Article

2007-07-14 Home Front: WoT

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Besoeker 2007-07-14 05:03|| || Front Page|| [5 views ] Top

#1 Talk to your Donk Congress. They, along with their brethren across the aisle, cut the active duty Army from 750,000 to 480,000 in the 90s. Peace dividend for all sorts of ~~pork~~ ineffectual social programs. They placed DoD in the position that it had to use the reserve and National Guard, who's resources and force structure were also protected Congressional district by Congressional district. Life is tough. It's a lot tougher when you're stupid ~~and keep sending the same rectal orifice back to Congress each election~~.

Posted by Procopius2k 2007-07-14 09:12|| 2007-07-14 09:12|| Front Page Top

#2 Thinking about it more, I believe its time to bring back the old Roman practice of sending pols out with the legions. When a legion got munched in the field, so did the pols. Big motivation to make sure the troops were well trained, equipped, and had good tactical leadership. Rotation every four months, five reps and two Senators. Billeted no higher than battalion with at least two trips out on patrols. Any wimps automatically forfeit their seats and are banned from federal offices, elected or appointed, for twenty years. Time to put quality assurance into the process.

"Do you know who I am?"
"Yeah, dead weight if you piss off those kids trying to keep you alive, so you can posture when you get home."

Posted by Procopius2k 2007-07-14 09:21|| 2007-07-14 09:21|| Front Page Top

#3 While I'm happy to sign on to Procopius's idea of "deploying" Congresscritters, the buck on this issue has to stop at G-Dub's desk. In the days after 9-11, I was expecting to hear him call for, if not a full national mobilization, at least an end-strength increase sufficient to recoup the manpower losses resulting from the fact that Billy Jeff's budget surpluses came largely out of DoD's hide. Instead, what we got was "Go Shopping, Or the Terrorists Win".

Posted by Ricky bin Ricardo (Abu Babaloo) 2007-07-14 10:32|| 2007-07-14 10:32|| Front Page Top

#4 Someone at DA-MILPERCEN and the Guard bureau has their head up their 4th point of contact.

This clearly calls for an exemption for the good of the service. This guy will stay guard if they let him - and he will have great input with Sikorsky on the very things he did in combat, and on the flip side, he can bring knowledge to his unit from Sikorsky to make his unit better. And int he long run, the Guard and Army will probably get a hell of a good officer if this guy goes that way once he completes his degree. 3.9 GPA in engineering is damn good. Combine that with his combat experience, and you have the makings of a someone the Guard and Army will need as it retools over the next 5 years.

On top of that he has served enough combat tours. IVM is supposed to be used only in dire situations. I cannot see where they can't find another helicopter maint NCO. Go down to Ft Rucker and grab a spare E-6 that has probably done just one.

I think someone at a desk in DC is screwing this up.

Posted by OldSpook 2007-07-14 11:01|| 2007-07-14 11:01|| Front Page Top

#5 You need a STANDING army. The cutback in the 90's was not a good idea considering we knew the need was increasing. Why has congress not increased the army by now? why?

Posted by newc">newc 2007-07-14 11:23|| 2007-07-14 11:23|| Front Page Top

#6 Same reason they haven't passed the Flat Tax, slashed social program spending, and done a thousand other obviously beneficial things: what's good for the country isn't necessarily good for the Congresscritter who would like to retain his cushy public sector job.

Posted by AzCat 2007-07-14 12:11|| 2007-07-14 12:11|| Front Page Top

#7 "the buck on this issue has to stop at G-Dub's desk"

My late uncle hated Bush for just that reason. As a former WWII vet, he loathed the overuse of troops in combat areas because Dubya refused to expand the military. I sure as blazes couldn't argue with that.

Posted by E Brown 2007-07-14 12:50|| 2007-07-14 12:50|| Front Page Top

#8 By the WWII standard everyone who volunteered after 9-11 should have deployed continuously for the next 3 years without a break - except for wounds or death.
Terrorism is in part an attempt to criple our economy. So far it has been unsuccessful because we haven't done and general call-up and are continuing to let free market forces control production. In some ways it is awful attractive to contemplate the government bailing GM out of their 40 years of stupidity taking control of their plant and making them manufacture tanks that we don't need.
A general call-up of American men wasn't necessary to take Iraq or Afghanistan. Neither will be necessary to take Iran or Syria. A general call-up would be quite useful for occupying Iraq or Iran but American casualties would skyrocket. Currently most of the casualties for our side are being absorbed by Iraqis. If the surge is successful, the casualty rates for Iraqis themselves will drop and we are a step closer to stable self-governement.

