By Kristin Roberts
Reuters, 03 January 2007
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. military planners ordered to draft options for a quick boost to troop levels in Iraq are weighing moves to send another Army brigade or delay the departure of Marines already in the war zone, defense officials said this week.
The ongoing review, which has yielded a variety of distinct scenarios, is aimed at giving President George W. Bush a set of alternatives as he considers a broad new policy for the deteriorating situation in Iraq.
A quick, short-term troop increase, or "surge," is just one of many policy changes under consideration. But it is the one that has garnered the most attention in Washington, as American military casualties in Iraq have climbed above 3,000 and analysts question whether a troop increase can stem violence.
Surge options developed by military planners have ranged widely and could include as many as 10,000 to 30,000 additional troops, according to defense officials speaking on condition of anonymity. The United States now has 132,000 troops in Iraq.
The plans also differ in how quickly more troops could be deployed, officials said.
Under one plan, the
Pentagon could most quickly increase troop levels by 7,000 to 8,000 by moving in two Army brigades -- one now headed to Kuwait to serve as a standby force and another that has not been announced.
The Pentagon also could boost troop levels quickly in Baghdad by delaying the anticipated departure of two Marine Corps units now in violent Anbar province, defense officials have said. That option could provide an additional 13,000 to 15,000 troops to Iraq's capital.
Other plans, including those aimed at providing 20,000 or more troops, could take longer to implement, until as late as April, some officials said.
MILITARY CONCERN
Some generals, including Gen. John Abizaid, the U.S. Middle East commander due to retire early this year, have raised concerns about the concept of a surge, saying it would heighten opposition to the American presence.
Some critics have said the plan helps Bush satisfy political interests rather than military goals.
That is because the mission, defense officials say, is to train Iraqi forces to help them take responsibility for security. Repeatedly, commanders on the ground have said they do not need more troops to accomplish that mission.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who has not disclosed what options he prefers, also said commanders were worried that additional forces would allow Iraqis to ease away from taking security responsibility.
White House spokesman Tony Snow said Bush is "fairly far along" in deciding how to proceed on Iraq but has not completed his new plan.
Bush is expected to unveil a new Iraq policy as early as next week.
"If he goes forward with the idea presumably it means he thinks it will have a positive effect," said incoming House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, a Maryland Democrat.
"But of course the president has been almost uniformly wrong on what his premise is, of what his actions in Iraq were going to result in, whether it is cost or success, stabilization, support, sectarian violence," Hoyer said. "You name it, their observations have been wrong."
-----------------------------
Citation: Kristin Roberts. "Military planners assess options for Iraq," Reuters, 03 January 2007.
Original URL: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070103/ts_nm/iraq_usa_troops_dc
-----------------------------