Pentagon's plan: More U.S. troops in Iraq

WASHINGTON - As President Bush weighs new policy options for Iraq,
strong support has coalesced in the Pentagon behind a military
plan to "double down" in the country with a substantial buildup in
American troops, an increase in industrial aid and a major combat
offensive against Muqtada Sadr, the radical Shiite leader impeding
development of the Iraqi government. By Julian E. Barnes.
http://email.latimes.com/cgi-bin1/DM/y/eBE...Io30G2B0H8wA0Eq

Army, Marine Corps To Ask for More Troops

By Ann Scott Tyson
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, December 13, 2006; A01



The Army and Marine Corps are planning to ask incoming Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates and Congress to approve permanent increases in personnel, as senior officials in both services assert that the nation's global military strategy has outstripped their resources.

In addition, the Army will press hard for "full access" to the 346,000-strong Army National Guard and the 196,000-strong Army Reserves by asking Gates to take the politically sensitive step of easing the Pentagon restrictions on the frequency and duration of involuntary call-ups for reservists, according to two senior Army officials.

The push for more ground troops comes as the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have sharply decreased the readiness of Army and Marine Corps units rotating back to the United States, compromising the ability of U.S. ground forces to respond to other potential conflicts around the world.

"The Army has configured itself to sustain the effort in Iraq and, to a lesser degree, in Afghanistan. Beyond that, you've got some problems," said one of the senior Army officials. "Right now, the strategy exceeds the capability of the Army and Marines." This official and others interviewed for this report spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to talk publicly about the matter.

The Army, which has 507,000 active-duty soldiers, wants Congress to fund a permanent "end strength," or manpower, of at least 512,000 soldiers, the Army officials said. The Army wants the additional soldiers to be paid for not through wartime supplemental spending bills but in the defense budget, which now covers only 482,000 soldiers.

The Marine Corps, with 180,000 active-duty Marines, seeks to grow by several thousand, including the likely addition of three new infantry battalions. "We need to be bigger. The question is how big do we need to be and how do we get there," a senior Marine Corps official said.

At least two-thirds of Army units in the United States today are rated as not ready to deploy -- lacking in manpower, training and, most critically, equipment -- according to senior U.S. officials and the Iraq Study Group report. The two ground services estimate that they will need $18 billion a year to repair, replace and upgrade destroyed and worn-out equipment.

If another crisis were to erupt requiring a large number of U.S. ground troops, the Army's plan would be to freeze its forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, and divert to the new conflict the U.S.-based combat brigade that is first in line to deploy.

Beyond that, however, the Army would have to cobble together war-depleted units to form complete ones to dispatch to the new conflict -- at the risk of lost time, unit cohesion and preparedness, senior Army officials said. Moreover, the number of Army and Marine combat units available for an emergency would be limited to about half that of four years ago, experts said, unless the difficult decision to pull forces out of Iraq were made.

"We are concerned about gross readiness . . . and ending equipment and personnel shortfalls," said a senior Marine Corps official. The official added that Marine readiness has dropped and that the Corps is unable to fulfill many planned missions for the fight against terrorism.

Senior Pentagon officials stress that the U.S. military has ample air and naval power that could respond immediately to possible contingencies in North Korea, Iran or the Taiwan Strait.

"If you had to go fight another war someplace that somebody sprung upon us, you would keep the people who are currently employed doing what they're doing, and you would use the vast part of the U.S. armed forces that is at home station, to include the enormous strength of our Air Force and our Navy, against the new threat," Marine Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said at a briefing last month.

But if the conflict were to require a significant number of ground troops -- as in some scenarios such as the disintegration of Pakistan -- Army and Marine Corps officials made clear that they would have to scramble to provide them. "Is it the way we'd want to do it? No. Would it be ugly as hell? Yes," said one of the senior Army officials. "But," he added, "we could get it done."

