Home > Thinking Right > Archives > 2006 > October > 25
Wednesday, October 25, 2006
More troops for Iraq?
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
The top commander of American forces in Iraq, Gen. George Casey, said Tuesday that he may call for more troops to quell violence in the Baghdad area. He expressed, too, a belief that Iraqi forces would be ready to take over security responsibilities by late next year or early in 2008.
While it is clearly disheartening that Iraqi security forces have not been up to the task in Baghdad, changing a military culture, like changing the culture of any population or institution, occurs slowly. Securing Baghdad is essential and if more troops are required to give the Iraqis more time to professionalize their army, troops most assuredly should be provided. On troop levels, I believe it to be true that the U.S. had sufficient forces to win the war and agree too that in planning for the war, the defense strategy of not thinking in terms of manning an occupation army was the correct one. The message, always, should have been: defeat Saddam, stabilize the country and give an elected government the opportunity to function, and then come home. Don’t plan to stay for the long haul. Having said that, though, overwhelming force is required for specific battles and Casey should have access to troops when they’re required for a short-duration situation. That may involving moving troops within country, holding troops over, or getting reinforcements from elsewhere.
It makes sense, too, to remind Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki that while the U.S. will not abandon Iraq or his government, our stay is not entirely open-ended. No timetables for withdrawal, but the clock is running and it is imperative for Iraqi leaders to resolve their differences so that they can professionalize their security forces to police the militias.
Services »
