The World Newser is World News' daily blog. Here, you'll find our staff's thoughts on the day's news and the way we build our broadcast. Plus, we'll share reports from our team of correspondents in the field, as well as producers behind-the-scenes.
RECENT POSTS
- Clem's Chronicles: Toyota Recall/Afghan Speech/State Dinner Crashers
- Charlie Gibson...On this Thanksgiving
- Quotes of the Day: 'It is my intention to finish the job'
- Start Your Shopping Engines
- The Hajj and Women's Dress
- Clem's Chronicles: Afghanistan/WH State Dinner/Holiday Travel
- Photos: White House State Dinners Through the Years
- Are We Becoming A Nation of Know-Nothings?
- Quotes of the Day: 'President Obama has the information he wants... to make his decision'
- Clem's Chronicles: Jobs/Afghanistan/Health Care Reform/Deficit
- Child Safety: Crib Recall and Other Recently Recalled Kids Products
- You Buying Less This Holiday?
WORLD NEWSER CATEGORIES
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
Rumsfeld Confirms Iraqi Troops Levels to Be Boosted
October 31, 2006 8:33 AM
ABC News' Luis Martinez Reports: Defense Secretary Rumsfeld confirms that Gen.'s Casey and Dempsey have made a proposal to boost the overall size of the Iraqi Security Forces. Rumsfeld said he was going inside to review it because "it's sitting on my desk." He wouldn't characterize the size of the increase, but said that "I'm very comfortable with the increases they've proposed and the acceleration in achievement of some of their targets" He said there would be an announcement when the Iraqis make their announcement.
Asked what impact the boost would have on the presence of US troops in Iraq, Rumsfeld said the biggest impact would be on US combat support and logistics forces. As the Iraqi Security Forces improve he thinks it's likely we'll see fewere US combat forces needed for presence and patrols, while the trainers and combat support troops will lag to continue assisting the Iraqis. He doesn't foresee a necessary increase in the current level of 3,000 US trainers embedded with Iraqi units.
On PM Maliki's decision to end the Sadr City checkpoints, Rumsfeld wouldn't add much beyond saying he's aware of the reports and would rather "validate" the information before "expressing the kinds of adjectives and adverbs" the press wants.
IRAQI TROOP BOOST PROPOSAL ON HIS DESK
--I've got on my desk, the proposals, the charts and I was hoping to have a meeting sometime later today to come to some closure on it. But for the momene, I think it's correct to say the IG and Gen. Casey have made their recommendations and gen. Dempsey and I'm very comforable with the increases they've propsoed an the acceleration in achievement of some of their targets that they've propsoed Nnd I understand that the Iraqi Government is and now it's a matter of our pressing forward and getting our portion of the funding from the Congress and working to see that it's executed.
--I'm not going to characterize it. We'll have an announcement when they have an announcement. It's their forces, not ours.
--I'd rather wait until they have something to announce and have to go back up and understand precisley what we'r egetting for our investment. I'm not going to characterize it (the increase.) We'll have an announcement when they have an announcnment.
IMPACT ON US FORCES STAYING LONGER?
--(When Iraqi Forces Stand up to provide their own security levels) "NO.Because they're all different pieces, there are people who do the training and obviously they're training people they're going to be there. The people who do the patroling and the security for various portions of the country and as those are passed over coalition forces would be not needed. The things I mentioned would be needed somewhat longer are combat support and combat service support because the logistics systems and all the things you have to do to support military forces are things that the training is taking place now and has not advanced to extent combat training has.
SADR CITY CHECKPOINTS
I'm aware of the reports. I've not talked to Gen. Casey this morning, but will be later today. So I don't know if there's much I can add.
--That's what the press is reporting, but I can't tell, I've been in meetings all morning
--I wouldn't say that. That they're too soft. I think the Govt of Iraq has a very difficult and complex job. I think he's been there less than a baseball season, he clearly is focused on it and he's clearly focused on reconciliation.
-- You know, I tend to validate things first, get on the phone and find out precisely what took place and exactly what the reasons were rather thatn expresisng the kinds of adjectives and adverbs you want.
October 31, 2006 in Political Radar | Permalink | Share | User Comments (5)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
They need to either send over the personnel to do the job or get out and hope the Iraqi's can handle things.
This will be the second military action, if things continue on this track, which will be unresolved and the population of the country we entered with our military will be slaughtered upon our exit.
We are there - do the job and get out. No more half assed attempts. We cannot accept another Viet Nam.
Posted by: Kate | Oct 31, 2006 10:18:48 AM
Don't they already have enough Iraqi Defense Forces? Shouldn't they focus on properly training those existing troops to not run at the first sign of trouble, not sell their weapons to terrorists, and not act as adjuncts to the militias? I fail to see how any increase in raw numbers will improve the situation when you can't depend on those forces already in place. Also, I wonder how much extra this will cost the U.S. We probably have 3 or 4 support troops to prop up every Iraqi soldier, extra budget to purchase weapons for these troops (which will mysteriously go missing)...but, on a bright note, this will certainly improve the bottom line of the U.S. contractors...and it will look nice for a parade (if you can keep them from deserting long enough to participate).
Posted by: Dirik Lolkus | Oct 31, 2006 10:29:44 AM
Why are they putting more troops in when it looks like the PM is calling the shots in Sadr City??
How about moving them into Afghanistan where we have a change of not getting bogged down or "stuck".
Posted by: Paulet | Oct 31, 2006 11:09:36 AM
Wow,after the commanders on site have been calling for more troops for three years some Neo Con think tank expert removes their head from their ass and realized in fact that we do need more boots on the ground.
Posted by: Rolling Eye | Nov 1, 2006 1:23:42 AM
I think it's time to get out.
this so called war should not have happend REMEMBER wanted dead or alive This came out of bush's mouth,And we still do not have him
and he sits up in those hills and
is busting a gut on how STUPID we are.So we get out or we go after the so-and-so who started this:9-11
Posted by: G.VOSCH | Nov 13, 2006 9:01:53 AM
Post a comment
