Our Troops Say No! To The Surge

You’ll never see these guys on CNN.

Many of the American soldiers trying to quell sectarian killings in Baghdad don’t appear to be looking for reinforcements. They say the temporary surge in troop levels some people are calling for is a bad idea.

[snip]

Spc. Don Roberts, who was stationed in Baghdad in 2004, said the situation had gotten worse because of increasing violence between Shiites and Sunnis.

“I don’t know what could help at this point,” said Roberts, 22, of Paonia, Colo. “What would more guys do? We can’t pick sides. It’s almost like we have to watch them kill each other, then ask questions.”

[snip]

“Nothing’s going to help. It’s a religious war, and we’re caught in the middle of it,” said Sgt. Josh Keim, a native of Canton, Ohio, who is on his second tour in Iraq. “It’s hard to be somewhere where there’s no mission and we just drive around.”

Capt. Matt James, commander of the battalion’s Company B, was careful in how he described the unit’s impact since arriving in Baghdad.

“The idea in calling us in was to make things better here, but it’s very complicated and complex,” he said.

But James said more troops in combat would likely not have the desired effect.

“The more guys we have training the Iraqi army the better,” he said. “I would like to see a surge there.”

[snip]

Pfc. Richard Grieco said it’s hard to see how daily missions in Baghdad make a difference.

“If there’s a plan to sweep through Baghdad and clear it, (more troops) could make a difference,” said the 19-year-old from Slidell, La. “But if we just dump troops in here like we’ve been doing, it’s just going to make for more targets.”

Sgt. James Simons, 24, of Tacoma, Wash., said Baghdad is so dangerous that U.S. forces spend much of their time in combat instead of training Iraqis.

“Baghdad is still like it was at the start of the war. We still have to knock out insurgents because things are too dangerous for us to train the Iraqis,” he said.

[snip]

Sgt. Justin Thompson, a San Antonio native, said he signed up for delayed enlistment before the Sept. 11 terror attacks, then was forced to go to a war he didn’t agree with.

A troop surge is “not going to stop the hatred between Shia and Sunni,” said Thompson, who is especially bitter because his 4-year contract was involuntarily extended in June. “This is a civil war, and we’re just making things worse. We’re losing. I’m not afraid to say it.”

3 thoughts on “Our Troops Say No! To The Surge

  1. Monkeyfister says:

    A Surge!(tm) of 50,000 troops most assuredly means HUGE new construction and support contracts. I guess I’m a little slow on the uptake, but, I wonder– is this one last push for “Victory!(tm),” or just one last pass of our economy through the profits mangle by BushCo?(tm)
    –mf

  2. Anonymous says:

    What really bothers me with the “surge” is knowing how Shrub does math.
    Just picking a round number for the sake of example:
    Start with 1,000
    Surge by an additional 1,000
    Announce that this is a 50% reduction as you had planned to surge by 2000
    Reduce troops by 500.
    Announce that this is a 50% troop withdrawal (as this was 50% of the surge. Forget all the other soldiers already on the field).
    Total = 100% troop withdrawal. Meanwhile 1,500 stay in Iraq permanently.

  3. pansypoo says:

    obviously we are winning.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: