Democracy Has Prevailed.

April 2, 2008

The Troops

In October of 2000 we read:
The military has suffered through eight years of neglect.
Meaning of course, the 8 years of the Clinton Administration. The author, Mark Helprin, wrote later in the piece:
If Gov. Bush becomes president, the armies his father sent to the Gulf will not be available to him, not after eight years of degradation at the hands of Bill Clinton. Given that their parlous condition is an invitation to enemies of the United States and, therefore, Mr. Bush might need them, and because the years of the locust are always paid for in blood, he should take this issue and with it hammer upon the doors of the White House at dawn.
And later still:
If we are, in effect, the enemies of our own fighting men, what will happen when they go into the field? The military must be redeemed.
Then came the invasions Afghanistan and Iraq. May, 2003 George W Bush said this on the deck of the USS Abraham Lincoln:

Thank you all very much. Admiral Kelly, Captain Card, officers and sailors of the USS Abraham Lincoln, my fellow Americans: Major combat operations in Iraq have ended. In the battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed. And now our coalition is engaged in securing and reconstructing that country.

In this battle, we have fought for the cause of liberty, and for the peace of the world. Our nation and our coalition are proud of this accomplishment -- yet, it is you, the members of the United States military, who achieved it. Your courage, your willingness to face danger for your country and for each other, made this day possible. Because of you, our nation is more secure. Because of you, the tyrant has fallen, and Iraq is free.

Operation Iraqi Freedom was carried out with a combination of precision and speed and boldness the enemy did not expect, and the world had not seen before. From distant bases or ships at sea, we sent planes and missiles that could destroy an enemy division, or strike a single bunker. Marines and soldiers charged to Baghdad across 350 miles of hostile ground, in one of the swiftest advances of heavy arms in history. You have shown the world the skill and the might of the American Armed Forces.

Seemed to work just fine.

Then came the occupation of Iraq and now we read:

Senior Army and Marine Corps leaders said yesterday that the increase of more than 30,000 troops in Iraq and Afghanistan has put unsustainable levels of stress on U.S. ground forces and has put their readiness to fight other conflicts at the lowest level in years.

In a stark assessment a week before Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, is to testify on the war's progress, Gen. Richard A. Cody, the Army's vice chief of staff, said that the heavy deployments are inflicting "incredible stress" on soldiers and families and that they pose "a significant risk" to the nation's all-volunteer military.

And:
"I've never seen our lack of strategic depth be where it is today," said Cody, who has been the senior Army official in charge of operations and readiness for the past six years and plans to retire this summer.
And:

The nation needs an airborne brigade, a heavy brigade and a Stryker brigade ready for "full-spectrum operations," Cody said, "and we don't have that today."

Soldiers and Marines also lack training for major combat operations using their entire range of weapons, the generals said. For example, artillerymen are not practicing firing heavy guns but are instead doing counterinsurgency work as military police.

The Marine Corps' ability to train for potential conflicts has been "significantly degraded," said Gen. Robert Magnus, assistant commandant of the Marine Corps.

Greatest Commander-in-Chief EVER!

5 comments:

Anonymous said...

wingnut
Why does General Cody hate America?
/wingnut

Anonymous said...

John K. says: Yah the military is in such bad shape that reenlistments in the Army and Marines are up 137%. Get real. Make it simple lefties, run another Gen Betrayus ad and blame it on Karl Rove.

Anonymous said...

As usual, The Troll doesn't get it

Supposedly impressive re-enlistment rates are cited as evidence that soldiers enthusiastically support the war effort. In reality, these retention numbers are more the result of the “stop-loss” policy, where soldiers are required to remain in the Army after their contracts have expired if their units are deployed or ordered to deploy soon. My platoon’s infantrymen expected to be “stop-lossed” and some felt they might as well cash in on the re-enlistment bonuses if they were going to be forced to stay in the Army anyway.

Anonymous said...

John K says: Like I said, get real. They are not the result of stop loss policy. They are the results of real reenlistments. These soldiers and Marines want to finish the job. So get real, run another Gen Betrayus ad and say everything is lost. At least that way you stay on record.

Anonymous said...

I still wonder how this happens. How is it possible that John K can WRITE (if only to post his dribble here) but he doesn't seem to be able to READ.

It wasn't just dayvoe pointing out the wretched condition of the Bush army and marine corps, it was "Senior Army and Marine Corps leaders" who said that.

And the guy quoted by "fair and balanced" speaks from first hand knowledge as a former Army Infantry officer (something our friend John K has NEVER been).

Why can't John K read?

not-Shitrock