According to Army Gen. John P. Abizaid, the top U.S. commander for the Middle East, the Army and Marine Corps today cannot sustain even a modest increase of 20,000 troops in Iraq. U.S. commanders for Afghanistan have asked for more troops but have not received them, noted the Iraq Study Group report, which called it "critical" for the United States to provide more military support for Afghanistan.

"We are facing more operational risk than we have for many, many years," said Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.), a member of the Armed Services Committee. He called it "shocking and scandalous" that two-thirds of Army units are rated "non-deployable." He said the country has not faced such a readiness crisis since the aftermath of the Vietnam War.

The U.S. military has more than 140,000 troops in Iraq and 20,000 in Afghanistan, including 17 of the Army's 36 available active-duty combat brigades. When Army and Marine Corps combat units return from the war zone, they immediately lose large numbers of experienced troops and leaders who either leave the force, go to school or other assignments, or switch to different units.

The depletion of returning units is so severe that the Marines refer to this phase as the "post-deployment death spiral." Army officials describe it as a process of breaking apart units and rebuilding them "just in time" to deploy again.

Training time for active-duty Army and Marine combat units is only half what it should be because they are spending about the same amount of time in war zones as at home -- in contrast to the desired ratio of spending twice as much time at home as on deployment. And the training tends to focus on counterinsurgency skills for Iraq and Afghanistan, causing an erosion in conventional land-warfare capabilities, which could be required for North Korea or Iran, officials say.

If a conflict with North Korea or Iran were to break out and demand a medium to large ground force, the Army would be forced to respond with whatever it had available.

The U.S. military today could cobble together two or three divisions in an emergency -- compared with as many as six in 2001 -- not enough to carry out major operations such as overthrowing the Iranian government. "That's the kind of extreme scenario that could cripple us," said Michael E. O'Hanlon, a military expert at the Brookings Institution.

Unable to count on a significant troop withdrawal from Iraq, the Army seeks to ease the manpower strain by accelerating plans to have 70 active-duty and National Guard combat brigades available for rotations by 2011. Next year, for example, the Army intends to bring two brigades on a training mission back into rotation. It is investing $36 billion in Guard equipment in anticipation of heavier use of the Guard
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...1201697_pf.html

U.S. Commander Says Withdrawal Won't Be Soon

By Nancy Trejos
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, December 13, 2006; A26



BAGHDAD, Dec. 12 -- The outgoing top U.S. operational commander in Iraq said on Tuesday that military might alone would not win the war and that the withdrawal of U.S. troops would not happen quickly.

"I wish I could tell you exactly how long it's going to take and exactly when U.S. forces and coalition forces could go home, but I am just not able to do that," said Army Lt. Gen. Peter W. Chiarelli, commander of the Multi-National Corps -- Iraq.

Chiarelli, who is preparing to end his second one-year tour in Iraq, gave a mostly positive but sober assessment of U.S. military involvement in Iraq.

He praised his forces' efforts to tamp down the violence that escalated after the bombing of a Shiite mosque in Samarra in February. But he acknowledged that securing Iraq was taking longer than expected.

"None of us would make the claim that it's going as fast as we want it to go," he said.

Top military leaders had declared 2006 "the year of the police" to acknowledge the importance of training not just the Iraqi army but also the police in any strategy for withdrawing U.S. troops.

Chiarelli said military officials did not think the police would need so much training and did not know that "in some instances militia influence in the police was as high as it was."

Chiarelli expressed frustration that "we seem to be totally focused on the military solution to this, like somehow it will be the thing that will win this." He said that deploying additional U.S. forces would not solve Iraq's problems. Providing jobs, electricity and drinkable water and cleaning up streets would, he said.

"If I could drive down unemployment in this country just to something that was reasonable, or if other people could help me drive unemployment down here," he said, "I promise you, our casualty figures would not be as high, nor would Iraqi casualties be as high as they are today, nor would the level of violence be as high as it is today."

The bipartisan Iraq Study Group last week recommended that the focus of U.S. troops in Iraq be shifted from combat to training Iraqi soldiers and police officers, and that most combat brigades be withdrawn by early 2008.

