|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||
Military.com Forums Hot Topics & Current Events In the News War Demands Strain Military Readiness|
Go
|
New
|
Find
|
Notify
|
Tools
|
Reply
|
|
|
Member |
RE: http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,161717,00.html
I keep going back to the alarm sounded by Congressman Murtha back in October 2005. He saw it coming; and probably several thousand others with appropriate expertise and knowledge saw it. What would be our situation today if, instead of calling him a coward and/or a traitor, the body politic had taken his alarm more seriously? How would a hundred year war, a possibility envisioned by Senator McCain, do anything but move America beyond the "significant" risk level to the "critical" level? |
||
|
|
Member |
AMERICAN MILITARY CAPABILITY APPEARS WEAKER TODAY THAN AT ANY TIME SINCE EARLY SPRING 1942.
But then we had faith in our national leadership and hope to recover. America is depressed by our present national leadership that has continually lied to us. Our only hope is in the audacity to hope for new national leadership representing the people in which we can find truth and new hope. |
|||
|
|
Member |
I see Barak Obama to be a leader of honest opinions like John Murtha. Both are in touch with the common man. Both are strong. |
|||
|
Member |
Wow! Murtha and Obama mentioned positively in the same comment? Dangerous stuff on these pages.  |
|||
|
|
New Member |
I cannot speak for the Army, but I know for a fact that my Marine Corps can handle anything. We love fighting, and can't wait to invade the next country when given the order! So the premise is flawed in my professional judgment!
We have that ten percent that says the same horse crap, but the other ninety percent love to fight. And as a matter of fact, every solider that I know which is a significant amount (except guard) feel the same. (Even if they disagree with the war) The Army probably has more like twenty percent that object and don't want to fight. The fat body brass beauracrats (think that is how you spell it) in D.C. that haven't fought have this feeling because they know they are going to have to go soon and are getting nervous. So they produce this malarky! MURTHA IS AN SOB, ACCUSING MARINES OF BEING COLD BLOODED KILLERS BEFORE THE FACTS WERE STRAIGHT SO HE HAS LOST HIS RIGHT TO AN OPINION ON THE MILITARY, and Obama other than pulling the troops out seems like a nice guy, but the wrong choice for POTUS. |
|||
|
|
New Member |
I dislike the "maverick" John McCain, but you misrepresent what he meant. He was discussing a type of occupation for that length of time. An example of this would be like Japan, or Germany. |
|||
|
|
New Member |
Could you please elaborate on the lies that have been told?? Thanks! |
|||
|
|
New Member |
Can someone please tell me why this is a shock? During what war have we been more capable to respond to another threat than duing peactime? This just seems like common sense to me. During vietnam how well would we have handled an invasion of europe? I don't understand why politicians insist to constantly point out the obvious negatives to the war in Iraq/the war on terror. The politicians and generals should have seen the need to expand the military years ago.
|
|||
|
|
New Member |
We've never truely rebuild the military since the Carter admin tore it apart
|
|||
|
|
New Member |
Obama! I'm not helping put a raghead in office!
|
|||
|
|
Experienced Member |
The following, according to the news story, is the way things happen in today's political partisan world !
"The latest review by Mullen covers the military's status during 2007, but the readiness level has seesawed during the Iraq war. For example, the risk for 2004 was assessed as significant, but it improved to moderate in 2005 and 2006. Last year, when Pace increased the risk level, a report from Gates accompanying the assessment warned that while the military is working to improve its warfighting capabilities, it "may take several years to reduce risk to acceptable levels." Gates is expected to tell Congress that while the primary goal is to continue to increase the size of the military, it is also critical to step up efforts to work with other nations - as well as other U.S. agencies - to bolster fragile governments through economic development and other support." In Jan 07; President Bush proposed adding 92K troops to the end-strengths of the Army & Marines. Funding for those troops was just recently made available by the Democrat Controlled Congress! So, as indicated by the above Extract from the story; Sec Gates will ask Congress for more troops. You can bet Congress won't do a damm thing until the Next President is in office! By Jan 2010, our Military MAY RECEIVE Congress-appropriated funds to increase the Troop Strengths! I don't like it; but, I guess things happen that way! From A Proud Vietnam Veteran |
|||
|
New Member |
Ready..Aim...Fire!!!  Just kidding hehe... yes potentially volatile but you should be safe for the most part... but I can't promise that  Anyway, my biggest problem with Murtha, which many Marines have is him calling Marines murderers before any kind of investigation was done. Some people we would expect it from, but you would think a former Marine would at least have given enough benefit of the doubt for the facts to come out first. As for Obama... though I disagree with him I give him a measure of credit for being consistent. However, since he wasn't on the "Bush lied rant" at the outset of the war I don't see it helping is credibility on the issue now to do it. Hopefully with Congress's dismal approval ratings under Pelosi and Reid the Republicans have a chance to take back at least one of the houses. I think then you would get to see if he is a "uniter". I listened to his speech in VA last night and I actually thought it was good until he did the Bush bash. We'll see. |
|||
|
|
Member |
Well, for all you folks so hung up on Murtha, who is a decorated war veteran and does understand things like military readiness better than most of the neocon Chickenhawk pinheads who so blithely led us into this war, you should consider some of what Senator Jim Webb of Virginia said this week during the testimony of Mullen and Gates.
