Velma Berger – 3/21/06

This page was last updated on March 21, 2006.

More troops aren’t the answer; Velma Berger; Beaver County Times; March 21, 2006.

Below is a detailed critique of the letter.

“The pictures in Wednesday’s World section of The Times told it all about the war in Iraq.

“It had a picture of a woman wailing because her house has been broken into and raided. Beside it is a picture of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld looking bewildered with his hands up saying Iran is backing the violence in Iraq. He is telling us something we all know. Iran wants us fighting there.”

[RWC] How did the pictures tell “it all about the war in Iraq?”

The last thing Iran wants is the U.S. in Iraq because the last thing Iran wants is to be in between two democracies, Afghanistan and Iraq.

“As President Bush was traveling around last week asking for support of the war, our chief ally, Great Britain, announced it will be pulling out 10 percent of it [sic] troops.”

[RWC] Not surprisingly, Ms. Berger didn’t say why the British are cutting manpower. That’s because Ms. Berger wants us to believe the British are bailing out.

The British have been cutting troops from the beginning as conditions in their sectors improved and more Iraqi forces took over. According to CNN, “Britain had 46,000 military personnel in Iraq during combat operations in March and April 2003. That dropped to 18,000 in May 2004, and to 8.500 at the end of 2005.” About this most recent reduction, British Defense Secretary John Reid said, “This is a significant reduction which is based largely on the ability of the Iraqis themselves to participate and defend themselves against terrorism, but there is a long, long way to go.”

“To date, Britain has lost 108 soldiers compared to our 2,310 - and counting. Add another 180 of those lives that were lost by our other five allies. All along when the military leaders were asked if they needed more troops, the answer was always ‘no.’ Now, when they have been telling us things are going well, they are asking for 700 additional troops.”

[RWC] Here are two points Ms. Berger ignores.

First, the Iraq troop levels have been fluctuating from the beginning to address current events. For example, troop levels increase in advance of elections or special religious holidays and then drop afterward.

Second, the 700 troops specified by Ms. Berger are going in to supplement prison operations because of the recent increase in terrorist detainees. These troops are already on duty in Kuwait.

Finally, folks in Ms. Berger’s camp need to get their story straight. Isn’t this the same group that told us we didn’t have enough troops in Iraq and even proposed reinstating the draft? Ms. Berger’s hero, Rep. John Murtha (D-PA), has spoken out in favor of a draft as recently as the end of 2005.

“U.S. Rep. John Murtha is right when he says this is a civil war. Things in Iraq have gotten out of hand. There is so much bloodshed and bombings every day.”

[RWC] I believe Ms. Berger and Mr. Murtha hope for a civil war in Iraq, though they will never admit it. After all, if the Iraqis and the coalition are successful, Ms. Berger and Mr. Murtha will be shown to be wrong. How sad is it when for you to win, your country – and 20+ million Iraqis – must lose?

“Sending more troops in has the same familiar ring as the Vietnam War when the military leaders advised President Johnson to increase the military, and we all know how that ended. How long are people going to support this war president?”

[RWC] Man these people have a fixation on Vietnam! That said, they are poor history students or didn’t pay attention if they were alive during the Vietnam War.