The military has embedded U.S. advisers with Iraqi army divisions and the national police since 2004; 300 such teams are in the country, each with 10 to 15 members.

Brig. Gen. Dana J.H. Pittard, commanding general of the Iraq Assistance Group, which oversees the teams, said on Tuesday that he plans to add members to each team.

But Pittard warned that training the Iraqi forces should be coupled with a reconciliation of the government's warring factions as well as economic and quality of life improvements.

"The embedded transition team is not the Rosetta stone of Iraq," he said after meeting with 3rd Iraqi Army Division leaders at a base near Mosul. The division, one of three in the country that has taken control of security in its community, oversees an area spanning 30 miles between Mosul and Tall Afar in northern Iraq.

He called the study group's report "just one more opinion on how to help Iraq and America to be successful here, but it's not the end-all."

Pittard was reluctant to give a timetable for withdrawal. He called 2008 a "good goal" but said, "We really have to see how 2007 goes."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...1201663_pf.html

Bush gives no hint of new Iraq direction
By DEB RIECHMANN, Associated Press Writer
Tue Dec 12, 6:28 PM ET

President Bush, facing intense pressure to craft a new blueprint for the Iraq war, said Tuesday the U.S. is holding fast to its objectives and commitment. The White House said he knows the general direction he wants to move U.S. policy but won't announce it until next month.

Bush gave no hints of a change in direction after a meeting with Iraq's Sunni Vice President Tariq al-Hashemi, one of several Iraqi powerbrokers he's recently hosted in the Oval Office.

"Our objective is to help the Iraqi government deal with the extremists and the killers, and support the vast majority of Iraqis who are reasonable, who want peace," Bush said.

"We want to help your government be effective," he said. "We want your government to live up to its words and ideals."

Bush met for 25 minutes with al-Hashemi, who has been linked to a behind-the-scenes effort to form a new ruling bloc that could topple the fragile Iraqi government led by Nouri al-Maliki.

The White House would not say whether Bush and al-Hashemi talked about the movement afoot to form a new ruling coalition that would exclude anti-American Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr and radical Sunni Arabs. Bush has called al-Maliki the "right guy" for Iraq, but al-Maliki is dependent on al-Sadr for political support.

White House press secretary Tony Snow said the president had expected to make a speech before Christmas to announce his new strategy for Iraq but still had questions and was not yet ready to make all the decisions he needed to make.

"The president generally knows what direction he wants to move in, but there are very practical things that need to be dealt with," Snow said. "This is not a sign of trouble. This is a sign of determination on the part of the president."

Democrats didn't see it that way.

"It has been six weeks since the American people demanded change in Iraq," said Harry Reid, who will become Senate majority leader. "In that time, Iraq has descended further toward all-out civil war and all the president has done is fire Donald Rumsfeld and conduct a listening tour."

"Talking to the same people he should have talked to four years ago does not relieve the president of the need to demonstrate leadership and change his policy now," said Reid, of Nevada.

Bush began his day by having breakfast with his new defense secretary, Robert Gates, who plans to travel to the region to talk with military commanders shortly after he is sworn in next Monday.

Gates also joined Bush in a secure video conference with Rumsfeld; the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Peter Pace, and Gen. John Abizaid, the top U.S. commander in the Middle East. Participating from Iraq was Gen. George Casey, the chief U.S. commander in Iraq.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Bush had decided to take more time partly to give Gates time to settle into his new job at the Pentagon and help develop the new policy. She said the president was still considering advice from administration officials and commanders in Iraq and was studying the report issued last week by the bipartisan Iraq Study Group.

The report rejected calls for a quick withdrawal of troops but suggested that most U.S. combat forces might be withdrawn by early 2008 — and that the U.S. mission should be changed from combat to training and support of Iraqi units. It also called for an energetic effort to seek a diplomatic solution to Iraq's violence by engaging its neighbors, including Iran and Syria.

