Need More Troops
Dec 20, 2008
By JASON STRAZIUSO
KABUL, Afghanistan (AP) – The top U.S. military officer said Saturday that the Pentagon could double the number of American forces in Afghanistan by next summer to 60,000 – the largest estimate of potential reinforcements ever publicly suggested. Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said that between 20,000 and 30,000 additional U.S. troops could be sent to Afghanistan to bolster the 31,000 already there.
The Army is Broken
In the last few weeks, Pelosi has released three official statements designed to highlight the comments of generals who say the military is reaching a breaking point.
“Americans are rightly concerned about how much longer our nation must continue to sacrifice our security for the sake of an Iraqi government that is unwilling or unable to secure its own future,” Pelosi said late last month, responding to comments by Army Chief of Staff Gen. George Casey that six years of war have left the Army “out of balance.”
House Democratic Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel (Ill.) compiled a list of examples of National Guard shortfalls in 16 states that hampered their ability to react to natural disasters or terrorist attacks.
So, Mr. Chairman, as we look to that future, we do so with an Army that’s already stretched by the impacts of six years of war. And while we remain a resilient, committed, professional force, today’s Army, as Congressman Hunter said, is out of balance. The current demand for our forces exceeds the sustainable supply. We are consumed with meeting the demands of the current fight and unable to provide ready forces as rapidly as necessary for other contingencies. Our reserve components are performing an operational role for which they were neither originally designed, nor resourced.
link
Those in charge deny there’s a crisis. Schoomaker, the Army’s top general, served in the Vietnam-era Army. “I know what an Army that’s near broken smells like, what it looks like, how it acts,” he said in January. “Drug problems, race problems, insubordination — all kinds of things going on. We’re nowhere near anything like that.”
link
General Colin Powell Agreed With General Shoomaker That the Army Is Broken. “I’m suggesting that what General Schoomaker said the other day, before a committee looking at the Reserve and National Guard, that the active Army is about broken. General Schoomaker is absolutely right, and all of my contacts within the Army suggest that the Army has a serious problem in the active force, and it’s a problem that will spread into the Guard and Reserves: Backlog of equipment that is not being repaired, soldiers–especially officers and noncommissioned officers–going on repetitive tours.”
link
Democrats Call For Draft
U.S. Representative Jim McDermott (D-Wash.) spoke Wednesday at the UW about reinstating the draft during declared war or national emergency. He described House Resolution 393 as a national service bill. He co-sponsored the bill with fellow veteran Congressman Charles Rangel (D-NY). It would require all citizens 18-42 to perform national service for two years. This requirement could be fulfilled through civilian volunteer work or through military service.
…
“Having a draft means everybody then cares,” he said. “If you believe in a democracy, you have to believe that the people will make the right choice.”
link
“We’re going to have to face that question,” Biden said on NBC’s “Meet the Press” television show when asked if it was realistic to expect restoration of the draft. “The truth of the matter is, it is going to become a subject, if, in fact, there’s a 40 percent shortfall in recruitment. It’s just a reality,” he said.
link
—–
Interesting article in today‘s Washington Post
(another dying newspaper that’s paying the price for leaning too far to the left)
Author of “Reparations and America’s 2nd Civil War
Reparations and America’s 2nd Civil War: Malensek, Scott: 9798864028674: Amazon.com: Books
The dems told me that if Bush were elected the draft would be reinstated and they were right. When an antiamerican like McDoormat introduces a bill to reinstitute the draft you know its not in the country’s best interests. Indeed, the thinking on the left is that if the draft is instituted it will be 60s again and protests and antiwar marches and bans on the US ever fighting any war again because the public supposedly would not want their children, and the draftees themselves would not want to fight, and both would hogtie Congress and/or the President’s hands.
eaglewingz08;
Mind citing your source that Bush re-instituted the draft? Didn’t happen. That was just a 2004 attempt to try to scare people into voting for Kerry.
Yeah I mentioned I suspected “the draft” would come back months ago, if the Dems won. I figured it might be inevitable once Obama started dropping hints about Darfur and other areas of unrest the U.N. is concerned with during the debates. I’m sure Clinton with Bosnia and Serbia also thought in hindsight that perhaps he should have reinstated the draft.
I’m sure Obama’s Citizen Police Force, along with the Peace Corps, will be accepted as an alternative to the draft to provide shelter to liberal/socialists, and college elites as it would protect their conscientious objector beliefs, while more conservative youths get stuck doing the actual fighting. I could see them extending that practice to Greenpeace volunteers as well. After all, Conservative lives are expendable because most of us try to play by the rules and simply refuse to “think and behave politically correctly”. Liberals on the other hand prefer to burn their draft cards, look for outs, and dodge the draft.
Craig, you can expect another Canadian influx of American draft-dodgers if a draft here gets passed, and an even “more” liberal bent of your government once they are there and can’t come back until they are 43.
Also helps serve to help solve the “unemployment problem”, which explains the “43-year-old cut-off age” of McDermott & Rangel. During the Vietnam War, the cut-off age was 29. Raising it to 42 would guarantee the ability to kill off an entire generation of our youth.
Anyone else find it ironic? They bash the military every chance they get, then when people don’t want to join, they say, “Draft!”
Gotta love the morons some people put in charge.
Funny, that article Scott links to is over six months old…
““I know what an Army that’s near broken smells like, what it looks like, how it acts,” he said in January. “Drug problems, race problems, insubordination — all kinds of things going on. We’re nowhere near anything like that.””
