NY Times: War on the Cheap

[thebullet]

War on the Cheap
By Bob Herbert
The New York Times

Monday 20 December 2004

Greg Rund was a freshman at Columbine High School
in Littleton, Colo., in 1999 when two students shot
and killed a teacher, a dozen of their fellow students
and themselves. Mr. Rund survived that horror, but he
wasn't able to survive the war in Iraq. The
21-year-old Marine lance corporal was killed on Dec.
11 in Falluja.

The people who were so anxious to launch the war
in Iraq are a lot less enthusiastic about properly
supporting the troops who are actually fighting,
suffering and dying in it. Corporal Rund was on his
second tour of duty in Iraq. Because of severe
military personnel shortages, large numbers of troops
are serving multiple tours in the war zone, and many
are having their military enlistments involuntarily
extended.

Troops approaching the end of their tours in Iraq
are frequently dealt the emotional body blow of
unexpected orders blocking their departure for home.
"I've never seen so many grown men cry," said Paul
Rieckhoff, a former infantry platoon leader who
founded Operation Truth, an advocacy group for
soldiers and veterans.

"Soldiers will do whatever you ask them to do,"
said Mr. Rieckhoff. "But when you tell them the finish
line is here, and then you keep moving it back every
time they get five meters away from it, it starts to
really wear on them. It affects morale."

We don't have enough troops because we are
fighting the war on the cheap. The Bush administration
has refused to substantially expand the volunteer
military and there is no public support for a draft.
So the same troops head in and out of Iraq, and then
back in again, as if through a revolving door. That
naturally heightens their chances of being killed or
wounded.

A reckoning is coming. The Army National Guard
revealed last Thursday that it had missed its
recruiting goals for the past two months by 30
percent. Lt. Gen. H. Steven Blum, who heads the
National Guard Bureau, said: "We're in a more
difficult recruiting environment, period. There's no
question that when you have a sustained ground combat
operation going that the Guard's participating in,
that makes recruiting more difficult."

Just a few days earlier, the chief of the Army
Reserve, Lt. Gen. James Helmly, told The Dallas
Morning News that recruiting was in a "precipitous
decline" that, if not reversed, could lead to renewed discussions about reinstatement of the draft.

The Bush administration, which has asked so much
of the armed forces, has established a pattern of
dealing in bad faith with its men and women in
uniform. The callousness of its treatment of the
troops was, of course, never more clear than in Donald Rumsfeld's high-handed response to a soldier's question about the shortages of battle armor in Iraq.

As the war in Iraq goes more and more poorly, the
misery index of the men and women serving there gets
higher and higher. More than 1,300 have been killed.
Many thousands are coming home with agonizing wounds.
Scott Shane of The Times reported last week that
according to veterans' advocates and military doctors,
the already hard-pressed system of health care for
veterans "is facing a potential deluge of tens of
thousands of soldiers returning from Iraq with serious
mental health problems brought on by the stress and
carnage of war."

Through the end of September, nearly 900 troops
had been evacuated from Iraq by the Army for
psychiatric reasons, included attempts or threatened
attempts at suicide. Dr. Stephen C. Joseph, an
assistant secretary of defense for health affairs from
1994 to 1997, said, "I have a very strong sense that
the mental health consequences are going to be the
medical story of this war."

When the war in Afghanistan as well as Iraq is
considered, some experts believe that the number of
American troops needing mental health treatment could
exceed 100,000.

From the earliest planning stages until now, the
war in Iraq has been a tragic exercise in official incompetence. The original rationale for the war was wrong. The intelligence was wrong. The estimates of required troop strength were wrong. The war hawks' guesses about the response of the Iraqi people were wrong. The cost estimates were wrong, and on and on.

Nevertheless the troops have fought valiantly, and
the price paid by many has been horrific. They all
deserve better than the bad faith and shoddy treatment
they are receiving from the highest officials of their government.

