White House Disputes CBO Report, Says Combat Troops Don’t Need More Support
White House Disputes CBO Report, Says Combat Troops Don’t Need More Support
A new study by the Congressional Budget Office shows that the real troop increase associated with President Bush’s escalation policy could be as high as 48,000, more than double the 21,500 soldiers that Bush has claimed.
Last night on MSNBC, Newsweek’s Howard Fineman reported that White House counsellor Dan Bartlett had written him in an email, “[W]e don’t agree with the CBO estimate and analysis. We think that there are already enough support troops on the ground there that very few will be required.” Watch it:
In fact, the CBO report considers Bartlett’s claim and rejected it. “Army and DoD officials have indicated that it will be both possible and desirable to deploy fewer additional support units than historical practice would indicate,” the report states. “CBO expects that, even if the additional brigades required fewer support units than historical practice suggests, those units would still represent a significant additional number of military personnel.”
Fineman added that if the administration is going to “flat-out deny” the CBO report, “then the question’s going to be, ok, if it’s not 15,000, how many is it? And where are your plans for actually knowing how many people you are putting in there? It undermines the whole notion that they know precisely what they are doing at this moment.”
Transcript:
FINEMAN: But most of the American public does not back it. Most of the American public, if they heard any number, heard the 20,000 number. Now 35,000 to 48,000 is a big difference in total, and it puts, if it’s up at 48,000, it puts the total in Iraq at, I think, about if not over 200,000. So I don’t think politically it’s good news for the White House in any way, shape, or form in a time when they are desperately trying to keep a Republican coalition together up on the Hill and having a lot of trouble doing it, I can tell you, because it was chaos up there this afternoon.
OLBERMANN: There’s a lot of bad news in this for everybody, though, but aren’t the Democrats on Capitol Hill going to catch hell, and the media? I mean, how did everybody miss the obvious, that they need support troops at a ratio of better than one-to-one.
FINEMAN: Well, you think we would know how to be very specific about the labels, and we weren’t. Um, 21,000 troops — is that combat troops? That term wasn’t always used because, especially in today’s Army, what they call the tooth-to-tail ratio, fighter-to-support ratio, is very high, and often there are more support troops than there are actual fighting troops.
Now, I spoke to the White House people about this. I exchanged e-mails with Dan Bartlett, who is the communications director, and he said to me we don’t agree with the CBO estimate and analysis. We think that there are already enough support troops on the ground there that very few will be required. But that’s not what the CBO says, and keep in mind that the CBO is an independent nonpartisan research organization of the Congress, and, you know, they’re pretty neutral up there. I think there will be debate over it. If the administration’s gonna just flat-out deny it, then the question’s going to be, ok, if it’s not 15,000, how many is it? And where are your plans for actually knowing how many people you are putting in there? It undermines the whole notion that they know precisely what they are doing at this moment.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
26 Responses to “White House Disputes CBO Report, Says Combat Troops Don’t Need More Support”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Think ProgressContact Us
Donate
If there is a crapload of support staff also going in, then this is serious escalation. There is no front line in Iraq.
February 2nd, 2007 at 3:08 pmU.S. troops kept Iraqi brains in fridge as trophies
According to Chanan Suarez-Diaz, who also received a Purple Heart for his service in Iraq, the psyched up emotions among the troops resulted in US soldiers taking “trophies” of brain matter from Iraqis they killed and putting such in their refrigerators on base.
February 2nd, 2007 at 3:12 pmhttp://www.wartribunal.org
February 2nd, 2007 at 3:15 pmHas bushco ever known exactly what they were doing at any moment other than when they are lying, steating, and chealing?
February 2nd, 2007 at 3:16 pmi hate to keepp beating a dead horse, but… the administration’s track record on being forthright about this stuff is nonexistant. no credibility.
February 2nd, 2007 at 3:20 pmWhat the hell is wrong with this WH? Are they actually trying to make the situation in Iraq worse?
Nico, you’re supposed to get GOOD screen shots of Keith. Lordy.
February 2nd, 2007 at 3:24 pmIf there is one thing this administration has been consistent about Iraq, is underestimating.
They underestimated the amount of troops needed -remember Gen Shinseki?
They underestimated the how long the war would last -Rumsfeld’s “I doubt six months”
They underestimated the cost, who and how the war would be paid -remember how Lindsey’s estimates were downplayed?
So, when Bartlett says: “We think that there are already enough support troops on the ground there that very few will be required”, well, I know where their credibility is, in terms of estimating the effort needed.
February 2nd, 2007 at 3:24 pmAs usual…
…the White House will be AGAINST the report…
…before they’re FOR the report…
…creating reality…
…is hard work…
February 2nd, 2007 at 3:29 pmWhy don’t they just go ahead and say, ” Look after we stir up the Iranian hornets nest we are going to need a hell of a lot more live bodies to stem the flow of the human wave attacks sure to accompany the blacking out of the sun by Iranian missles.” We are going to start a war with Iran…too many people up top keep denying it, so it has to be true. These extra troops are the speed bump that is going to slow down the overwhelming Iranian response. Then they are going to say something stupid like ” Ya see? These goddamn svages will stop at nothing…they hate our freedom, which is why we are going to take your freedoma dn draft you to fix our mistake.”