All this while the DOW climbs and without undue inconvenience to Paris Hilton and her adoring fans. Who would have thunk it on the morning of 9-12-01.

Posted by Super Hose 2007-07-14 13:13|| 2007-07-14 13:13|| Front Page Top

#9 Does seem that this fine young man has done his share (and more) for us, doesn't it? I agree with Old Spook, give him an exemption, keep him in the Guard and let him get his degree.

I've said before that Dubya should have asked for a new division of Army and a new brigade for the Marines after 9/11. These things take time, you never build up as quick as you build down, but had he done this we'd have those new units, well trained and set, on line now. Then we'd see if we need another new division.

Posted by Steve White">Steve White 2007-07-14 14:22|| 2007-07-14 14:22|| Front Page Top

#10 It wasn't Bush who downsized the military. We all know who that was and that coupled with his roving eye (not on the critical mass of known terrorism since 1979) is what has got us where we are today. Bush and Rummy have made their share of mistakes but to somehow give him the boot for not adding a brigade is disingenious at best. It would have taken 5 years to get a brigade operationally fit. I still say the biggest issue with the military operation in Iraq and Afghanistan is RoE and the war being overlawyered. Also, we had the right generals (Franks) for the invasion but then the wrong ones for the post-victory occupation. Now we have a COIN general and team of repute that seem to be making very acute corrections. If we could only get the RoE changed on civilians....

Posted by Jack is Back!">Jack is Back! 2007-07-14 16:19|| 2007-07-14 16:19|| Front Page Top

#11 It was Bush, just not this one. BJ just kept a good thing going. There was nothing wrong with it. But after 9/11, the policy should have been reversed but it wasn't. That's what's this Bush's fault.

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2007-07-14 16:24|| 2007-07-14 16:24|| Front Page Top

#12 OK, this guy has "4 deployments" under his belt, including 2 that lasted less than 30 days. He has only spent 10 nonconsecutive months deployments. He needs a good ass kicking from his chain of command. As they say in my Corps, USMC...U Signed (the) Motherf*cking Contract. Suck it up and deal with it. I know guys that have 4 REAL deployments and 3 purple hearts. Don't hear this crap from them!

Posted by 0369Grunt 2007-07-14 16:53|| 2007-07-14 16:53|| Front Page Top

#13 OK, this guy has "4 deployments" under his belt, including 2 that lasted less than 30 days. He has only spent 10 nonconsecutive months deployments. He needs a good ass kicking from his chain of command. As they say in my Corps, USMC...U Signed (the) Motherf*cking Contract. Suck it up and deal with it. I know guys that have 4 REAL deployments and 3 purple hearts. Don't hear this crap from them!

Posted by 0369Grunt 2007-07-14 16:53|| 2007-07-14 16:53|| Front Page Top

#14 Once again Bush is napping while necessity demands more boots and more boot camps.
Either the man's a jerk or he's getting secret messages through his aluminum beanie. He's blown more chances than Linda Lovelace. He had a trunk Congress and he didn't manage to even get his sucessful tax cuts permanent. What a maroon.

Posted by wxjames 2007-07-14 21:51|| 2007-07-14 21:51|| Front Page Top

23:27 RD
23:26 trailing wife
23:22 House demoC*raps
23:21 Barbara Skolaut
23:17 trailing wife
23:15 trailing wife
23:14 Anonymoose
22:54 CrazyFool
22:43 anymouse
22:09 Angereger Jones7671
21:59 Mullah Lodabullah
21:52 Monty
21:52 JDB
21:51 wxjames
21:47 Iblis
21:39 Frank G
21:27 macofromoc
21:25 Leigh
21:07 FOTSGreg
21:04 Darrell
21:00 BA
20:55 Zenster
20:52 Nimble Spemble
20:44 BA