 

[Virtual_Burlesque]

. . . Troops approaching the end of their tours in Iraq are frequently dealt the emotional body blow of unexpected orders blocking their departure for home. . . when you tell them the finish line is here, and then you keep moving it back every time they get five meters away from it, it starts to really wear on them. It affects morale.". . . the misery index of the men and women serving there gets higher and higher. . . . the already hard-pressed system of health care for veterans "is facing a potential deluge of tens of thousands of soldiers returning from Iraq with serious mental health problems brought on by the stress and carnage of war." . . some experts believe that the number of American troops needing mental health treatment could exceed 100,000. . .

Was it not the continual increase in number of mandatory missions to be flown, which was the underlying complaint in Joseph Heller’s WWII serio-comic novel “Catch-22”?

And was not the practise of giving precedence to economic considerations over military or humanitarian concerns at the heart of that problem?

Life imitating Art?

 

[amicus]

A recent television broadcast, Adventure in English, followed the spread of the english language around the world through the exploits of Great Britain and english colonies around the world.

Germaine to the issue was the civilizing impact as rule Britannia secured sea lanes and brought the concepts of trade and science to the four corners of the earth.

There was of course, conflict, war, on going; and there were of course, detractors, anti war advocates along the way.

Great Britain passed the torch of world policeman to the United States during or at the close of world war two.

America took up that cause, at great cost, in europe and asia, perhaps beginning with the Berlin airlift and the occupation of Japan.

The Soviet Union, once a member of the Allied forces, began or perhaps continued its question through Comintern, or, international communism. Long range plans to eventually control the entire world.

The sixty years since the end of world war two have seen the defeat of international communism and the advent of a democratic form of government in dozens of countries around the world.

As with the Brits, it has been costly to the Americans.

The New York Times has every right to advocate any political position it chooses. Those who read, know the NYT's to advocate a particular line of political thought.

And they demonstrate a very casual attitude about factual reportage and are not shy about supporting one political view over all others.

The success of the United States and 31 other coalition countries in moving into the middle east following the terrorist atrocities at the world trade center and the pentagon is amazing.

The best equiped and best trained military in the world made short work of terrorist forces in both Afghanistan and Iraq. They may well do the same in Syria and Iran and North Korea in the coming decade.

Military planning, both in strategy and equipment, was based on a land war against the Soviet Union when Iraq invaded Kuwait in the early 1990's. To change tactics to a desert war in Iraq, and a moutainous terrain in Afghanistan was a huge undertaking by U.S. Forces.

As an amateur history buff of world war two, I can point to many errors in the planning and the execution of battle plans that include Norway and the North African campaigns. There are many examples in Sicily and Italy, through the D-day invasion, Market Garden operations and the battle of the bulge.

There was poor planning in Korea and the Suez and of course, Vietnam and Cambodia.

To those who consider the lack of armor on the Humvees and supply trucks currently in Iraq, consider: Jeeps and transport vehicles have seldom if ever been 'armored'.

There are of course, tanks and armored personnel carriers as standard equipment in military hardware.

There is no 'perfect war' and all war plans, no matter how well planned, cannot foresee all contingencies.

To criticize the ongoing conflict in Iraq as the New York Times does, is to display a vast ignorance of war and a disregard for the lasting and future importance of combatting a new threat to human freedom around the world.

Islamic based terrorism is active in 60 countries around the world. The terrorists agenda does not involve traditional armed forces seeking to conquer land areas; instead it seeks to destablize existing governments and disrupt the lives of everyday citizens and cause as much death and destruction as possible.

A lesser country than the United States and Great Britain, might just fall back into isolationism and defend sovreign borders and let the rest of the world survive or fall as it may.

We are fortunate that a voting majority in this country was wise enough to choose a strong leader who will stay the course in this war against terror and the never ending war against ignorance and fear.

As the President said, "This is hard, this is hard work..." Yes it is, especially in view of ill informed detractors who have a myopic view of world affairs.

America has taken the torch from the Brits to continue to extend civilization into even the darkest corners of the world.

USA! USA! USA!


Bite the bullet, Bullet!


amicus...

http://www.publishamerica.com/shopping/shopdisplayproducts.asp?Search=Yes

 

[rgraham666]

But we can spend $80 billion on a missile defence system that doesn't work.

And $20 billion on a fighter to take on the next generation MiGs. which don't exist yet and probably never will.

And $2 billion a pop for the nearly useless B2. It's so expensive they can't risk flying it much as even an accident will be too expensive to be borne.

