Anyone support McCains plan of increasing the military by a 100,000 and sending 20,000 more to Iraq?

[NNN0LHI]

http://www.unionleader.com/article.aspx?headline=McCain+urges+more+troops+for+'insurgency'&articleId=da3c6ebd-241a-4f1a-bd4f-02735cf7681c

McCain urges more troops for 'insurgency'

Lancaster – Arizona Sen. John McCain said yesterday the United States needs to send another 20,000 troops to Iraq.

The potential Presidential candidate spoke in Lancaster and Berlin yesterday. With 16 days to go before the mid-term elections, McCain said he is "spending every waking moment" helping Republicans get elected.

"Roughly, you need another 20,000 troops in Iraq, but that means expanding the Army and Marine Corps by as much as 100,000 people," the Arizona senator told reporters after a campaign event for Republicans in New Hampshire's North Country.

McCain, a former Navy pilot who was held prisoner in Vietnam, argued that he has been saying for three years that more U.S. troops were needed in Iraq. Last week, he said during an appearance in Iowa they were needed to quell a "classic insurgency" in the country.

Yesterday, McCain said the Army and Marine Corps must be increased to take the strain off National Guard troops deployed to Iraq. He also repeated his opposition to a hasty U.S. withdrawal.

[Karenina]

1. HIS KIDS GO FIRST.

[Bonobo]

2. It is simply an idiotic idea.

We are the irritant and adding more irritant is not going to improve things.

Honestly, how stupid can people be?

[still_one]

6. That is why it is extremely important to push Murtha's plan

and if Pelosi isn't strong enough push it, then Murtha should be Speaker of the House

Don't get me wrong, Pelosi may be very much up to the job

[MichiganVote]

3. Support it for what? What is the goal? Never was defined, only lied about

[still_one]

4. Sending more troops into a civil war, gives all sides participating in the civil war

more targets

What do you expect from mccain, who believes we could have "won" Viet Nam

Raw Story also indicates that Lieberman want more troops sent also:

http://thinkprogress.org/2006/11/12/mccain-iraq-troops/

Both are wrong, dead wrong in their assessment. I am not bring up Lieberman to start an emotional flame against him, because I have no doubt their will be other Democrats, and republicans who will agree to this, and to emphasis that this would be a TERRIBLE MISTAKE.

Whatever the reasons for going into Iraq are now irrelevent, WE ARE QUITE SIMPLY A CATALAST FOR MORE VIOLENCE, and our actions will force more and more Islamic moderates to shift toward radicalism

This is why the Murtha plan is critical, HE LEARNED THE LESSONS FROM Viet Nam, others haven't

[Rainscents]

5. Bit too late warmonger fucker.

Iraq is lost... Bring the troops home now!

[still_one]

7. Murtha's plan is the way to do it

It moves our troops out of harms way, and allows the Iraqii people to take over

[BrotherBuzz]

9. Your word 'allows' is to soft

Move our troops out of harms way, and force the Iraqi people to take over.

Other than that, I agree. ;)

[still_one]

11. What I meant was that events will FORCE them one way or another to take over

because they will NOT have US to do it for them

[BrotherBuzz]

16. Yes

On edit to emphasize you words: one way or another :thumbsup:

[WinkyDink]

15. Yeah, because the Iraqis of course INVITED all this upon themselves.

[still_one]

17. We are the catalyst for the violence there now. We opened up the civil war that is occurring

There is NO WAY WE can end that, ONLY THE IRAQII People can

That is the sad reality, our credibility is zero

[Rainscents]

13. Yes, I like his plan... I also like, Kerry's plan too!

[Jacobin]

8. No.

We already tried that in the last guerilla war. 550,000 troops in Viet Nam only led to more being killed.

Its a civil war.

We have no business being there.

We had no reason to attack them.

[Rex]

10. No. A stupid idea from a stupid man.

You cannot occupy a country of 26 million, with 135,000 troops. Can't be done. Not a modern civilization like Iraq. Stupid idea. You need at least a million troops on the ground and a huge amount of growth in the national infrastructure. What have we done for the last 3 years? Nothing. Zip. Made things worse. Living conditions mean about as much as nothing when money is involved to companies like Halliburton.

Out of the question. Like the huge military bluff Rove sat out off the coast of Iran. Nothing. October Surprise my ass. Nothing happen. Things will only get worse if we continue to ignore Iraqs living conditions. Sad.

I feel sorry for the troops and the Iraqis. What a fucked up situation. Way to go Mr. Perle. Bush should be ashamed of this war. It is like Vietnam with Perle coming out against it now. Sounds like something I've heard before;

'Robert S. McNamara could give duplicity a bad name. In his new memoir, In Retrospect: The Tragedy and Lessons of Vietnam, he says that the Vietnam War was a mistake and that he knew it all along. We should have gotten out in 1963, when fewer than 100 Americans had been killed. When he and other US policymakers took us to war, they "had not truly investigated what was essentially at stake.'

http://www.afa.org/magazine/june1995/0695edit.asp

[aquart]

12. Throwing good money after bad?

And exactly what difference could they make? OUT NOW. Bring in the planes, freighters, troop ships, pack up and go.

Oh, wait. We have no jobs for them in the United States. We are completely unprepared to bring our army home. Ooops.

[WinkyDink]

14. No. More dead is not a "plan". I guess Republicans just don't get it:

We are HATED OCCUPIERS, and NOTHING will change that hatred, but our departure.

[brokensymmetry]

18. So if we're in a hole - we should dig deeper?

No. Bring them home. Now.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

19. If they're all Republican volunteers? Go for it.

[upi402]

21. 100% Republican kids, ok fine

[bowens43]

20. Hell no.

This can't be solved by throwing more bodies at it. OUr military is far too large. It should be cut by 50% or more. Bring our troops home from EVERYWHERE and use them t defend OUR country as the founding fathers intended.

[AndyTiedye]

22. It Sure Is Getting DRAFTY In Here!

[applegrove]

23. If it means they get to all redeploy sooner and this thing can be ended...

then I'd support a short term increase in troops.

[BlooInBloo]

24. Atrios said everything there is to say about McCain's inconsistent idiocy....

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2006_11_12_atrios_archive.html#116337711875664405

[LynnTheDem]

25. Nope. Poor angry McCain. Can't bear US troops to be healthy and whole

when he's not.

Hating our soldiers won't cure your problem, McCain.

[Disturbed]

26. McLame is hypocrite and a fool.

He voted for allowing torture after devising a Bill to stop Torture.

Most of the Iraqi people want the US Occupation Forces to leave their country. Only the Puppet Govt. of Iraq wants to Occupation to continue because if the US Forces leave they will be hunted down and executed.

The US/UK "Liberated" Iraq from Saddan. Now the Iraqis must figure out how to govern themselves. Give a six month withdrawl date and start demployment today.

[leesa]

27. Nope. Just more dead people all the way around.