Pentagon seeks ‘very rapid reduction’ of troops.
By on Sep 11th, 2007 at 2:28 pm
Pentagon seeks ‘very rapid reduction’ of troops.
Newsweek “has learned that a separate internal report being prepared by a Pentagon working group will ‘differ substantially‘ from Petraeus’s recommendations.” An early version will “recommend a very rapid reduction in American forces: as much as two-thirds of the existing force very quickly, while keeping the remainder there.” “There is interest at senior levels [of the Pentagon] in getting alternative views” to Petraeus, an official said.
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Bush
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Indeed! Why does the Pentagon hate America so?
September 11th, 2007 at 2:32 pmWaiting for the rightwingtards to start attacking the Pentagon working group. How dare they question bush? How dare they dissent?
September 11th, 2007 at 2:34 pmWell look who’s cut-and-running now! Way to support the military, military!!
September 11th, 2007 at 2:35 pmAnd remember, the Pentagon is doing this not because they’re committed to withdrawal, like the American people are, but because preventing the military from becoming a broken force is their top priority. If we try to sustain current troop levels for another year, the military breaks. Recruitment is collapsing, we’re hemhorraging mid-level officers, equipment is reaching the breaking point, money from other programs are being siphoned off for “current operations”.
September 11th, 2007 at 2:36 pmcheney/bush don’t need no help from the pentagon.
September 11th, 2007 at 2:39 pmthey’ve already reduced our troop levels by about 4,000 and counting!
PeterW: Summing up: “Your doin’ a heck of a job, bushie.”
September 11th, 2007 at 2:39 pmI’ve become so cynical at this point that my first reaction is to wonder who benefits from this information being leaked today.
September 11th, 2007 at 2:42 pmIs it another attempt to divert attention while they search for yet another diversion to kick the can down the road to November 2008?
And the next question is, generals:
“Where are you sending 2/3 of the troops now on active duty, hm?”
Back home to recover, or is there another theatre of operations you have in mind?
September 11th, 2007 at 2:42 pmWell, not everyone at the Pentagon can get an extra star for being a glorified tour guide, so I guess these mean people in the Pentagon are just jealous.
September 11th, 2007 at 2:42 pm.
Its too easy for Bush to Cut and run out of his presidency leaving a mess behind – - he needs to learn and learn now, How to wipe his own backside
September 11th, 2007 at 2:45 pmPENTAGON REDUCING TROOPS BY 2/3′S
TYPICAL POLITICAL SWINDLE… LIKE CORRUPTION
WITH SO MUCH POLITICAL LEECHING, SCRATCHING ME AND SCRATCHING
YOU, THE SMOOZING WITH LOBBYISTS, ALL THESE FRIGGIN CORRUPTED
PARASITES, I’M STANDING STRONG………
WE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE GET THE GREASE DUMPS FOR SERVICE FROM
OUR FAITHFULLY CARESSED T0TALLY CORRUPTED SERVANTS
AND TO TOP OFF THE GREASE DUMPS, CORRUPTION COMES OOZING DOWN THE SIDES
THAT’S WHAT WE AMERICAN PEOPLE GET FOR SERVICE
RIGHT… PENTAGON 2/3′S REDUCTION, NOT WITH PIGGY PORK CONTRACTS
September 11th, 2007 at 2:45 pmAND LOBBYISTS, ALL THE FRIGGIN SWINDLING, POLITICALLY CORRUPTED
PARASITES SWIRLING AROUND ALL THE PORK
If this report by the Pentagon working group will indeed differ from the brave, American hero Petraeus’ report, then it obviously will be a report which includes all kinds of bane for the US’ Iraq strategy…in short, something the leftards will adore. This report is said to demand an immediate withdrawal of two-thirds of US soldiers, so right there, the report is one authored with defeatism, surrender, cowardice and failure in mind! As such, this report cannot possibly be considered a serious alternative to the brave, heroic Petraeus’ report; it’s probably that the report is just a brain-storming exercise, or a contingency “plan,” things which the military has a neverending supply of. However, to the frustration of anti-American and pro-terror progressives, no matter how many reports are authored, the great GW Bush is the one who is the DECIDER, the one who has FINAL SAY over the strategy. This means you progressive losers will have to suffer more years of troop levels staying steady!
September 11th, 2007 at 2:46 pmThe primary mission of the U.S. military is and always has been “combat readiness”. The Pentagon is taking the steps they need to take to keep our military from being so broken they can no longer meet this goal.
What’s going to be interesting is how Bush will spin this: “we’re not cuttin’ and runnin’ — we’re efficientizin’!”
September 11th, 2007 at 2:46 pmYou hit the nail on the head PeterW. The military is at the breaking point.
