Domenici: "The plan is not 20,000 soldiers...because that's too small a number for a surge"

[Rose Siding]

Sen. Pete V. Domenici (R-N.M.) said he "felt much better" about the plan after his 20-minute meeting with Bush, although he was reserving judgment until he saw the details. Domenici said the president's plan has been mischaracterized in recent weeks and is more complex than just a buildup of troops in Baghdad, adding that the Iraqis have agreed to spend at least $10 billion and will be in charge of the security plan.

"The plan is not 20,000 soldiers -- I wouldn't even consider the plan if it was 20,000 American soldiers, because that's too small a number for a surge," he said. "The people coming out of these meetings saying it's the lead ingredient just didn't get it. There are a lot of other important elements."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/08/AR2007010800237_2.html

Huh?

Smith characterized his meet this way:

"It was clear to me that a decision has been made for a surge" of at least 20,000 additional troops, Sen. Gordon Smith (R-Ore.) said in a conference call with reporters.

[wakeme2008]

1. The second Carrier Group in the Gulf adds 5-6,000 troops

and they are not counted because they are not in Iraq....

Bush is playing games......

[ClassWarrior]

2. I'm guessing Bush/Cheney** lowballed the number, hoping...

...Dems would say it's not enough. Then the mis-administration** could lob mass quantities of troops into the occupied zone unopposed.

But, if that was their strategy, it's backfired, because most Dems - and some Rape-Publicans - are saying NO ESCALATION AT ALL.

NGU.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

3. What is important is that we need more money for homeland security in the USA

not in Iraq. Money seems to grow on trees when it come to Iraq but when it comes to actually defending our country on the homefront money has suddenly vanished.