One sure way to break the Army is to force people to join it that don’t want to.
Only Democrats could even consider such a stupid idea.
What’s worse is that when Democrats say they want to “fix” the army you can bet they have in mind using it for a laboratory for their latest round of socialist brainwashing. Look to see changes in basic training to include mandatory sensitivity training including multiculturalist and gender claptrap along with brainwashing on the need to combat global warming.
The military’s main purpose will no longer be to defend the country but brainwash the troops into believing the entire line of crap being pushed by Democrats.
fitfit, you’re absolutely right that I used dated links. I did it on purpose-to show the difference between then and now, and to make Obama supporters explain it. Care to explain:
what’s changed?
Is the army broken or not?
Were they right or not?
Were they playing politics with war or not?
Were they misleading the American people on a matter of national security or not?
Was all that rhetoric about ending the war in Iraq, all those non-binding resolutions, all those attempts to cut funding…was that all BS, or not?
What’s changed? If there was a need for a draft because of a broken army years ago, then clearly the Army’s WAY BROKEN now…unless….
The dems are no dummies! They know quite well that there are just too many patriots in an all volunteer force. Too many Bush voters in 2000. Too many anti-Clinton types through the 90’s. The only way to make certain there are ample troops on hand to enforce the coming the overthrow of the 2nd amendment is to draft a whole bunch of Obama voters. Todays army would not fire on the American public. Obama’s dream force would be used to it.
I was not here on FA 6 months ago, I never viewed the sites Scott linked to, and had made that prediction based not on what he was actually telling people, but by reading between the lines Obama’s debate statements in an attempt to interpret his policies on what he was not saying. If you recall; Obama was notoriously bad about NOT saying anything specific about what his plans were.
To my knowledge, the question of reinstating the draft was a dead issue and did not arise again in the public forum following 2003-2004 Bush-Kerry election propaganda.
Rocky,
I believe you’ll find the links I provided are from 2006, 2007, and 2008. However, you are very correct in remembering that in late 2004 Democrats screamed that if Bush was re-elected there would be a draft. 4yrs later….still no draft. My questions remain:
what’s changed?
Is the army broken or not?
Were they right or not?
Were they playing politics with war or not?
Were they misleading the American people on a matter of national security or not?
Was all that rhetoric about ending the war in Iraq, all those non-binding resolutions, all those attempts to cut funding…was that all BS, or not?
What’s changed? If there was a need for a draft because of a broken army years ago, then clearly the Army’s WAY BROKEN now…unless….
Is the army broken or not?
NO
Were they [Dems]right or not?
Did we “lose” in Iraq? NO! Dems were wrong and defeatist
Were they playing politics with war or not?
Of course they were.
Were they misleading the American people on a matter of national security or not?
Did they mean to sell the American people on defeat for political gain? Of course!
Was all that rhetoric about ending the war in Iraq, all those non-binding resolutions, all those attempts to cut funding…was that all BS, or not?
Sure was. No one could stop them from pulling the troops out now could they?
Bring back the draft is a very bad idea even if it were to augment the present volunteer effort. Forcing someone into the military to work with someone who joined is like mixing oil and water.
The US Army under the democrats will now combat global warming. Hoo-yah.
blast avoids the questions-NICE!
Care to explain:
what’s changed?
Is the army broken or not?
Were they right or not?
Were they playing politics with war or not?
Were they misleading the American people on a matter of national security or not?
Was all that rhetoric about ending the war in Iraq, all those non-binding resolutions, all those attempts to cut funding…was that all BS, or not?
What’s changed? If there was a need for a draft because of a broken army years ago, then clearly the Army’s WAY BROKEN now…unless….
“what’s changed?”
You now have an idiot as POTUS.
“Is the army broken or not?”
Only in Dem’s mind. But then again, they are idiots.
“Were they right or not?”
Dems are always wrong.
“Were they playing politics with war or not?”
They are always playing politicic on every issue; they respect nothing, not even wars.
“Were they misleading the American people on a matter of national security or not?”
Dems are always misleading people, they are corrupted manipulators.
“Was all that rhetoric about ending the war in Iraq, all those non-binding resolutions, all those attempts to cut funding…was that all BS, or not?”
Dems are first class bullshitters, always have, always will.
I’m sorry… but what’s this draft crap?
Per stats, all branches met or exceeded their recruiting goals:
Per DefenseLink, all branches enjoyed one of the strongest recruiting years in four years.
Not enuf volunteers to stand up for America? Forget the draft. Up the “goal”….
Another “fear” tactic from the party that accuses others of “fear” tactics. duh wuh
BTW, where’s “the outrage” for war “escalation” without Congressional blessings? And why is Congress ready to bless an escalation without nary a wimper?
Oh that’s right… it’s a Dem POTUS….
assholes
If Dems thought it was a good idea to cut troop funding and demand a withdrawal in 6months (back in 2006), then why isn’t it a good idea now when a President is saying 16months bare min, and most likely indefinitely?
Oh yeah…’case that call for cutting the funds was really just anti-Bush, not anti-war; ie they were just being partisans before being patriots.
I was not avoiding a question, I was responding to the tenor of the post. If the writer wanted respondents to comment on specific areas he should have posed that question. I don’t get what point you are making on demanding answer to those questions.