home

Officials to Rumsfeld: Bring On the Troops

The New York Times reports that military officials are becoming mroe vocal in their criticism of the war in Iraq, and telling Rumsfeld we need more troops there.

US military officials are becoming increasingly vocal in their criticism of the war in Iraq, telling Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld that more troops are needed to prevail over the insurgents. Moreover, recruitment is down and more reservists and members of the National Guard are being sent to Baghdad.

The number of deserters is increasing...many are going to Canada and applying for political asylum, as we wrote about here. The Times continues:

Deserting US recruits -- once a rarity -- are not alone in their search. Three months after being reelected and immediately prior to what is expected to be a triumphant inaugural party to mark the start of his second term, US President George W. Bush will be hard-pressed not to reevaluate the strategy for the deployment of US troops in Iraq. He faces massive doubts among the members of his own military, who are becoming increasingly vocal in their opinion that the US war with Iraqi insurgents is being conducted with insufficient manpower and equipment. Lieutenant General James Helmly, chief of the Army Reserve, warns that his troops in Iraq have "deteriorated into a broken force."

The Times says "A revolt seems to be taking place within the ranks." Bush plans to focus extensively on the troops during his inaugural bash. He thinks it will minimize criticism of his $60 million extravaganza. Too bad they won't be there to boo him.

And back to the draft....we don't have enough troop for an extended presence in Iraq.

But it is precisely the military's desire for more troops that could unleash a public debate over the reintroduction of compulsory military service -- a discussion that no Washington politician of any stripe truly wants to tackle. The threat of a general draft could trigger a massive exodus to Canada which, until now, has only been an option occasionally resorted to by American opponents of the war. But even the few deserters that have already fled have put the Canadian government into an embarrassing bind.

If the draft comes back, Canada will not be a safety net.

But even though the Iraq war is as unpopular in Canada as US President George W. Bush himself, Martin knows full well that Washington would view Canada's granting asylum to GIs from south of the border as an open insult.

Americablog expands on this.

< The Jury Pool From Heaven | Britain's Torture Trial >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Step 1 for young men who are conscientious objectors approaching their 18th birthday: a) Obey the law. Register with Selective Service within a month of your birthday. b) When you fill out your registration card, write "I am a conscientious objector" across the center of the card. Fill out all the other information requested. c) Submit your registration card as required. Make a copy of the card, place it in a sealed envelope and mail it to yourself. Don't open it. Keep the envelope in a safe place along with other documents you collect to substantiate your claim for a CO exemption. For more, visit the Center on Conscience and War. Click the link on the main page for "Conscientious Objectors and the Draft."

    Re: Officials to Rumsfeld: Bring On the Troops (none / 0) (#2)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Jan 19, 2005 at 03:55:42 PM EST
    And go off to college, get a degree, get a job, buy a house, have kids, become a conservative. If you have time please pray for the Democrat party. -C

    Re: Officials to Rumsfeld: Bring On the Troops (none / 0) (#3)
    by soccerdad on Wed Jan 19, 2005 at 05:44:21 PM EST
    Cliff is probably right, Iraq is FUBAR and will get worse after the election if thats possible. If they attack Iran we will be out of Iraq real soon.

    Re: Officials to Rumsfeld: Bring On the Troops (none / 0) (#4)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Jan 19, 2005 at 06:34:37 PM EST
    All that's missing is the carpet-bombing and a real draft. And, perhaps, the lovely smell of napalm.

    Re: Officials to Rumsfeld: Bring On the Troops (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Jan 19, 2005 at 06:42:21 PM EST
    We are so understrength & the problems with retention are going to be so large that a draft will not cure it. By the time a draft is initiated, the soldiers trained and the huge amounts of equipment manufatured to equip the new units we will have declared victory & left Iraq in defeat. There simply is not enough time for that. What we will see is Bush "privatizing" many of the jobs that current support forces perform. This won't work either because they will start quiting as soon as this policy is implimented. If they had wanted combat arms they would have signed up for it.

    Re: Officials to Rumsfeld: Bring On the Troops (none / 0) (#6)
    by Johnny on Wed Jan 19, 2005 at 10:08:37 PM EST
    Cliff said: "And go off to college, get a degree, get a job, buy a house, have kids, become a conservative." I might add: "Then send other peoples babies off to die in a foreign land"

    Re: Officials to Rumsfeld: Bring On the Troops (none / 0) (#7)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Jan 19, 2005 at 10:10:18 PM EST
    Johnny - Sigh, well, we can only hope that women get more selective and refuse your seed. -C

    Re: Officials to Rumsfeld: Bring On the Troops (none / 0) (#8)
    by Ernesto Del Mundo on Wed Jan 19, 2005 at 10:40:01 PM EST
    All that's missing is the carpet-bombing and a real draft. And, perhaps, the lovely smell of napalm. Napalm is not missing, actually. In fact, it seems to be one of the primary tools that we use to install "freedom and democracy".

