NationStates Jolt Archive


More troops to iraq

East Pusna
06-01-2007, 00:32
So apparently Bush wants to send 20,000 more troops to baghdad.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16453606/

Can somebody please explain to me how any number of troops can keep somebody from sticking a gun out their window and firing at people if our troops can't return fire or enter a building without clearance. For checkpoints will do nothing. All more troops are is more targets and more justification to kill for insurgents.
Kryozerkia
06-01-2007, 00:35
Doesn't this also contradict the Democrat's agenda to withdraw troops from Iraq?
Swilatia
06-01-2007, 00:36
Doesn't this also contradict the Democrat's agenda to withdraw troops from Iraq? since when was Bush a Democrat?
Kryozerkia
06-01-2007, 00:38
since when was Bush a Democrat?

But, the Democrats have official control of the house, and they could out forth a legislation to reduce the number of troops. And further, doesn't this kind of thing need to go before Congress anyway?
Forsakia
06-01-2007, 00:39
since when was Bush a Democrat?

It's the GOP's new re-election strategy;)
Prekkendoria
06-01-2007, 00:42
Troops should be kept there, for the simple reason that removing Saddam was a stupid thing to do (one in a chain of many), and it should not be those of the Middle East who have to pay alone. The troops keep some semblence of order and that is enough, their job is to fight and die after all. Which is not in the job description of the civilian last I heard.
Read My Mind
06-01-2007, 00:45
But, the Democrats have official control of the house, and they could out forth a legislation to reduce the number of troops. And further, doesn't this kind of thing need to go before Congress anyway?

I may be wrong, but when it comes to matters within the military, such as troop numbers, Congress has no say. I mean, the President is the Commander in Chief and entitled to control of the armed forces under Article II.
Peisandros
06-01-2007, 00:48
Bush doesn't seem to quite get it. I mean, I don't understand what this will acheive. If he's hoping this will just stop all the attacks and bombings etc, he must be deluded or something.
Nodinia
06-01-2007, 00:55
Bush doesn't seem to quite get it. I mean, I don't understand what this will acheive. If he's hoping this will just stop all the attacks and bombings etc, he must be deluded or something.

Yep. Or thick.
Ultraviolent Radiation
06-01-2007, 00:55
I think the presence of American troops serves to stir up anger, so they may actually be causing as much fighting as they stop.

Besides, isn't it time America threw a new country into civil war?
Prekkendoria
06-01-2007, 01:00
I think the presence of American troops serves to stir up anger, so they may actually be causing as much fighting as they stop.
Stirring up anger in return for halting a civil (and possibly international) war seems like a good trade-off. That is assuming you want the people of the region to remain slightly less in danger than now.