February 2nd, 2007 at 3:29 pm“It undermines the whole notion that they know precisely what they are doing at this moment.â€
what a stupid statement. Based on what evidence would any sane person come to the conclusion that the bush adminsitration has ever known what they were doing in regard to Iraq. On the contrary, the ONLY sane judgement to make regarding any actions of the bush administration takes is to have a position that they have NO IDEA what they are doing - THAT…is where ALL the evidence is.
February 2nd, 2007 at 3:39 pm.
Support troops in Iraq are not like they are miles away from the “front lines” because there are no front lines in Iraq. The war is everywhere. It is more than disingenuous for the WH to say that they don’t need support troops — Rumsfeld didn’t think they were necessary either — and they don’t account for them. If they plan to send 21000 without the support troops necessary, they would be guilty AGAIN of sending not-fully-prepared/equipped troops into battle. They still haven’t learned the lessons of Iraq.
February 2nd, 2007 at 3:47 pmThis is simply more of the Pentagon’s on-the-cheap warfare, and American soldiers may make up the cost difference with their lives.
We should be bringing our people home, not sending more there; and to think they may be sent there without proper backup is unconscionable.
More outrageous behavior from Bush&Co.
with 1/4 trillion more? so the money is not for additional support? what does bush intend to do with it? oil platforms in the persian gulf?
February 2nd, 2007 at 3:48 pmMahdi Army Chants… All Hai..l King Bubble Boy Bush! ..Embed those US Troopers
U.S. training made Shiite militia stronger
BAGHDAD — The U.S. military’s efforts to train and equip Iraq’s security forces have unwittingly strengthened the al-Mahdi Army militia, which has been battling to take over much of the capital as U.S. forces try to secure it.
U.S. Army commanders and enlisted men who are patrolling east Baghdad said the militia, which is loyal to anti-American Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr, had heavily infiltrated the Iraqi police and army units that the Americans have trained and armed.
http://www.dfw.com/ mld/ dfw/ news/ world/ 16605799.htm
February 2nd, 2007 at 3:48 pmYou can always count on Tobey to provide such uplifting information about the US.
February 2nd, 2007 at 3:52 pmI think the White House prefers that troops support be supplied by haliburton with no bid contracts.
February 2nd, 2007 at 4:12 pm…creating reality…
…is hard work…
Comment by big papa
Not really if you have a 30% which is gullible (WMDs in Iraq, AlQaeda-Iraq, 9/11-Iraq, Bush talks to God), afraid (Iran´s nukes, OBL still floating around, Zarkawi, Al-Sadr, arabs, commies), ignorant (where´s Iraq, Muslims are evil, Islam wants to kill us, American Idol, all my sources are corporate sources), low self-esteemed (cant lose this one, victory no matter what, need that car to get laid, I admire Bill Gates).
February 2nd, 2007 at 4:12 pmIsn’t it wonderful to have an administration that lies about everything? Truth appears to be their enemy.
February 2nd, 2007 at 4:14 pmIt undermines the whole notion that they know precisely what they are doing at this moment.
I don’t know whose “notion” this is supposed to be, but how anyone in their right mind could believe that this administration has a clue about knowing precisely what they are doing amazes me. I guess they represent the 30 percenters.
February 2nd, 2007 at 4:16 pmNothing to see here move along,
Administration has no idea what they are doing.
Same shit different day.
Move along, nothing to see here.
Why is this even news? America has accepted that God has commanded a total moron to lead us for 8 years — beats 30 years circling in the desert, right? Get over it.
or…
IMPEACH Already !
February 2nd, 2007 at 5:22 pmThey know exactly what they are doing. Telling you a subset of the truth that is just another big lie.
February 2nd, 2007 at 5:50 pm‘When I said 21K troops you should have known they would need 39K troops to support them. Are you against supporting our troops?’
Jerks
February 2nd, 2007 at 10:05 pmwhat ever the eventual number it will be much larger than anyone knows right now. when bushit kicks the can in the middle east, sooner rather than later, numbers will not be a big concern. We will all be in it.
February 3rd, 2007 at 1:04 amI don’t need no stinkin’ plans.
February 3rd, 2007 at 10:42 amOkay, why is it that cbo,isg,msm,etc does not mention how many civilian support personnel are there now under no-bid contracts? If you check you will see the military uses more and more civilians in the support role. The money comes from another budget so the money and number of people already there are listed elsewhere. So they send 21,000 combat troops and 21,000 civilians. Check out who is manning and maintaining all the permanent bases in Iraq now. Even congress is not making an issue of this. How many g.i.s do kp,base cleaning, truck driving, etc? How many have died? You do not see these figures in the news.
February 3rd, 2007 at 12:19 pmThis says it better than I can - great graphic
February 4th, 2007 at 11:31 amhttp://theheretik.us/ 2007/ 02/ 04/ we-want-our-piece-now/
48,000!!!
February 4th, 2007 at 2:18 pmAll the more money to be made for Dick Cheney’s Halliburton!
Wee Haw!