    Re: Officials to Rumsfeld: Bring On the Troops (none / 0) (#9)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Jan 19, 2005 at 11:31:08 PM EST
    And go off to college, get a degree, get a job, buy a house, have kids, become a conservative. That's great Cliff. Not everyone wants to teach their children to devalue others on the basis of race, nationality, religion, and/or culture. Thanks for your prayers Cliff, but as a staunch supporter of Bush's war, you should save those prayers for your own soul.

    Re: Officials to Rumsfeld: Bring On the Troops (none / 0) (#10)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Jan 20, 2005 at 01:17:23 AM EST
    Look I understand that Rumsfeld is gay but if he keeps this up! All the young guys inside this empire will have AIDS. Mrs Rumsfeld stop the rape! or go get bin laden?

    Re: Officials to Rumsfeld: Bring On the Troops (none / 0) (#11)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Jan 20, 2005 at 01:24:26 AM EST
    To, Quaker in a Basement, No Go to war have fun don't eat anyone! well maybe one! Look people don't fight for big business, only fight for your real ideals, we do have bad people in this world, so some must fight and some will be killed. Hey Bush where is bin laden?

    Re: Officials to Rumsfeld: Bring On the Troops (none / 0) (#12)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Jan 20, 2005 at 06:15:31 AM EST
    Lavocat on January 19, 2005 07:34 PM All that's missing is the carpet-bombing and a real draft. And, perhaps, the lovely smell of napalm. "...I love the smell of Napalm in the morning.", had to get that one in. Fred Dawes on January 20, 2005 02:24 AM Hey Bush where is bin laden? ...uuhhhhh I dunno, he's in Iraq guarding the WMD's, when we find them we'll find him. Cliff is officially on IGNORE permanently.

    Re: Officials to Rumsfeld: Bring On the Troops (none / 0) (#13)
    by pigwiggle on Thu Jan 20, 2005 at 07:19:02 AM EST
    “Not everyone wants to teach their children to devalue others on the basis of race, nationality, religion, and/or culture.” No, just to devaluate on the basis of ideological diversity. A new protected class; ladies and gentlemen, I give you the ‘political bigot’.

    Re: Officials to Rumsfeld: Bring On the Troops (none / 0) (#14)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Jan 20, 2005 at 09:32:42 AM EST
    Ernesto: Thanks for the enlightenment, man. That article really blew me away. I had not heard of the use of napalm in this operation. I don't know what repulses me more, napalm's reappearance of the fact that this has gone entirely unreported (to my eyes at least) in the mainstream press. What other wonderful munitions are being used that we are unaware of? Probably everything short of WMDs. I guess we're that much closer to Vietnam than even I thought. I've lost my appetite for lunch.

    Re: Officials to Rumsfeld: Bring On the Troops (none / 0) (#15)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Jan 20, 2005 at 11:28:27 AM EST
    PW: No, just to devaluate on the basis of ideological diversity. A new protected class; ladies and gentlemen, I give you the ‘political bigot’. I could write a "snarky" response, but I'll choose to write a detailed one. With regard to your average Conservative, I fundamentally reject exclusionary policies. I am intolerant of those who work everyday to marginalize others for the benefit of the few. I am intolerant of those who would bury intolerance even deeper into our culture. I am intolerant of those who refer to hundreds of dead Iraqis as "Collateral Damage". I am intolerant of those who supported an immoral war. I am intolerant of those who support removing our freedoms to assemble, speak, and (not) practice religion. etc. With regard to yourself, PW, in your writings here you have focused mostly on the areas where "mainstream" Libertarian beliefs conflict with progressive belief systems. I hope that you are equally as critical and visit freeper sites on the web. But I suspect you do not, since it is apparent that you believe that those with the most money should have the most power in our society. You will call it an oversimplification, but it is most certainly not one. I don't care to spend time referencing materials to prove how this is bad for our society, because you'd have about zero interest in reading it anyway. I respect your (statuatory) freedom to vote for Conservatives and Libertarians. I also respect your freedom to have your votes counted by partisans. Unlike other liberals, do not expect me to pull punches when anyone (whether they be Liberal, Conservative, or Libertarian) expresses support for immoral and otherwise oppresive policy.

    Re: Officials to Rumsfeld: Bring On the Troops (none / 0) (#16)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Jan 20, 2005 at 01:01:13 PM EST
    What other wonderful munitions are being used that we are unaware of?
    I'm sure you are aware of the depleted uranium.

