[A-List] US imperialism: overstretch

["Michael Keaney" <michael.keaney@xxxxxx>]

'Hundreds of thousands of troops' to occupy Iraq, says US general
By Rupert Cornwell in Washington
The Independent
26 February 2003

The military force required to occupy a post-Saddam Iraq could comprise
several hundred thousand troops, far higher than any estimate so far, the US
Army's most senior general said last night.

General Eric Shinseki, the army's Chief of Staff, told the Senate Armed
Services Committee that Iraq was "a piece of geography that's fairly
significant" and that a post-war force would have to be big enough to
maintain safety in a country with "ethnic tensions that could lead to other
problems".

Questioned by Senator Carl Levin of Michigan, the most senior Democrat on
the Committee, General Shinseki declined to give a specific estimate, saying
he would rely on the recommendation of commanders in the region.

But he added in response to further probing that the figure would be "what's
been mobilised to this point, something on the order of several hundred
thousand soldiers". And he added: "Assistance from friends and allies would
be helpful."

The US and Britain will have massed at least 200,000 troops in the Gulf by
the time a war might start, perhaps in mid-March. But it had been assumed
until now that the post-war deployment would be much smaller, with Iraqi
soldiers taking an increasing share of responsibilities.

Pentagon commanders have already complained that their forces are being
stretched thin by the looming war with Iraq and the growing tensions on the
Korean peninsula.