Webb describes our situation as a double strategic mousetrap. The first prong of the mousetrap was our decision to get involved in a war which has tied up our people and destroyed major amounts of the materiel needed to pursue it, while leaving our main enemy - terrorism - mobile. The second prong of the mousetrap is that we've tied up so much of our resources and our military in one region while ignoring our strategic interests in the rest of the world. Take a look at China, Korea, Africa, and South America and ask yourself how we're supposed to handle things if another part of the world blows up while we're so tied up in Iraq. Webb is very frustrated at the drain on our people and materiel and knows that we cannot continue on this course without a severely deleterious effect on our military capabilities and warfighters. We're losing career military people and young officers from the service at an alarming rate. We can go ahead and throw money at it as some have proposed, but the money's going to be borrowed from the Chinese who now have a shocking amount of control over our economy and the money will not make up for the lack of personnel. |
|||
|
|
New Member |
MURTHA DOESN'T DESERVE TO CLAIM MARINE SERVICE ANYMORE, AFTER WHAT HE DID TO MY FELLOW BROTHERS IN ARMS. THROWING US UNDER THE BUS, BEFORE CHARGES WERE EVEN FILED!! Webb is not the brightest Senator there is. I lived in Virginia when he was running against Allen. Those two guys were funny as hell running against eachother, because both of them sounded like fools. Oh by the way MarineAuntie, you need to change your name. You are not a Marine, and might have served at one point, but just because you have a relative in My Marine Corps doesn't mean you know jack about the service. Every post that I have seen of yours has been anti-military or anti CIC. You are entitled to an opinion yes, but your lack of support for any pro military piece that is listed on this left of center website is disgusting! And everytime I or someone else sees that name it gives MY MARINE CORPS a bad name! Thanks. |
|||
|
|
New Member |
I don't see anyway of boosting the military except by the use of the DRAFT. Yea, lifes a ***** and America is paying for it. So what do you do? Bring the forces home, close the borders of the whole United States and gather up the non-Americans and kick them out and don't let anyone else in. Sounds cold but if we don't America will no longer be America. It will be the next battleground. Our government is undermining the people. They don't have to live out here and put up with it. They have their on meal ticket and we are paying for it. It's getting to a point where it sucks to be an American.....Veteran USN
|
|||
|
New Member |
CAN YOU SAY DRAFT ?
It would be a good start. Just hope the Dem Party is keep out of office. I remember what they did. Semper Fi |
|||
|
Member |
The current military and political leadership has failed to deploy our armed forces in an effective "strategic" manner.
The Roman legions were deployed in an strategic scientific manner. The legions, generally, had three ranks. When the first rank was tired of fighting, the second would take over, and then the third. As a result, those fighting were always fresh and able to defeat their tired enemies who didn't use this scientific strategy. Also, they attempted to fight on as limited a front as possible to maximize the effectiveness their strategic scientific method of fighting. We are doing the opposite, deploying our reserves, our guard, and our main forces in a widely ranging war. This causes them to be both strategically and tactically at a disadvatage and minimizes the overwhelming scientific strategic capablities that we do have |
|||
|
|
Member |
|
|||
|
|
Member |
I remember studying how America’s goal is to have a big enough military ready at all times to embark on a “conflict” in two separate fronts at the same time with reserves available to protest the homeland. I interpreted that as being able to go to war in the Far East somewhere and in the greater European theater (give or take a few countries). Today our military is spread so thin in a so wide area that we are hurting if we were to undertake a WWII again with the likes of Japan and Germany at the same time. Much of our equipment is outdated and the political machine in Washington can not or will not come to grips with that fact. Our main bomber (B-52) is 45 years old, our air superiority fighters (F-15) are 30 years old (F-16, 27 years old) and worn out, most of our air tankers (KC-135) are also close to 50 years old and just tired, our strategic airlift capabilities (C-5) for outsized cargo are restricted for the most part and stay broke more than in commission. Relief for A/F is now limited to current C-17 deliveries, current F-22 deliveries, that the A/F says is inadequate. Also they are undecided about a new tanker which will take 10 years to see after decisions are made as to who shall make it. Our strategic sealift (merchant marine) was proven to be in sad shape when we invaded Iraq as most of the cargo ships used had to be towed to Iraq and back with tugs. Our numbers of uniformed personnel are at the lowest ever (1.4 million active and 1.4 reserves as of 2007). During WWII we had 1.3 million in Europe alone. In today’s war, we hear about the daily casualty rate of the 1’s or 2’s. Any death is sad but in WAR, people on both sides die. In all other wars our casualty rate in a month equaled this entire war’s death count. We have lost our will to be the number one nation in the world. Our boarders are unchecked and hemorrhage with illegal’s coming across in record numbers undermining everything this country stands for. Our laws go un-enforced. We now are hearing, depending on who is elected, that we just may walk away from a War that we did not start but paid a very large price in NY. Are we becoming or are we at the doorstep of being a quitter nation? We quit in Viet Nam are we going to quit again? Again we find ourselves of not doing what is right for the USA but doing what is “politically correct” so we can feel good.
 |
|||
|
|
Member |
One must really understand where America is militarily, strategically. We are unlikely to be invaded en mass. That threat is non-existent.
We are unlikely to suffer such a defeat of arms as to place continuity of our domestic government at risk. What is at risk, in the long run is the loss of credability of our threat to use our force. The world's pretenders to regional power, will be emboldened by the appearance of an American leadership, unwilling to exert itself in the interest of world stability. Meddling to some is rescuing to others. Rewanda, Darfur, Kosovo, intervening by whom without American support? United Nations Security Council's resolutions are stacked knee high all over the world.. . to what end, without credible force? |
|||
|
| Powered by Eve Community | Page 1 2 |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
Military.com Forums Hot Topics & Current Events In the News War Demands Strain Military Readiness