September 11th, 2007 at 2:48 pmthey called that drug dealing asshat ollie north a brave hero too, lest we forget
how dare the pentagon not support the perpetual war
September 11th, 2007 at 2:49 pmGeneral Patraeus is giving the low down on Iraq……are you listening or are you going to remain ignorant by choice or worse yet let someone else watch and tell you what they think they saw and heard and you with not have another point of reference so you will have no other choice but to BELIEVE IT?
September 11th, 2007 at 2:49 pmCUZ…..
JACKY KNOWS WANDA KNOWS LINDA KNOWS MURTHA
A NICE REFORM OR BILL STUFFED WITH PORK SO MUCH
ITS LIKE A FRIGGIN GREASE DUMP WITH ALL THIS CORRUPTION
OOZING OFF THE SIDES CAUSE THERE’S SO MUCH FRIGGIN CORRUPTION
STUFFED IN THAT PORK
I STAND STRONG…. WE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE GET THE FRIGGIN GREASE PITS FOR SERVICE FROM THESE SWINDLERS AND PARASITES
AND WE THE PEOPLE GET FAR FAR SUPERIOR SERVICE FROM A COMPLETE DUMP CALLED MCDONALDS OR POPEYES OR WHEREVER CERTAINLY NOT FROM THESE SO CALLED LEADERS WHO CAN’T EVEN MUSTER UP 25% APPROVAL, MORE LIKE WHAT IS IT NOW 15% APPROVALS
September 11th, 2007 at 2:49 pmMeanwhile, isn’t Bush ramping up the number of mercenaries in Iraq? Last I heard, there were about 100,000 Hessians, financed again by our tax dollars.
September 11th, 2007 at 2:53 pm100% True!!
Comment by Mr. President
We know by now, if you claim something is true, then in reality, it is false.
September 11th, 2007 at 2:56 pmSee, your antics have proven to provide a result Idiot P. No one believes a goddamned thing you say.
Go back to your parody of a web site, troll
LISTEN DUDE
THE HIGHEST CLASS HOUSE OF THE UTMOST INTEGRITY IS ONE OF
THE BIGGEST CRIMINAL CLASSES
AT LEAST THAT’S WHAT CREW HAS SHOWN
THERE IS SO MUCH CORRUPTION AT THE PENTAGON, LITERALLY
THERE’S NOT A SPECK OF TRUTH IN WHAT THEY STATE
I STAND STRONG
WE THE FRIGGIN PEOPLE GET THE FRIGGIN GREASE PITS FOR SERVICE
EQUIVELENT TO A FRIGGIN GREASE DUMP WITH SO MUCH PORK BUT
IN THIS CASE CORRUPTION STUFFED IN THAT GREASE DUMP
THE FRIGGIN CORRUPTION COMES OOZING DOWN THE SIDES OF THAT
GREASE DUMP
THAT’S THE KIND OF SERVICE WE THE PEOPLE GET FROM THOSE OF
THE SO CALLED ROCK SOLID INTEGRITY, FAITHFULLY CARESSED
CIVIL SERVANTS
WE GET THE GREASE PITS DUDE, FRIGGIN POLITICAL CORRUPTION
September 11th, 2007 at 2:56 pmLIKE STUFFING PORK AND SMOOZING AND SCRATCHIN ME AND SCRATCHING YOU, ONE SCANDAL AND SWINDLE AFTER THE NEXT
Meanwhile, isn’t Bush ramping up the number of mercenaries in Iraq? Last I heard, there were about 100,000 Hessians, financed again by our tax dollars.
Comment by Starve-A-Bush_Feed-A-Beaver — September 11, 2007 @ 2:53 pm
One of the reasons this war is so costly. Mercenaries cost a great deal more than regular soldiers do.
September 11th, 2007 at 2:59 pmMr. President you follow a fool.
September 11th, 2007 at 2:59 pmTroll logic:
This report says we should begin to withdraw.
Yeah, but we shouldn’t listen to that. It was written by traitors and cowards.
Um, how do you know it was written by traitors and cowards?
Because it says we should begin to withdraw! DUUUUHHHH!!!
September 11th, 2007 at 3:02 pmWith the 100,000 hired guns (I do like the Hessians comparison) and the 160,000 US troops we have 260,000 fighters in Iraq and can’t verifiably point to noted success after 5 years of this. Put aside whether it was the right thing to do to go into Iraq. President Bush is a complete failure for not managing what he has there. Over one quarter of a million fighters and he can’t even get his generals to prove of solid success.
The president has failed.
September 11th, 2007 at 3:03 pmThink about this, trolls: if our military isn’t able to operate, we are going to lose in Afghanistan.
Why do Republicans want to help the Taliban?
September 11th, 2007 at 3:03 pmMy money says they’re preparing for Iran.
