More Troops Needed in Iraq?

US officers in Iraq are emailing fellow officers back home and saying more troops are needed, according to a report in today's Washington Times:

Officers in Iraq are telling colleagues back in the United States that they disagree with the official Pentagon position and think they need more troops on the ground.

Retired and active-duty personnel who have received such e-mails say they are not couched as gripes. Rather, the shortfall is explained in terms of, "If we had more soldiers, we could be in two places at once," said a retired four-star Army general. This source said he has received such unofficial communications from a crosssection of commanders in the Army.

"Senior army officers in Iraq have told me we need more troops to do this mission," said the retired general, who asked not to be named because he does business with the Pentagon. "They are not bemoaning. Not griping. It's just what they feel they need."

He said the most-often repeated figure is six to eight more brigades, or more than 50,000 more troops.

An Army official at the Pentagon said he has heard similar complaints.

I'll leave it to the milblogs to analyze this. If it's true, it may be the sort of impossible choice where politics and troop safety clash. Were the Bush Administration to announce such an increase in troop strength before the Iraqi election, it could color the results dramatically -- and not in a way we'd like.

Besides, 50,000 is a big number, the sort of number that calls to mind the ugly and unfounded draft rumors that Kerry's henchmen circulated in the final days of the campaign.