If it was within my power to order that some brigades be moved from Iraq to Afghanistan then I would direct the Pentagon to analyze the situation and come up with a list. That’s what they are there for.

Did you ever stop to think they’ve already analyzed the situation and are not moving brigades from Iraq to Afghanistan because it isn’t feasible?

Some times it’s best to just remain “Anonymous.”

If the Pentagon can’t more 2 or 3 brigades from Iraq to Afghanistan (they of course can) then we would need a new Pentagon.

And you “Blacksheep” need to get a new song and dance.

So, you have no idea which brigades are where, or which you would remove, or where they would come from.

So fracken what!

Is this suppose to be some kind of brilliant gotcha pop quiz on your part? Details like that are the job of those at the Pentagon. The Pentagon has a lot of staff. It is a very big place. Have you ever been there? Do you think they are just thousands of potted plants there? I guess so. Why on earth should I know the names and locations of all the brigades in Iraq? Do you think that George Bush or John McCain knows that?

That’s what I thought.

Your thinking is uncoordinated and off the mark entirely.

There is really nothing that complicated here.

Again, you don’t know what you’re talking about.

Again, your attempt at a “gotcha” is extraneous and confused.

Brigade-level withdrawal is extremely complicated, and your comment only underscores your lack of familiarity of military operations.

There should be nothing complicated about those at the Pentagon coming up with a couple of brigades to move from Iraq to Afghanistan. During 1971 alone over 170,000 troops were withdrawn from RVN and all the way to the United States of America on the other side of the planet.

How about this: we pick brigades at random, and then have everyone else spread out like a friggin’ NFL zone defense to make up for it!

Blacksheep on July 23, 2008 at 3:52 PM

If you worked at the Pentagon you would be fired.

How about this: we pick brigades at random, and then have everyone else spread out like a friggin’ NFL zone defense to make up for it!

Trying to defend against smugglers?

Not too long ago, according to Democrats, we needed to get out of Iraq, because Iraq couldn’t be won.

Now, according to Democrats, we need to get out of Iraq, because Iraq can’t be lost….

If it was within my power to order that some brigades be moved from Iraq to Afghanistan then I would direct the Pentagon to analyze the situation and come up with a list.

So, you have no idea which brigades are where, or which you would remove, or where they would come from. That’s what I thought.

There is really nothing that complicated here.

Again, you don’t know what you’re talking about. Brigade-level withdrawal is extremely complicated, and your comment only underscores your lack of familiarity of military operations.

How about this: we pick brigades at random, and then have everyone else spread out like a friggin’ NFL zone defense to make up for it!

MB4, since you’re apparently a military genius, let me ask you this:

It doesn’t take a military genius to do simple math.

specifically which brigades would you remove from Iraq, and from where?

If it was within my power to order that some brigades be moved from Iraq to Afghanistan then I would direct the Pentagon to analyze the situation and come up with a list. That’s what they are there for.

what would you do to fill the void left by the 25% withdrawal?

Blacksheep on July 23, 2008 at 3:16 PM

If the “Surge” has been half as successful as advertised and if the IA and IP have been improving half as much as advertised, then there shouldn’t be much of a “void” now should there be. If the Iraqi’s can’t start filling a lot of the “void”, and Maliki seems to think that they can, then we are back to square one.

There is really nothing that complicated here.

Moving just 25% of the American troops in Iraq to Afghanistan would increase the number of American troops in Afghanistan by 100%.

MB4, since you’re apparently a military genius, let me ask you this: specifically which brigades would you remove from Iraq, and from where? What would you do to fill the void left by the 25% withdrawal?

Why is Klein angrier at McCain for what he said than at the fact that the left was prepared to consign Iraq to that possible fate by pulling troops out prematurely two years ago?

Klein’s feigning outrage because he’s a dishonorable coward who hoped we lose the war. Invested in defeat along with his liberal buddies, he’s probably also fairly surprised how things have gone lately, and mortified that Bush & McCain are getting credit for it. And now that we’ve won, he’s embarrassed, and scared that our victory might hurt his beloved Democrats in November.

To my mind, if Afghanistan really is in such dire straits that we can’t spare another moment without reinforcements, then “everyone out of Iraq now” is a more defensible position than some 16-month timeline

Moving just 25% of the American troops in Iraq to Afghanistan would increase the number of American troops in Afghanistan by 100%.

Quite the editorial from the WaPo the other day (emphasis mine):
Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, who has a history of tailoring his public statements for political purposes, made headlines by saying he would support a withdrawal of American force…

McCain is having a problem even finding the right target let alone hitting it. If his target acquisition does not improve he is in danger of blowing his own head off.

Takeaway: “[I]t’s a strong line.

Joe McCarthy had some pretty strong lines too.

How did that work out for him?

I can see why Klein and his ilk are trying to scare McCain out of using it.

Now that I rather doubt.

We will see if McCain uses it, basically calling the other parties Presidential candidate a sell out traitor, or coming pretty close anyway, again without toning it down anyway.

McCain wants voters to believe that all improvements in Iraq flow from the extra troops

That seems to be true.

while the left basically wants them to believe that none of the improvements do

Part of the left which does not seem to include Obama.

The locals (Sunnis) turned first in 06

okonkolo on July 23, 2008 at 1:59 PM

The surge started in Ramadi in 2006, but spread throughout Anbar in 2007 and throughout all of Iraq in 2008. Without the surge, the effect would have been localized.

At least McCain’s revisionism on the surge has a basis in reality (clearly the surge encouraged the locals to turn against Al Qaeda).

No, this isn’t correct. The locals (Sunnis) turned first in 06 and the “surge” was announced in early 07. I would imagine that the surge strengthened the local resolve and the two reinforced each other, but the locals had already turned before the surge had even been announced much less staffed.

CLEARLY, any person with even the remotest smidgeon of understanding in military matters understands that adding forces, finally leaving strongholds and engaging the enemy allowed the Iraqis themselves to participate in turning the tide at at whatever level of participation.

These concepts in hypotheticals that the surge is not the root cause of turn around is a whole new level of total stupidity, insanity.