    Re: Officials to Rumsfeld: Bring On the Troops (none / 0) (#17)
    by pigwiggle on Thu Jan 20, 2005 at 03:09:23 PM EST
    TS- “I hope that you are equally as critical and visit freeper sites on the web.” I try, but I have been banned from all I have posted to. I’ve also spent time on boards sympathetic to my own philosophies. Truly lame; mental masturbation. “ But I suspect you do not, since it is apparent that you believe that those with the most money should have the most power in our society.” I’ve never said anything like this. If you mean economic power, then of course you are correct; if you mean political power, then no. “I don't care to spend time referencing materials to prove how this is bad for our society, because you'd have about zero interest in reading it anyway.” Your right, I wont read the litany of collectivist writings you could post here. You should instead bring those ideas here for a debate; then we will see if they stand. “Unlike other liberals, do not expect me to pull punches when anyone (whether they be Liberal, Conservative, or Libertarian) expresses support for immoral and otherwise oppresive policy.” Don’t flatter yourself; or rather denigrate others here. There is absolutely no need to ‘pull your punches’, I am quite comfortable with my ideology and have spent much time evaluating it critically to ensure consistency. With regard to your laundry list of things you won’t tolerate; it is an unfortunate tactic, used by many, which characterizes opposition as bigoted, hateful, and so forth. I wouldn’t consider you a bigot simply for supporting affirmative action, just confused about what is just. Likewise, it is intellectually dishonest to characterize conservatives as exclusive bigots because they might oppose race based policy. That was my point, ‘snarky’ or not.

    Re: Officials to Rumsfeld: Bring On the Troops (none / 0) (#18)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Thu Jan 20, 2005 at 06:42:10 PM EST
    it is an unfortunate tactic, used by many, which characterizes opposition as bigoted, hateful, and so forth. If you think that civilian casualties in Iraq are acceptable, you by definition devalue those lives. Likewise, it is intellectually dishonest to characterize conservatives as exclusive bigots because they might oppose race based policy. Affirmative Action is the whipping boy, although I can and have argued for it in the past. Let's instead use a simple example that everyone reading here can understand. Why do you suppose that it is so easy for Americans to confuse Sadaam Hussein and the 9/11 hijackers? Don't get me wrong, I believe that the Administration misled people, but I don't believe that Americans were completely fooled by that. There is something inherent in American culture that allows Americans to devalue entire cultures. Call it extreme nationalism, or something else. It is ethnocentric bigotry nonetheless. As a nation, we are as guilty of it as Iran is. American children raised in the Protestant ethos are taught that every Hindu in India will burn in a pit of hellfire so long as they were aware of the existence of Christianity and chose not to convert. It isn't hard to see how those children could grow up to devalue the entire nation of India. Incidentally, I have enough direct experience with the southern mentality to understand what motivates many of them to support certain politicians. Racism is high on that list. I’ve never said anything like this. If you mean economic power, then of course you are correct; if you mean political power, then no. Maybe in theory, but keep telling yourself that economic power does not equal political power. Economic power can have an equal amount of influence over a citizen's daily life and it is far less overt than action taken by the government. The biggest abuse of Economic power is the consolidation of institutional investment corporations. This ensures that publically traded Corporations are completely unaccountable to individual shareholders. Absent government oversight, they are accountable to no one for their actions. Some of those actions damage our society. For the super consolidated and legalized crony monopolies (i.e. utilities), Supply and Demand cannot substantially dictate their actions. You have made ludicrous comparisons between my commentary and that made by proponents of Cambodian genocide in previous threads. I'll consider your commentary about "denigrating others" the minute you begin doing so. Or are you telling us that you are intolerant of the intolerant as well?

    Re: Officials to Rumsfeld: Bring On the Troops (none / 0) (#19)
    by pigwiggle on Thu Jan 20, 2005 at 07:21:07 PM EST
    TS- “If you think that civilian casualties in Iraq are acceptable, you by definition devalue those lives.” If I have ever passively supported the current war, it was only in the context of simmering military action and sanctions. I would have been pleased if the only relation we had with Iraq was economic. There has been little effort by the opposition to this war to do anything other than oppose the war. I remember when the left was decrying sanctions, now all I hear is how sanctions were working. Where is the solution? Sanctions and no-fly zones are a slow and cruel war of attrition. My solution; leave Iraq to the Iraqis. Hope they sell us oil at a good price. “Why do you suppose that it is so easy for Americans to confuse Sadaam Hussein and the 9/11 hijackers?” I don’t know, people are stupid. You need to try harder to convince me it is wholesale bigotry. I don’t think folks devalue life, but rather value it. They value the life of people geographically, relationally, and characteristically closer to them more than people far away with disparate lifestyles. That’s just the way people are, you included. “The biggest abuse of Economic power is the consolidation of institutional investment corporations. This ensures that publically traded Corporations are completely unaccountable to individual shareholders.” I agree. I think shareholders should be economically and criminally liable for the actions of the corporation. If you don’t like that kind of risk don’t invest, or take out insurance. “You have made ludicrous comparisons between my commentary and that made by proponents of Cambodian genocide in previous thread” You are right, I apologize. You certainly aren’t in the league or tradition of the Khmer Rouge. I’ve complained about others characterizing me in the same fashion, I was being a hypocrite. “Or are you telling us that you are intolerant of the intolerant as well?” Yes, but I don’t have the problem of valuing tolerance, inclusiveness, and diversity. Folks have a right to their opinions, whatever that means. I don’t feel I need to respect the opinions of others.