Author Topic: Someone, please defend the 21,500 troop number (Read 5152 times)

240 is Back · « **on:** January 11, 2007, 09:05:03 PM »

Essentially, it's an inflationary number to keep up with the growing insurgency. 15% troop growth per year, for the next 5 years. Just as they say the insurgents grow.

Can anyone defend it? People seem to be saying either pull out completely, or boost the troops to 300k and just overwhelm them and win.

*Please don't attack either position or either party - this 21,500 position is unpopular with BOTH parties*

Can someone please defend the 21,500 number as a strategy for victory? thanks.

Mr. Intenseone · « **Reply #1 on:** January 11, 2007, 09:21:35 PM »

I'm not trying to defend it, but if you think pulling out is an option your wrong!!

GroinkTropin · « **Reply #2 on:** January 11, 2007, 09:23:36 PM »

No it's not enough, but it is enough to keep things under control.

240 is Back · « **Reply #3 on:** January 11, 2007, 09:30:33 PM »

Quote from: Mr. Intenseone on January 11, 2007, 09:21:35 PM

I'm not trying to defend it, but if you think pulling out is an option your wrong!!

I'm not. I've made it clear I want a 350,000 force to crush the f'kers.

I want to hear SOMEONE defend it, and tell us why it's the best answer. So far, it sounds like only Bush, and defense contractors, are in favor of this.

ToxicAvenger · « **Reply #4 on:** January 11, 2007, 09:40:29 PM »

Quote from: Mr. Intenseone on January 11, 2007, 09:21:35 PM

I'm not trying to defend it, but if you think pulling out is an option your wrong!!

pulling out aint an option..i agree...

we r fucked..into a chinese finger trap..

thanx bush~!

youandme · « **Reply #5 on:** January 11, 2007, 09:44:02 PM »

Put Saddam back in power....oh wait riiiight.

ToxicAvenger · « **Reply #6 on:** January 11, 2007, 09:47:32 PM »

Quote from: youandme on January 11, 2007, 09:44:02 PM

Put Saddam back in power....oh wait riiiight.

i've said it..and i'll say it again..

this is possibly the last timeperiod to enjoy life on this planet..

shits gonna hit the celing ..in another 50 yrs..HARD...

Dos Equis · « **Reply #7 on:** January 11, 2007, 09:59:50 PM »

Most of the soldiers who spoke with CNN said they believe that if the fresh troops are used in the right way, the increase could be a significant help. But these men have no say in policy.

In the words of one soldier, "I am just a little fish."(Watch Defense Secretary Robert Gates explain how plan will work )

Starbeck said he believes that Bush "did a pretty good job of owning up to what is going on over here."

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/01/11/damon.baghdad.reaction/index.html

240 is Back · « **Reply #8 on:** January 11, 2007, 10:08:02 PM »

Quote from: Beach Bum on January 11, 2007, 09:59:50 PM

Most of the soldiers who spoke with CNN said they believe that if the fresh troops are used in the right way, the increase could be a significant help. But these men have no say in policy.

In the words of one soldier, "I am just a little fish."(Watch Defense Secretary Robert Gates explain how plan will work )

Starbeck said he believes that Bush "did a pretty good job of owning up to what is going on over here."

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/01/11/damon.baghdad.reaction/index.html

the thread asked you to defend the number. Can you?

Dos Equis · « **Reply #9 on:** January 11, 2007, 10:14:06 PM »

Quote from: 240 is Back on January 11, 2007, 10:08:02 PM

the thread asked you to defend the number. Can you?

I don't need to defend the number. The troops on the ground already did. You can argue with them about it.

GroinkTropin · « **Reply #10 on:** January 11, 2007, 10:17:14 PM »

Quote from: ToxicAvenger! on January 11, 2007, 09:47:32 PM

i've said it..and i'll say it again..

this is possibly the last timeperiod to enjoy life on this planet..

shits gonna hit the celing ..in another 50 yrs..HARD...

I agree totally, which is why i do not have kids.

ToxicAvenger · « **Reply #11 on:** January 11, 2007, 10:20:05 PM »

Quote from: Methyl Mike on January 11, 2007, 10:17:14 PM

I agree totally, which is why i do not have kids.

good..

dont breed..

GroinkTropin · « **Reply #12 on:** January 11, 2007, 10:21:04 PM »

Quote from: ToxicAvenger! on January 11, 2007, 10:20:05 PM

good..

dont breed..

What's that supposed to mean?>

ToxicAvenger · « **Reply #13 on:** January 11, 2007, 10:21:35 PM »

Quote from: Methyl Mike on January 11, 2007, 10:21:04 PM

What's that supposed to mean?>

its in english..

dont breed...