September 11th, 2007 at 3:04 pmLooks like some heads will start to roll at the Pentagon. You don’t disagree with The Decider and his mouthpiece Betrayus. They don’t care about breaking the military, they just want to buy time and save face until Jan09.
September 11th, 2007 at 3:07 pmMy money says they’re preparing for Iran.
Comment by Dave C — September 11, 2007 @ 3:04 pm
And at this rate, this is like launching a rocket with only a thimbleful of fuel. It won’t get off the ground.
September 11th, 2007 at 3:07 pmSo now BushCo and Petraeus are running independently of the Pentagon? Wonder how that will work out for them?
September 11th, 2007 at 3:09 pmWe’re barely able to not lose there right now, Mr. Pee. I guess you haven’t been paying attention, but some of us actually consider the war against al Qaeda to be important, and it’s not going so well.
We’ve over-using air support to make up for a lack of troops on the ground right now, as it is. What do you think is going to happen if the next rotation has to be smaller than the cadres they’re replacing?
September 11th, 2007 at 3:13 pmTypical. The Pentagon has always pushed a liberal agenda…
September 11th, 2007 at 3:17 pmIf this report by the Pentagon working group will differ from the brave, American hero Petraeus’ report, then it obviously will be a report which includes all kinds of bane for the US’ Iraq strategy…in short, something the leftards will adore. This report is said to demand an immediate withdrawal of two-thirds of US soldiers, so right there, the report is one authored with defeatism, surrender, cowardice and failure in mind! As such, this report cannot possibly be considered a serious alternative to the brave, heroic Petraeus’ report; it’s probably that the report is just a brain-storming exercise, or a contingency “plan,†things which the military has a neverending supply of. However, to the frustration of anti-American and pro-terror progressives, no matter how many reports are authored, the great GW Bush is the one who is the DECIDER, the one who has FINAL SAY over the strategy. This means you progressive losers will have to suffer more years of troop levels staying steady!
September 11th, 2007 at 3:20 pmQuick withdrawal from Iraq so they can rush into Iran….
September 11th, 2007 at 3:21 pmSo now BushCo and Petraeus are running independently of the Pentagon? Wonder how that will work out for them?
Comment by upside00 — September 11, 2007 @ 3:09 pm
How will it work out? First, Bush will take the report of recommendations from the Pentagon working group, spit on it several times, then run it through the shredder. Then he will go on doing what he has always done. When the support for the war in Iraq starts getting approval ratings in the teens, he will invade Iran. Anything to keep people distracted until he can escape office.
Unfortunately, the consequences of such actions (that the Pentagon will surely include in their report) will come to pass. Our military will be struggling. Because Bush would rather attend a YearlyKos convention than reinstate the draft, we will need to hire more and more mercenaries for higher and higher pay to “stay the course”. We will be in hock up to our eyeballs to countries like China.
As far as the Pentagon goes, look for the members of this “working group” to pretty much stagnate at their current ranks and gradually muster out of the service quietly.
September 11th, 2007 at 3:22 pmThis means you progressive losers will have to suffer more years of troop levels staying steady!
Comment by Progsareearousedbyquickpullout — September 11, 2007 @ 3:20 pm
You can be helped, but first you must ask for help! You don’t need to suffer like this!
September 11th, 2007 at 3:25 pmI heard that the Black Water gunmen get a $1,000 a day each and our Soldiers get very little pay. The taxpayers get screwed paying for all of this.
September 11th, 2007 at 3:26 pmI heard that the Black Water gunmen get a $1,000 a day each and our Soldiers get very little pay. The taxpayers get screwed paying for all of this.
Comment by Mary Poppins — September 11, 2007 @ 3:26 pm
Welcome to the wonderful world of Darth and the NeoCons.
September 11th, 2007 at 3:29 pmAs far as the Pentagon goes, look for the members of this “working group†to pretty much stagnate at their current ranks and gradually muster out of the service quietly.
Comment by missmolly — September 11, 2007 @ 3:22 pm
So true! Many of the best and brightest of the Field Grade officers have already taken retirement so they can speak out and/or because they can’t continue to command troops under this Codpiece-in-Chief.
Also, they are pahing a $20,000 bounty for anyone signing up now and the Academy graduates are leaving the military in numbers never seen in the past 35 years.
A total quagmire, top to bottom!
