How do we say the Afghan Surge is not just mil when civilians are not participating?

[Schmedlap]

There were (publicity aside) never any shortage of volunteers for Iraq or Afghanistan.

I think that I know what you are referring to regarding the publicity thing (see here). That was what impacted my impression. If that reporting on the State Department was an instance of the typical disingenuous reporting that the DoD is often subjected to, then I am both glad that I was wrong and a bit frustrated with myself for having been snookered by it, especially since I am so often annoyed that others are snookered by crappy reporting on the DoD.

The word on the street is 900 more civilians for Afghanistan. Let's wait and see what the response is.

Agreed. In the mean time, have you heard any rumblings as to what capacity those numbers will serve in? As someone who spent OIF III seething at the knowledge that my company was undermanned and doing a mission appropriate for a battalion, while a nearby FOB had 10,000 idle personnel doing basically nothing, I am always more curious as to the utility of the personnel rather than their quantity.