Umm, cite?
ABC news out of Oregon is rabidly partisan now?
Who tells you these things?
Is there a “rabidly partisan” master list somewhere?
That’s cheery. Unfortunately, most of those units have shipped their supplies over to the active duty troops in Iraq. Sure, we can loot our bases around the world and put a few hundred thousand more troops on the ground, but they would be ill-supplied and poorly equipped. They would lack vehicles, armor, ammunition, and the other basic necessities of an army. Even what we have in Iraq is breaking down due to poor supply lines and lack of material. Most of the units in America have been stripped, as I mentioned. The armor in Germany was already redeployed to Iraq. Regional supply bases like Diego Garcia have been emptied. Disengaging our forces in SK and Japan would probably be a poor idea. Worst of all, our industry is not geared to produce what we need.
Can we throw around some numbers in a short term engagement? Yep, we sure can. Can we support those troops for anything remotely resembling a prolonged deployment? Nope.
“Military readiness” is not limited to how many soldiers you have available.
How about the Chillicothe Gazette. Is that also rabidly partisan?
A couple things:
First of all, I don’t know how this can be true. There are lots more than 33 units of active duty combat troops. Are you talking about a specific type of troop? Are you talking about a specific branch? Can I see where you’re getting your figures from?
Second, not even half the active duty troops in the military are currently deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan. Why would all the troops need to be deployed there within a few months of each other? Am I wrong in assuming that you’re talking about deployment to Iraq?
Third, we’re in the midst of a chang-over in active duty troops in Iraq (and possibly Afghanistan). Thus, the number of troops that “were either deployed or just back from being deployed or just about to be deployed” would be twice as high as normal.
I know. The numbers I’ve quoted weren’t combat soldiers. They were military personnel.
I’m going to need a cite for your argument that we’re running out of supplies, and that Diego Garcia has been emptied, and that most of the units in America have been stripped, and that the armor in Germany has already been deployed to Iraq, and that our industry is not geared to produce what we need.
I strongly suspect you’re making things up.
it’s four of the pink, two green and one blue.
(or is it one pink and four blue?)
partner squink.
I really don’t have to address this,
do I??
Apparently more than one person thinks that the US military’s sort’ve tight right now.
http://rasa.iht.com/articles/103439.htm
July 21, 2003,
“Of the army’s 33 active-duty combat brigades, only three are described as free for a new mission. Twenty-one are deployed overseas, 16 in Iraq, and the others are earmarked for missions, such as in Afghanistan, are rebuilding their ranks, or are standing by in the United States in case of some emergency” (Thom Shanker, “Pentagon Grapples with Troop Shortage,” _New York Times/International Herald Tribune).
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A61583-2004Jan29¬Found=true
January 30, 2004
An additional 30,000 soldiers authorized this week by Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld on a temporary basis could swell the ranks of the Army for five years or longer, depending upon troop requirements in Iraq, Afghanistan and other potential conflicts, a senior Army official said yesterday.
But the official, who briefed on the condition that he would not be identified, said it is not certain the Army would be able to cut strength in four to five years from the 510,000-troop level…
Elaborating on Schoomaker’s remarks, the official called that restructuring “the most comprehensive change and most monumental change the Army has undertaken in 50 years.”
The current plan for fulfilling both overseas commitments and restructuring calls for the use of “stop-loss” orders to keep all deployed units at or above 100 percent of authorized strength…
Schoomaker’s restructuring plan calls for an increase in the active-duty combat brigades from 33 to 48…
http://www.brook.edu/comm/events/20040310iraq.pdf
03-10-04
But, in short, the table on page two of my paper summarizes the argument, at least in snapshot form. For the active duty combat brigades of the U.S. Army, there are thirty-three. The total number of brigades from the active army that will have been deployed somewhere overseas in 2003 or 2004 numbers thirty-four. In other words, we’ve already sent some people back for a second time.
Good. I’d hate to see them go to waste.
It’s kind of like the Bel Air in the garage. Every now and again you have to take it out for a spin, just to make sure it’s in good working order.
http://216.239.39.104/search?q=cache:DELnOPI1uT0J:archives.econ.utah.edu/archives/pen-l/2003w30/msg00066.htm+30+33+“active+duty+combat+brigades”&hl=en
07-29-03
The former Special Operations commander called
from retirement to be Army chief… Gen. Peter J. Schoomaker [said]
“But I’m going to take a little risk here and I’m going to tell you
that, you know, intuitively I think we need more people,” General
Schoomaker said with far more candor than usually is on display at
confirmation hearings. “I mean, it’s that simple.”
