Iraq Troop Reductions: The Numbers Tell a Different Story

[MannyGoldstein]

Foul Rumsfeld's just announced a possible 5% US troop reduction in Iraq. Being a numbers guy, this got me thinking: is this really a reduction, or just another game with numbers in order to placate The People?

A quick Google found this article from January 12, 2005. Two interesting points can be seen:

1. At that time we had just increased the number of troops to 150,000 ahead of of the January 30 elections. For last week's elections, we beefed up to 160,000 troops. If the local Iraqi forces are actually getting more capable, then why would we need an extra 10,000 of our people this time? Seems to me that either the situation is getting worse, or the Iraqi forces are getting less capable - in any case, the actual numbers are not a hopeful trend.

2. In the article, Colin Powell states "With the assumption of that greater burden , the burden on our troops should go down, and we should start to see our numbers going in the other direction". As far as I can tell, the "base" number of troops in Iraq remained the same for all of 2005, at 138,000 troops.

So, while the Bush Administration is telling us one thing, the numbers tend to indicate another thing.

[teryang]

1. This regime wrecked the economy and can't win a war it chose

Reducing the forces at Christmas time is a feel good propaganda lie.

[Uben]

2. Hey, where did you go to school?

We added 22,000 troops for security for the elections, and now we are bringing home 8,000 troops. This is a troop reduction. Rummy said so, and if it were not true, he would have told you so!

Funny how they have to use lie after lie to justify the atrocity that is Iraq......and virtually every aspect of American government.

But hey, more people own houses today than any other time in history! Don't use your brain and realize 150,000 homes have to be bought to keep up with the birth rate. That's unpatriotic. Why do you hate freedom?

/rant off

edit:Of course, home ownership has increased every year since records have been kept, but since that is about the only truth republicans can say about this administration, we have heard it a million times and will continue to hear it repeatedly!

[Spazito]

3. Yep, they have been playing the numbers game every time

they feel the need to pretend they are drawing down when in reality the numbers have been increasing over time. It was interesting that it has been reported that Rumsfeld's priority is to try and stop the focus on 'numbers' of troops in Iraq because, it seems, they will no longer be 'front and center' but in the background. Like that makes one bit of difference? Don't think so. As Murtha and others have already pointed out, as long as U.S. troops are there, they will fuel the insurgency and, given there are 160 thousand there now and all they have done is stop the additional 7,200 from being deployed, drawing down is a fallacy as is everything the bush cabal says.

[Newsjock]

4. Here is a good chart

[MannyGoldstein]

5. Great Chart, Thanks - Reference?

This is a GREAT chart, thanks, I've been looking for something like this - do you have a reference?

[Newsjock]

6. It's an AP chart in today's SF Chronicle

Sourced to data from the Defense Department, so it's legit. Here's the page it came from:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/object/article?f=/c/a/2005/12/24/MNGBOGD4GJ1.DTL&o=1

[MannyGoldstein]

9. Thanks!

Added it to my blog article.

[FloridaPat]

7. And of things are going so well, why has the cost gone from $1 to $1.5

million a week? Right, going real well.

[MADem]

8. It is all bullshit

What they are planning on doing is removing service personnel from "combat." But wait, wasn't the mission "accomplished???" Why are they still in "combat?"

These people who will be removed from "combat" will be required, by and large, to stay in the fucking sandbox, TRAINING Iraqi soldiers. But hey, their mission isn't "combat"--it's "training."

You can still get blown up while "training"....this is a massive, stinking turd of a lie they are trying to pull--you can put a tutu on your dog and call him a ballerina, that still doesn't qualify him to dance at the Bolshoi.

It's a shell game, a con. And people who do not ask the hard questions will believe the bullshit.

[catmandu57]

10. They're counting on the short attention span of the general public

that, and their response to buzzwords such as draw down. What they are doing is playing three card Monte and hoping they don't get caught with yet another finger in the pie.
The world will not be a safe place to live until all of these bastards are doing hard time.