Top Leaderboard, Site wide
Shop the Truthdig Gift Guide 2014
December 21, 2014
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
Sign up for Truthdig's Email NewsletterLike Truthdig on FacebookFollow Truthdig on TwitterSubscribe to Truthdig's RSS Feed

Get Truthdig's headlines in your inbox!


Loss of Rainforests Is Double Whammy Threat to Climate






Truthdig Bazaar
Requiem

Requiem

By Frances Itani
$24.00

more items

 
Ear to the Ground

Violence Escalates With Troop Levels in Iraq

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Jan 21, 2007
U.S. Soldier
komotv.com

The first wave in Bush’s surge—3,200 troops—arrived in Baghdad as the United States experienced the most violent day for its forces in two years. Twenty-five American soldiers were killed on Saturday.


BBC:

As the deployment began, the US military said four soldiers and one marine had been killed in the restive western province of Anbar.

It took to 25 the number of US deaths in Iraq on Saturday - one of the worst days for US troops since the invasion.

[...]Saturday was the deadliest day for US troops in Iraq since January 2005, when 36 service members were killed. In addition to the deaths in Anbar:

  • Twelve US troops were killed in a helicopter crash near Baghdad
  • Five US soldiers were killed in a clash with militants in the Shia holy city of Karbala
  • Three other soldiers were killed in separate attacks across the country

Read more

More Below the Ad

Advertisement

Square, Site wide

New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

By felicity, January 22, 2007 at 2:24 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Maybe Pelosi is right.  Maybe Bush sending in 21,000 more sacrificial lambs was a tactic to deter Congress from cutting off his war funds. 
Since I have not found one viable reason for the surge - not even from Bush toadies - what else could it be but what Pelosi suggests it is.

Her accusation leveled at anybody but Bush/Cheney would be hard to swallow. But for those of us who have been paying attention for the last six years, the accusation is fitting.

Report this

By Rodney Matthews, January 22, 2007 at 1:41 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

It’S sad to see young soldiers die for nothing. Bush and Cheney must have no heart,no soul and no conscious. How can you allow soidiers to die everyday in a situation that continually gets worse instead of better.
forget for now that the war was based on outright lies. How about it’s not working and our brave men are dying for Bush and Cheney’s ego. Congress should stop the funding not to defy Bush. but because it’s the right and moral thing to do.

Report this

By brian roberts, January 22, 2007 at 12:50 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

it is time for those who can see through Bush’s facade to unite to beat him at his game. the only way to stop this failed rules of engagement policy is to force Bush to change the rules or face impeachment. another89

Report this

By lawlessone, January 22, 2007 at 11:04 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Why should we expect the Iraq Prime Minister to control the Sunnis or the Shiites in Iraq?  Poor Maliki must try to govern a genuine democracy where what the majority of voters want actually counts for something unlike Bush’s America where he can’t control Republicans, let alone Democrats, even when he has a near dictatorship going.

[more irreverence at resistence-is-possible.blogspot.com]

Report this

By Steve Hammons, January 21, 2007 at 9:53 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

George Bush’s and Dick Cheney’s “surge” will most likely be ineffective and simply result in more US casualties, as many experts have predicted.

It may be important to keep in mind that any so-called “failure” in Iraq is not the fault of the troops, mostly Army and Marines. But, rather, failure lies squarely on Bush, Cheney and their neocon cronies.

Hopefully, our system of justice will provide them with appropriate consequences.

In the meantime, the role of our Army and Marines should be clearly separated from that of corrupt government officials. Along these lines of thinking, the article below may provide some useful perspectives:

Army and Marine Corps will retain strength and honor after Iraq occupation ends

By Steve Hammons
American Chronicle
December 14, 2006

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=18005

Report this

By trantieungoc, January 21, 2007 at 7:52 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Don’t worry. The more killings the more Bush/Cheney & Co. are happy and enjoyed !

Report this

By Eleanore Kjellberg, January 21, 2007 at 6:46 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

“It took to 25 the number of US deaths in Iraq on Saturday - one of the worst days for US troops since the invasion.”

More than 20,000 are destined to be used as cannon fodder to prop up a failed presidency, for another two years; what value does the Bush administration place on human life,  obviously, not much unless your surname is Bush or Cheney. Everyone knows, that an additional 20,000 troops will not suppress a civil war—-we are NOT told that the real “coalition of the willing”  is the 100,000 mercenary troops who are already fighting in Iraq; so in effect, there are not just 140,000 troops but 240,000 troops that can not contain a civil strife.  Bush and his strategists know it would take an additional 500,000 troops to restrain Iraq’s insurgency, so to offer up 20,000 young men and women as mere sacrificial lambs is somewhat disgusting.

So how would the U.S “all voluntary military” muster up an addition 500,000 troops for Iraq and then another 100,000 to control the bedlam in Afghanistan which is now known as the “Taliban Heroin Haven”-—well, to wage a serious neo-con war in Iraq and in Afghanistan, Uncle Sam would need to reinstatement the draft.

Now, there are probably several reasons why these neo-cons do not want to reinstate the draft—fear of a Vietnam War civil rebellion in the streets; a lack of desire for CEO chieftains and energy warlords to sacrifice their own flesh and blood; and finally if you reinstate the draft you’re eliminating the privatization of the military, and also doing away with billions of dollars of war profiteering for services that were previous done by the enlisted—-how many no bid contracts would be terminated, well only Bush’s God would know for sure.

Report this

By HeadlessHessian, January 21, 2007 at 5:44 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

All for oil!  People think of that next time you get into your gas guzzler.

Its not worth it.

Headless

Report this
 
Monsters of Our Own Creation? Get tickets for this Truthdig discussion of America's role in the Middle East.
Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
 
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion   Zuade Kaufman, Publisher   Robert Scheer, Editor-in-Chief
© 2014 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.

Like Truthdig on Facebook