thedrifter
10-11-06, 06:07 PM
October 11, 2006
Casey: No need for more troops in Iraq ‘right now’
By Gordon Lubold
Staff writer
The senior U.S. commander in Iraq said Wednesday he has no need for more troops “right now,” but added he continues to evaluate the situation on the ground and is leaving the door open for possible increases.
Appearing in the Pentagon briefing room for the first time in more than three months, Army Gen. George Casey said it is unclear if more U.S. troops would reduce the violence that continues to plague Iraq.
“It’s a tough nut … whether or not bringing in more U.S. troops will have a significantly long-term impact on violence,” Casey told reporters. “There is no question that locally, more troops will have some effect on the levels of violence, but whether more U.S. troops for a sustained period will get us where we’re going faster is an open question.”
The violence in Iraq begs that question. When Casey sent more troops to Baghdad last month to stabilize the city, commanders reported moderate success in decreasing the level of violence there. But commanders and troops alike on the ground in Iraq fear that more U.S. troops only serve to give the Iraqis more time not to assume responsibility for stemming the violence themselves.
At the same time, Casey acknowledged that the number of car bombings, improvised explosive attacks and other violent acts is at its highest level since the invasion in March 2003.
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who appeared with Casey at the news briefing, said “there is no roadmap” when it comes to determining how much U.S. troop strength is required.
“It is tough stuff,” he said.
Army Gen. John Abizaid, head of U.S. Central Command, which has oversight of Iraq, said in Washington earlier this fall that more troops might be needed.
At the very least, commanders have made it clear that U.S. troop levels in Iraq will remain at current levels for some time. Abizaid said the current number of troops — now about 141,000 — will remain stable until at least spring, marking a change from expectations that significant drawdowns might have occurred by the end of this year.
But Gen. Peter Schoomaker, Army chief of staff, said Wednesday at the annual convention of the Association of the U.S. Army convention that the Army has plans on the shelf that would allow the service to maintain as many as 15 combat brigades — the current level — in Iraq until 2010.
As a service chief, Schoomaker does not make the decision on troop levels, but he indicated the Army could maintain those force levels if necessary — if he is asked by Rumsfeld to provide those forces. And it’s not yet clear that Rumsfeld will do that.
Asked during the Oct. 11 news conference if he gets what he wants as the senior commander in Iraq, Casey said he only makes “recommendations” to Rumsfeld and other senior leaders.
When he does ask for something — whether it be for more troops, equipment or other resources — Casey acknowledged that his requests are heavily scrutinized.
“I would say we get pretty good questions when we come in with things,” Casey said as Rumsfeld stood beside him. “I feel well supervised by my civilian leadership.”
Ellie
Casey: No need for more troops in Iraq ‘right now’
By Gordon Lubold
Staff writer
The senior U.S. commander in Iraq said Wednesday he has no need for more troops “right now,” but added he continues to evaluate the situation on the ground and is leaving the door open for possible increases.
Appearing in the Pentagon briefing room for the first time in more than three months, Army Gen. George Casey said it is unclear if more U.S. troops would reduce the violence that continues to plague Iraq.
“It’s a tough nut … whether or not bringing in more U.S. troops will have a significantly long-term impact on violence,” Casey told reporters. “There is no question that locally, more troops will have some effect on the levels of violence, but whether more U.S. troops for a sustained period will get us where we’re going faster is an open question.”
The violence in Iraq begs that question. When Casey sent more troops to Baghdad last month to stabilize the city, commanders reported moderate success in decreasing the level of violence there. But commanders and troops alike on the ground in Iraq fear that more U.S. troops only serve to give the Iraqis more time not to assume responsibility for stemming the violence themselves.
At the same time, Casey acknowledged that the number of car bombings, improvised explosive attacks and other violent acts is at its highest level since the invasion in March 2003.
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who appeared with Casey at the news briefing, said “there is no roadmap” when it comes to determining how much U.S. troop strength is required.
“It is tough stuff,” he said.
Army Gen. John Abizaid, head of U.S. Central Command, which has oversight of Iraq, said in Washington earlier this fall that more troops might be needed.
At the very least, commanders have made it clear that U.S. troop levels in Iraq will remain at current levels for some time. Abizaid said the current number of troops — now about 141,000 — will remain stable until at least spring, marking a change from expectations that significant drawdowns might have occurred by the end of this year.
But Gen. Peter Schoomaker, Army chief of staff, said Wednesday at the annual convention of the Association of the U.S. Army convention that the Army has plans on the shelf that would allow the service to maintain as many as 15 combat brigades — the current level — in Iraq until 2010.
As a service chief, Schoomaker does not make the decision on troop levels, but he indicated the Army could maintain those force levels if necessary — if he is asked by Rumsfeld to provide those forces. And it’s not yet clear that Rumsfeld will do that.
Asked during the Oct. 11 news conference if he gets what he wants as the senior commander in Iraq, Casey said he only makes “recommendations” to Rumsfeld and other senior leaders.
When he does ask for something — whether it be for more troops, equipment or other resources — Casey acknowledged that his requests are heavily scrutinized.
“I would say we get pretty good questions when we come in with things,” Casey said as Rumsfeld stood beside him. “I feel well supervised by my civilian leadership.”
Ellie