September 11th, 2007 at 3:32 pmLISTEN DUDE…
EVERY FRIGGIN DAY NOW FOR OVER 6 YEARS ALL BUSH BABBLES ON ABOUT IS BIG BAD TERRORISTS… NOW CONGRESS IS GETTING IN ON THIS TOO
BUSH SOME DAYS EVEN BABBLES ON ABOUT THE TERRORISTS OVER 100 TIMES IN HIS SPEECH
I STAND STRONG
WE THE FRIGGIN PEOPLE GET THE GREASE DUMPS FOR SERVICE WITH ALL THAT SMOOZING AND SCRTACHING AND PORK CORRUPTION OOZING DOWN THE SIDES OF THE GREASE PIT
PARASITES I SAY, SWINDLERS, CRIMINALS, WAR LORDS
A BUNCH OF FRIGGIN TOTALLY CORRUPTED SWINDLERS DUDE
September 11th, 2007 at 3:38 pmWhy are Pentagon Generals so crass as to believe that they know more about warfare than Tony Snow, G. W. Bush and R. Cheney? This honor roll of American heros are adept in the art of warfare – at least the art of avoiding it.
September 11th, 2007 at 4:07 pmWhat. I thought only Betrayus has the truth of what we should do in Iraq. How dare the Pentagon insert their opinion on a matter that has already been settled. How un-American of them. Sarcasm..off
September 11th, 2007 at 4:09 pm#27
Comment by joe — September 11, 2007 @ 3:03 pm
What the hell is NATO doing about filling the gap in Afghanistan? Answer….NOTHING. Thanks Europe.
September 11th, 2007 at 4:10 pmYou libs are too quick to jump to conclusions! The report is still being revised and the “anonymous†source is probably the underling that they sent to print-out copies.
Comment by Mr. President
And by the time it is released, it will say the exact opposite. I love it that there are people in our government who care more about this country than they do about George Bush. I love it that they are willing to risk their jobs, and maybe even their lives, to leak us the information we need to know, like the other views in the Bush Administration or things like an “accidental” flying of 5 nuclear weapons to an air force base that just happens to be the staging area for flights to the middle east. I am glad for these “leakers”, without them we would have nothing to go on but Bush’s propaganda.
September 11th, 2007 at 4:17 pm#46 – “What the hell is NATO doing about filling the gap in Afghanistan? Answer….NOTHING. Thanks Europe.” Comment by Tracy — September 11, 2007 @ 4:10 pm
What the hell is NATO doing about filling the gap in Iraq? Nothing!
Why does NATO hate America?!?!?
We (The US under Pres. Bush) took our eyes off the “war on terra” when Pres. Bush decided to get us stuck in Iraq. Pres. Bush has had a major hard-on about attacking Iraq ever since he began thinking about the Preidency in 1999!
When you think about how screwed up Afghanistan is, put the blame where it belings: with Pres. Bush’s failed policies!
September 11th, 2007 at 4:19 pmI couldn’t have said it better myself. Can you imagine the proverbial poop we’d be in without whistle blowers and those standing up to FIGHT FOR our democracy? The world would probably be nuked 10x over with a few crazy rich fundy zealots who built bomb shelters wondering why they haven’t been raptured yet.
Unlike Republicans, I REFUSE TO LET FEAR RUN MY LIFE OR RUIN MY LIBERTIES.
One quote that I hadn’t actually heard in a while despite how appropriate it is with regard to the excessive fear mongering Bush has been pushing on us I heard this morning and it brought tingles down my spine — FDR’s “We have nothing to fear but fear itself.”
Contrast this to W’s “Terraists are gonna getcha! Give up yer rights or you s’port the terraists!”
…
“…let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself—nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance. In every dark hour of our national life a leadership of frankness and vigor has met with that understanding and support of the people themselves which is essential to victory.”
September 11th, 2007 at 5:55 pmThe elections are coming! The elections are coming!
September 12th, 2007 at 12:03 am#44
Comment by Democrat Soldier — September 11, 2007 @ 4:19 pm
“Pres. Bush has had a major hard-on about attacking Iraq ever since he began thinking about the Preidency in 1999!”
Bush was just acting on the policy that the Clinton administration had already set in motion, i.e. the Iraqi Liberation Act.
“Congress found: “It should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove the regime headed by Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq and to promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Liberation_Act
I will admit that even thought the Clinton administration continually called for regime change in Iraq throughout the 1990s this was probably one of the most useless pieces of legislation that he ever signed.
“When you think about how screwed up Afghanistan is, put the blame where it belings: with Pres. Bush’s failed policies!”
I don’t think so! The fact that NATO has not stepped up to the plate to RELIEVE the U.S. from most of the operations in Afghanistan is a prime example of Europe’s unwillingness to take a leadership role against terrorist organizations like al Qaeda. They did the same damn thing against Milosivic and the Serbs. They are gutless aristocrats that look constantly to the U.S. to bail them out of problems they they should be able to solve THEMSELVES, i.e. in the case of Milosivic, and should be lending a much large helping hand in the case of Afghanistan.
BTW after that 1993 WTC bombing and after it was proven that affiliates of al Qaeda were behind the attack, why did we not go into Afghanistan the way we did after 9/11 considering the whole world was practically behind the U.S. in this operation?
September 12th, 2007 at 6:20 pm