The Pentagon has quietly surged combat troops and warships in U.S. bases throughout the Middle East after the top American commander in the region warned that he needed additional forces to counter rising potential threats, including Iran.
Marine Corps Gen. James Mattis, head of U.S. Central Command, got approval from the Obama administration for the surge just after talks with Baghdad broke down over keeping a large U.S. occupation force in Iraq. But the extent of the build-up is only now becoming clear.
Earlier this week, the U.S. sent a second aircraft carrier strike group into the Persian Gulf,partly in response to recent Iranian threats to close the Strait of Hormuz, where one-fifth of the world’s oil shipments passes. Those threats themselves were issued in response to aggressive military build-up, crippling economic sanctions, and covert war coming from the U.S. and its allies.
Arms transfers to key allies in the Gulf, including the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, et al., have also been sped up in recent months as a further deterrent to Iran.
Additionally, the status approximately 15,000 U.S. troops in Kuwait is currently being negotiated. The Kuwaiti defense minister was previously quoted as saying the number of troops would decrease. But now that seems unlikely, with new talks taking place over having Kuwait host a large enough number of troops to respond to potential regional war and other “threats.”
The U.S. primarily maintains troops and military bases throughout the Middle East in order to control the flow of the region’s oil resources and prevent any other state from gaining regional military power that would challenge that of America. But surges such as this one do more to destabilize and threaten war than act as a bulwark against it.
Have any troops actually returned home from Iraq, or have they all merely been reshuffled to various locales surrounding Iran?
"…do more to destabilize and threaten war than act as a bulwark against it." But that's why they do it. Despite the knowledge of what the consequences would be if the US (or Israel) should start a war with Iran, they seem bound and determined to go there anyway. Maybe what Obama and Panetta ought to do is go thru the General Officer corp at the Pentagon and weed out those who want this war. But, the Hawks (both war and chicken) would consider that treasonous – can't have peace breaking out all over the place now can we…
The mother of all wars is not over until USA and Europeans militarism regime (NATO) starts the third world war, or when is able to dominate the world oil market which in terms is about dominating the world economy.., thats been the idea from Bill Clinton to Bush and now Obama.
Look: US and EU had a vision when they started the Balkan war and then Afghanistan and then Iraq and now Libya and Syria.., by giving the Tyrants as UAE and Saudis the green light these tyrants helping USA and EU achieve their economic goal by starting yet another religious wars dividing people in middle east and beyond. Iraq war was lost when it started.., so for US and EU is to find a new ways.., Libya is about Africans wealth and Syria – Iran is about peoples in middle east wealth, therefore US and EU gearing up their militarism regime in middle east and in Africa. there is on going war in world between the evil of Paul Wolfowitz, Madeline Albright and the US democratic party in one hand and in the other is about a functioning economic democracy.