"Bush to reveal troop boost" - BBC

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

"Sacrifice", huh? Must've been quite a "sacrifice" having to disrupt his "ranching" to try to figure out how to look good while sending more kids to kill and die for nothing.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/6223923.stm

US President George W Bush intends to reveal a new Iraq strategy within days, the BBC has learnt. The speech will reveal a plan to send more US troops to Iraq to focus on ways of bringing greater security, rather than training Iraqi forces. The move comes with figures from Iraqi ministries suggesting that deaths among civilians are at record highs.

The US president arrived back in Washington on Monday after a week-long holiday at his ranch in Texas.

The BBC was told by a senior administration source that the speech setting out changes in Mr Bush's Iraq policy is likely to come in the middle of next week.

Its central theme will be sacrifice. The speech, the BBC has been told, involves increasing troop numbers.

The exact mission of the extra troops in Iraq is still under discussion, according to officials, but it is likely to focus on providing security rather than training Iraqi forces.

[spanone]

1. Odd that the BBC prints this. Is the White House now leaking to the British?

[yurbud]

7. so Bush has time to get to bunker before the American public finds out?

[fasttense]

2. What an Fing moron.

The majority of We the People want to get out of Iraq and what does the crazy king george do? He sends more of our sons and daughters into the civil war to get slaughtered. He doesn't believe in this war of his either. If he did he would send his own daughters into it.

[originalpckelly]

4. Oh, come now, what a vast majority of Americans think doesn't matter...

Bush doesn't listen to polls, because he's a leader, dontcha know? Democracy shemocracy!

[originalpckelly]

3. Peasants to storm White House within days, OPC concludes.

I have a feeling people on both sides of the political spectrum are not going to like this. Shrub may have picked the wrong battle. Last I heard only 12 REPUBLICAN Senators were for this. That means a vote to stop it, in the form of a spending bill amendment, would have enough votes to override a veto.

(2/3 majority of the Senate being equal to 67 Senators. 12 is less than half of 32.)

[BearSquirrel2]

10. Congress does not do itself well ...

Congress does not do well by itself to try to "micro-manage" the Iraq situation. Like it or not the President IS the commander in chief. Efforts to cut off funding to the war will only be interpreted and spun as "not supporting the troops."

The best course for congress is vigourous oversight by Congress by dredging up all the mismanagement of this effort. If Congress puts it's hand in the pot at this point Bush will just point to Congress and say it was THERE fault. If they want to end the war, they need to REMOVE the commander in chief from office via impeachment.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

5. it won't be a friday night surprise news dump?

I'll bet they time it to take away thunder from the Dems opening volley

[acmavm]

6. It's to bring 'greater security'? I thought it was to try to pull

Chimpy's ass out of the fire and stop all the killing that he started (or he helped the neocons start rather).

[Peace Patriot]

8. He's got a "State of the Ruination" speech coming up Jan. 20 or so--why

trump that with a pre-speech about sending more troops to the slaughter? Possible: Dem reaction in Congress. If he springs this on them cold, there might be boo's or mass exodus, or everybody turning their backs on him? It could happen spontaneously, out of leadership control. If you were elected to end the war, what would you feel to have Jr. up there telling you he's sending more troops? You'd be pretty pissed. But if he sneaks this tyrannical policy in beforehand, so, a) they know about it already--lessening shock, outrage, and b) he doesn't have to emphasize or even mention it to Congress--then the sting is gone.

Something like this must be behind the timing. Otherwise he would wait til the "State of the Ruination." This is a ve-e-e-ery touchy issue--with Repubs, with the military, with many Dems, not to mention with the American people, 70% of whom want this war ended. So he gives THIS speech--on troops--in some friendly venue, and then comes out for the minimum wage hike in his SOR speech before Congress (high visibility; low friendliness), and emphasizes THAT before Congress, forcing Dems and other pissed off people to applaud.

Also, the troop increase gets minimal play, and the minimum wage increase gets maximum play. In fact, Bush thus co-opts the minimum wage increase and takes credit for it.

It'll be interesting to see if he mentions the troop increase before Congress!

[BearSquirrel2]

9. Sacrifice by whom????

President Bush ... exactly WHO will sacrifice? Will you sacrifice? Are your daughters enlisting?

In order to ask for an equal "sacrifice" you will have to enact a draft with no deferments. And of course, you will have to ask the wealthy to "sacrifice" by revoking their tax cuts and asking them to actually fund this war.