“I have to think about how we plan and think through sustaining a
long-term commitment there,” he added, even if allies contribute troops
to diminish the American commitment. Currently, 16 of the Army’s 33
active duty combat brigades are committed to Iraq.
07-29-03
The former Special Operations commander called
from retirement to be Army chief… Gen. Peter J. Schoomaker [said]
“But I’m going to take a little risk here and I’m going to tell you
that, you know, intuitively I think we need more people,” General
Schoomaker said with far more candor than usually is on display at
confirmation hearings. “I mean, it’s that simple.”
“I have to think about how we plan and think through sustaining a
long-term commitment there,” he added, even if allies contribute troops
to diminish the American commitment. Currently, 16 of the Army’s 33
active duty combat brigades are committed to Iraq.
Ugh. We’ve been debating this for months, and I’ve had to cite it several times. I’ll dig it up. Would you like some steak and wine while I’m out, Massah?
http://slate.msn.com/id/2099408/
“To a civilian, it may not make sense that a war involving 130,000 troops could strain the 1.4 million-strong U.S. military to its breaking point. Military officers often say that “amateurs study tactics—professionals study logistics.””
“Ordinarily, the military would short-circuit this logistical nightmare by flying troops overseas to meet up with equipment and weapons it has stashed around the world in “pre-positioned” stocks (“pre-po” for short). However, senior Army officials told the House Armed Services Committee last month that the pre-po stocks were tapped for the Iraq war. Nearly all the equipment in Southwest Asia and on the island of Diego Garcia has been issued, as well as pre-po equipment stashed in Europe—a total of 10,000 tanks, personnel carriers, trucks, and other vehicles. Only the Army’s equipment stock in Korea and the Marines’ stock in Guam remain untouched. There are no pre-po stocks near Iraq for the 3rd Infantry Division (or any other unit) to borrow from. All the equipment will have to be brought from the United States, vastly increasing the cost and difficulty of the operation.”
You can read about all kinds of interesting things at G2mil
Sorry to let you down.
From KWWL, CBS channel 7 in Cedar Rapids Iowa:
http://www.kwwl.com/Global/story.asp?S=1877798
Caveat: Take this with a grain of salt. I don’t have access to the master list of “rabidly partisan” websites, but I’ve been to Cedar Rapids, and the town’s got a few too many bars to really trust any news that comes out of it.
Raw numbers of people in green suits is largely meaningless. What counts is combat brigades, for the most part infantry and armor battalions with supporting artillery and engineer battalions and aviation units. As I understand the situation the US Army’s combat brigades are largely committed to one present mission or another. Those combat brigades each have a logistical tail that stretches back to Europe and the United States. Without the logistical tail the combat brigades cannot function. When there is a shortage of, for instance, infantry replacements or a need for fresh battalions that need is not going to be filled with truck mechanics and warehouse workers and personnel and finance clerks from the depots at Kaiserslautern. To do so would is robbing Peter to pay Paul. It does no good to take units and soldiers from the logistical function because it weakens the logistical mission which in turn injures the combat mission. You must have both functions.
As a practical matter the shortage is going to have to be made up from the reserve component. That is why an Iowa national guard infantry battalion has been mobilized and is being sent to Afghanistan. That is why an Iowa reserve combat engineer battalion was attached to an active duty armored division and sent to Baghdad. That is why the inactive reserve (the guys who have already served their contract time on active duty and in the once a month drill reserve component but who are still subject to call up at the pleasure of the President) is being combed for people who can be sent into the once a month drill reserve units. Pulling replacements from the inactive reserve component is the last measure before conscription – and conscription is probably the kiss of death for the administration that asks for it. That is why there will be no draft but there will be increased pressure on the Reserves and the NG to fill the ranks, both in the combat brigades and in the logistical tail.
As a guy who is almost eligible for social security, I don’t think I have to worry about getting a call in the middle of the night to report to my old reserve unit, but if I were a few years younger I might, twenty year letter or no twenty year letter.
Squink, where are you? The item on the tonight’s 6:00 O’clock Channel 7 news (that bunch of Bolsheviks) was the first I heard about this.
Unless you’re in China, then it is kinda important.
Come to think of it, **AQA]/b], I think they may have some employment opportunities for people like you!
Does anyoe know a quick way to find out if you’re still on IRR or not? I lost my documents in a fire and haven’t bothered to replace them yet.
SG
Paradise on the Prairie; Lincoln, NE.
A bit of googling pulled up the article.
Despite the story’s tone, it does imply that there’s a bit of substance to the rumors.
Since you’re offerin’- please, thank you. Medium rare, mind you.