Bush has opposed direct talks with Iran until it halts uranium enrichment, preferring to let the Iraqis have direct talks with Tehran.

Most Americans who are familiar with the Iraq Study Group report support major recommendations by the bipartisan panel, according to a Pew Research Center poll, out Tuesday. But they also doubt Bush will follow the group's advice.

As for Bush's delayed speech, Snow was asked whether there were still active internal debates under way.

"People are going to have disagreements, and there may be some areas on which there are still going to be debates, but most have kind of been ironed out," the spokesman said.

Al-Hashemi was the second Iraqi politician Bush has met with in two weeks who has expressed discontent over al-Maliki's failure to quell raging violence. Last week, Bush spoke in the Oval Office with Shiite powerbroker Abdul-Ariz al-Hakim, who is among the Iraqi politicians talking about forming a new governing alliance.

"I can assure you there is a great and real chance to get out of this present dilemma," al-Hashemi said as he and Bush met briefly with reporters. "It is a hard time that the Iraqis face in time being, but there is a light in the corridor. There is a chance, but we need a good will and a strong determination."

In Baghdad, the embattled prime minister said there was no alternative to his "national unity" government. Al-Maliki said moves to set up a new government should not be viewed as an attempt to topple his coalition, although he appeared to suggest that was the aim.

"We are opposed to anyone who moves in that framework," al-Maliki said.

"The government belongs to the Iraqi people, it is they who chose it and it belongs to the political groups that are partners in it," he said.

Copyright © 2006 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.
Questions or Comments
Privacy Policy -Terms of Service - Copyright/IP Policy - Ad Feedback
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061212/ap_on_.../bush&printer=1

December 12, 2006
Tuesday: 158 Iraqis Killed, 5 GIs Killed; 287 Iraqis Injured
Updated at 10:00 p.m. EST, Dec. 12, 2006

Several explosions rocked the capital today, including one that killed 70 people and wounded 236 others. Another bomb damaged the Golden Mosque in Samarra. Overall, at least 158 Iraqis were killed or found dead today and 287 were injured in various incidents. Also, the U.S. Military announced the deaths of five GIs today, bringing the December total to 47 American servicemember deaths.

Three Marines died today from wounds sustained during combat in Anbar province; another Marine died on Monday in Anbar from "non-hostile causes"; and a soldier died from apparently natural causes near Diwaniyah, also on Monday. Coalition forces killed three militiamen in a separate incidents in the capital.

In Baghdad, a suicide car bomber killed at least 70 and wounded 236 after luring day laborers to his vehicle at Tayaran Square. About a mile away, a pair of roadside bombs wounded two policemen and seven civilians. Another suicide car bomber attacked a checkpoint in Radwaniya, killing one and wounding eight. Two people were injured when a mortar round fell on Haifa Street. And at least 47 dumped bodies were also discovered throughout the capital.

Police found 13 bodies in Baquba.

Mortars fell on Bani Saad where five people were killed and eights other wounded.

In Mosul, Aswan Fath Allah, an Associated Press TV cameraman, was gunned down. Also, four bodies, including that of an elderly woman, were found scattered about the city.

A mortar landed on a home in the northern city of Riyadh, killing a mother and her two children; two others were wounded in the attack.

Two policemen were gunned down near Hawija.

A gunshot riddled body was found near Chemin.

Five people were killed and 15 wounded in Kirkuk when a suicide car bomber drove towards an Iraqi army checkpoint. Another suicide bomber exploded his cargo in front of the home of police Col. Aazar; the colonel, his wife and children were among the seven injured.

Gunmen killed an Iraqi army colonel just north of Basra.

Gunmen killed two police officers in Loualwa.

Also, a bomb was discovered outside the Golden Mosque in Samarra. No casualties were reported, but the mosque was slightly damaged when the bomb exploded while Coalition forces were removing it. It is believed that an attack on the mosque last February ignited the sectarian violence that continues to this day.



Compiled by Margaret Griffis

http://www.antiwar.com/updates/?articleid=10152