We've Been Surging For Years: More troops in Iraq than reported

[Up2Late]

We've Been Surging For Years: More troops in Iraq than reported

The total comes to 300,000 to 360,000, more than twice the "official" figure.

by Don Monkerud

Global Research, April 27, 2007
tompaine.com - 2007-04-06

The U.S. uses a number of deceptions, definitional illusions and euphemisms, including counting only "combat forces" and "military personnel," to drastically undercount the number of U.S. forces involved in Iraq, which are at least twice the number as those quoted in the media.

Even President Bush's January announcement of a "surge" of 21,500 U.S. troops, opposed by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has now morphed into 30,000 troops with an additional "headquarters staff" of 3,000, although the currently reported total U.S. military in Iraq is 145,000....

(edit)

Additionally, private enterprise military "contractors" almost double the number of U.S. forces in Iraq. After four contractors were hung from a bridge in Fallujah in March 2004, the Bush Administration stonewalled congressional efforts to force the Pentagon to release information about the number of contractors in Iraq. Finally, the Pentagon reported a total of 25,000.

In "The Market for Force: The Consequences of Privatizing Security," Deborah D. Avant, director for the Institute for Global and Internal Studies at George Washington University, reports that official numbers are difficult to find, but "This is the largest deployment of U.S. contractors in a military operation." In October, the military's first census of contractors totaled 100,000, not counting subcontractors, and in February 2007, AP reported 120,000 contractors (which would put Bush's "surge" closer to 50,000)....

(much more at link) <http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=MON20070427&articleId=5503>

[Kagemusha]

1. Gimme a break. Generals do not order contractors into battle.

That's a good reason why they aren't considered uniformed soldiers.

[Erika]

3. And that is? n/t

[MGKrebs]

5. There aren't many "battles" in the traditional sense over there.

It sounds like urban warfare; attack and retreat. Most streets, most cities, virtually all areas are vulnerable to conflict. Blackwater has lost men, trucks and even helicopters to attacks, so they are doing something "in harm's way". And they have guns. They are evidently not restricted to base. Or Kuwait.

[enough]

6. If generals don't, who does?

Not arguing, just asking.

[Kagemusha]

8. They're not there to wage war like they're the 101st.

No one commands them into battle like that. I said generals because it was the fastest way to demonstrate that uniformed US officers don't command them in that manner. Comparing them to infantry sent to do door to door searches for weapons and insurgents is highly misleading. Soldiers do higher risk work for less money because they're doing it for the flag. Because, you see, even though everyone wants to call them mercenaries, they are in Iraq in a security, not a mercenary, capacity; they're fancy guards, not Hessians. Just because they're privately paid and bear arms does not make them into paratroop infantry, even if many hail from such a background.

Now if, like Hessians, US officers could and did order these so-called mercenaries into battle, THEN they would be properly considered auxilliary troops and part of the surge. They are not. So they ought not be counted so.

[Igel]

9. Moreover, not all the contractors are there to provide

security per se. Some are there as advisors, some are there to get the electricity plants back up and running, some fix water purification sites.

Unfortunately, for each of *those* advisors security is needed. So, sure, there are mercenaries carrying guns, but who orders them around? The contractors, to keep the engineers trying to bring infrastructure up to snuff alive.

[Up2Late]

7. No, they just protect them and our so-called "diplomats...

...like L."Paul" Bremmer and Former Generals and things line "The Green Zone" and the Iraqi Oil Fields.

<http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/warriors/etc/script.html>

...MARTIN SMITH: A British security company, Aegis, was hired for $300 million to help coordinate and track all security teams operating in Iraq, as well as to protect the Green Zone...."

In August 2003, Blackwater was awarded a $21 million contract to supply security guards and two helicopters for Paul Bremer III, head of the U.S. occupation in Iraq. Other Blackwater operations in Iraq are merely described as full protective teams "for any threat scenario."

<http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200704u/iraq-state-department>

[Erika]

2. Is W proud of the private mercenaries? n/t

[Up2Late]

4. kick n/t

:kick: