by Taylor Marsh
I've talked about this for a very long time. The reality is finally here. According to Mr. Bush, ESCALATION is the order of the day. In his news conference just a little bit ago Mr. Bush emphasized a "unity government." It's obvious the Saudis recent warnings about aiding the Sunnis in Iraq if we pull out has been heard. But make no mistake about it, our president is paralyzed.
With the announcement that Mr. Bush will not unveil his plan to move forward in Iraq until after the holidays, it's clear what message is being sent. Bush will not be rushed because we're not going anywhere while he's in office.
This is a wake up call, people. The elections changed the Congress's complexion. Now the Congress, which comes in January 2007, needs to change the course, because Mr. Bush will not do it on his own.
But now it also looks likes the military is going to ask Mr. Bush for something that will leave the U.S. further out on a national security limb, but leave him with a legacy option that excites him: passing Iraq on to the next president(s). It has the added benefit of masquerading as a "support the military" commander in chief moment, when nothing could be further from the truth.
It doesn't get more serious than this. Bush's current course in Iraq dictates this strategy in order to preserve his presidency, unless of course someone in the new Congress stands up and pushes back hard.
The Army and Marine Corps are planning to ask incoming Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates and Congress to approve permanent increases in personnel, as senior officials in both services assert that the nation's global military strategy has outstripped their resources.
In addition, the Army will press hard for "full access" to the 346,000-strong Army National Guard and the 196,000-strong Army Reserves by asking Gates to take the politically sensitive step of easing the Pentagon restrictions on the frequency and duration of involuntary call-ups for reservists, according to two senior Army officials.
The push for more ground troops comes as the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have sharply decreased the readiness of Army and Marine Corps units rotating back to the United States, compromising the ability of U.S. ground forces to respond to other potential conflicts around the world. ...
(snip)
According to Army Gen. John P. Abizaid, the top U.S. commander for the Middle East, the Army and Marine Corps today cannot sustain even a modest increase of 20,000 troops in Iraq. U.S. commanders for Afghanistan have asked for more troops but have not received them, noted the Iraq Study Group report, which called it "critical" for the United States to provide more military support for Afghanistan.
"We are facing more operational risk than we have for many, many years," said Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.), a member of the Armed Services Committee. He called it "shocking and scandalous" that two-thirds of Army units are rated "non-deployable." He said the country has not faced such a readiness crisis since the aftermath of the Vietnam War. ...
Technically, this is not a draft. But it's definitely drafting Army National Guard and Army Reserve units into combat in which they likely had no intention of ever serving. Combat fine print matters. The other issue is that if we stay in Iraq this must be done. We can't sustain our presence without it.
Woven into this reality is our lack of readiness to combat a flare up in any particular region of the world. No doubt this is something our enemies know all too well. We're not ready to handle anything outside of Iraq. Just look at Afghanistan, which has been slipping out of our control for a very long time.
Iraq has not made us safer.
Iraq has made us more vulnerable.
Iraq has also stretched our military beyond what it can handle.
So now Iraq is causing us to tap into our last line of homeland defense, our Army National Guard and Army Reserves.
Folks, we're in trouble.
And again, there is the Saudis, who are adamant against an American pull-out, while threatening to aid Iraqi Sunnis with money, but also troops, which isn't much of a threat considering the Saudi troop strength. But it is a harbinger of a wider Middle East war.
Where is Mr. Bush? Waiting in the wings until January 2007 to make a decision on what to do. Our president is paralyzed. Meanwhile, our troops are caught in the middle of a sectarian civil war, because he can't make up his mind on what to do.
Republican Senator Gordon Smith is correct about Iraq. Mr. Bush's negligence has become criminal. The question remains, what will the 110th Congress do about it?
- Taylor Marsh LIVE! can be heard from 6-7 pm eastern - 3-4 p.m pacific, Mon.-Thurs, with podcasts available.