240 is Back · « **Reply #14 on:** January 11, 2007, 10:22:48 PM »

Quote from: Beach Bum on January 11, 2007, 10:14:06 PM

I don't need to defend the number. The troops on the ground already did. You can argue with them about it.

The troops on the ground, knowing they are going to be on CNN, would defend anything.

i asked because I wanted to see if anyone here could defend that number, as opposed to 300k or zero troops.

I see you can not. Thank you for playing.

Jeff Miller · « **Reply #15 on:** January 11, 2007, 10:25:12 PM »

Quote from: 240 is Back on January 11, 2007, 09:30:33 PM

I'm not. I've made it clear I want a 350,000 force to crush the f'kers.

Do you know how mush 200,000 extra troops would cost?

10,000 more troops a year = 1.2 BILLION

Do the math. Its just not feasible.

youandme · « **Reply #16 on:** January 11, 2007, 10:27:01 PM »

Quote from: Jeff Miller on January 11, 2007, 10:25:12 PM

Do you know how mush 200,000 extra troops would cost?

Better question to ask is do you know how much people are making off this war?

240 is Back · « **Reply #17 on:** January 11, 2007, 10:30:35 PM »

Quote from: Jeff Miller on January 11, 2007, 10:25:12 PM

Do you know how mush 200,000 extra troops would cost?

10,000 more troops a year = 1.2 BILLION

Do the math. Its just not feasible.

1.2 billion?

The Iraq war costs American taxpayers $195 million per day. That's in the HOLDINg pattern. When we borrow the money, maintain, and accomplish little there.

At least spend big for 4 months, crush everything in sight, and then STOP spending.

Bob Gates just signed up 92,000 troops over 5 more years.

So do the math jeff- - - would it be cheaper to crush them at the higher cost, and then start spending close to ZERo in the place? Or to spend the next 5 years, spending $195 million a day, and be exactly where we are today?

Jeff Miller · « **Reply #18 on:** January 11, 2007, 10:35:35 PM »

Quote from: 240 is Back on January 11, 2007, 10:30:35 PM

So do the math jeff- - - would it be cheaper to crush them at the higher cost, and then start spending close to ZERo in the place?

What do you mean "crush them"? Crush who?

Dos Equis · « **Reply #19 on:** January 11, 2007, 10:44:39 PM »

Quote from: 240 is Back on January 11, 2007, 10:22:48 PM

The troops on the ground, knowing they are going to be on CNN, would defend anything.

You don't know squat about the troops on the ground, or the military in general. But carry on with the nonsense.

240 is Back · « **Reply #20 on:** January 11, 2007, 10:46:31 PM »

Quote from: Beach Bum on January 11, 2007, 10:44:39 PM

You don't know squat about the troops on the ground, or the military in general. But carry on with the nonsense.

Oh, okay. Do troops on deployment often get on CNN and disagree with Bush on tv in front of their commanding officers?

LOL.. you're a silly girl.

Mr. Intenseone · « **Reply #21 on:** January 11, 2007, 10:47:13 PM »

Quote from: 240 is Back on January 11, 2007, 10:30:35 PM

1.2 billion?

The Iraq war costs American taxpayers $195 million per day.

How did you arrive at that number?

Dos Equis · « **Reply #22 on:** January 11, 2007, 10:49:29 PM »

Quote from: 240 is Back on January 11, 2007, 10:46:31 PM

Oh, okay. Do troops on deployment often get on CNN and disagree with Bush on tv in front of their commanding officers?

LOL.. you're a silly girl.

Why do you ask dumb questions day after day after day? They are like never ending. Just when I think you've asked your last dumb question of the day, you ask another one. $:-\$ Interesting talent you have.

240 is Back · « **Reply #23 on:** January 11, 2007, 10:50:50 PM »

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11880954/

here's MSNBC. Just punch in "cost of iraq war by day" and you get various estimates from 190k to 210k.

240 is Back · « **Reply #24 on:** January 11, 2007, 10:52:30 PM »

Quote from: Beach Bum on January 11, 2007, 10:49:29 PM

Why do you ask dumb questions day after day after day? They are like never ending. Just when I think you've asked your last dumb question of the day, you ask another one. $:-\$ Interesting talent you have.

If you weren't watching MtV all day, you would have seen this exact question being asked of senators/reps on both side of the aisle, all week on the news.

But I guess the media, congress, and most americans having this conversation are "dumb" as you put it.

And you still haven't defended the 21,500 number. Defend it. you did crash this thread and never answered it.