But hiring enough men to get the job done? Don't need to. Lives are cheap.

 

[amicus]

You fecking Canadians just don't get it, do you?

I can understand you feeling second class with your failing socialist economy, your high prices, your high taxation, your lack of any basic national identity.

But to ignore the fact that the U.S. Military protected your sorry ass during the cold war is downright ungrateful.

And in case you don't know, the Strategic Defense Initiative, SDI, named StarWars by the left wing, has been operational for over a decade.

And for your information, the B2 stealth bomber is, in a technological sense, a stepping stone to the next generation of weapons to deter aggression from whereever it may raise its ugly socialist head.

As usual, you have your head up your Liberal ass.


amicus...


http://www.publishamerica.com/shopping/shopdisplayproducts.asp?Search=Yes

 

[cantdog]

amicus:
The sixty years since the end of world war two have seen the defeat of international communism and the advent of a democratic form of government in dozens of countries around the world.


Such as? If there are dozens, perhaps naming five could be a good start?

Name five of these democratic governments we brought about. Exclude Japan's constitution.

 

[Liar]

You fecking Canadians just don't get it, do you?

I can understand you feeling second class with your failing socialist economy,

....

a stepping stone to the next generation of weapons to deter aggression from whereever it may raise its ugly socialist head.

Aggression from who? The Canadians? If you think socialism is a military threat then you can't really have left your bunker since -87.

#L

 

[thebullet]

A recent television broadcast, Adventure in English, followed the spread of the english language around the world through the exploits of Great Britain and english colonies around the world.

I'm grateful. You watched a television show once and now you are ready to lecture me about history. I love your sources.

Is it at all possible that instead of looking at Pax Britannica through the rose colored prism of a great country doing great and dangerous things to bring peace and prosperity to the world, it might be equally possible to view the expansion of the colonial states in the 17th - 20th centuries with an eye to the acquisition of cheap and readily available raw materials and land stolen from people ill-equipped to fight against the modern war machines of Western Europe?

I know what you will say: a typical left wing response. But Amicus, is it possible?

The sixty years since the end of world war two have seen the defeat of international communism and the advent of a democratic form of government in dozens of countries around the world.

Oh, no, Amicus. You can't have it both ways. You are the one who told me on this very forum that America is the only free country in the world. Don't go changing your tune to match your arguments. That's a no-no!

The New York Times...demonstrate a very casual attitude about factual reportage and are not shy about supporting one political view over all others.

Amicus, did you by any chance peruse my posting of the other day labeled "Media Control in America?" Of course you did. In interviews with Bill Moyers, right wing pundants proudly bragged how journalism has nothing to do with truth or facts. It is about convincing people regardless of truth.
I dunno. I kinda think that is propaganda. Of course, the way to make it work even better is to accuse your enemy of the very tactics you are using. That's what you are about, isn't it, Amicus?

The best equipped and best trained military in the world made short work of terrorist forces in both Afghanistan and Iraq. They may well do the same in Syria and Iran and North Korea in the coming decade.

Yes, I'm sure proud of the way we've finished off those terrorist forces in Afghanistan and Iraq and turned them into secure, safe democracies beholden to no one but American oil companies. I'm also sure that the military is eagerly looking forward to expanding the effort into more states so that our men can be stretched thinner and thinner, taking more and more losses for our war-crazed Administration. I personally am proud to be an American.

As an amateur history buff of world war two

Stress the word amateur, Amicus.

To criticize the ongoing conflict in Iraq as the New York Times does, is to display a vast ignorance of war and a disregard for the lasting and future importance of combating a new threat to human freedom around the world.

Islamic based terrorism is active in 60 countries around the world.

The odd thing is, before we attacked Iraq, Islamic based terrorism was active in only 59 countries around the world. Before we attacked, there were no Islamic terrorist forces in Iraq. We had to work at it to turn Iraq into a hub of terrorism.

As the President said, "This is hard, this is hard work..." Yes it is, especially in view of ill informed detractors who have a myopic view of world affairs.

What the President meant when he said that was: "this is hard work trying to think up a lie to your questions in these debates."
Dear George W. hasn't done a day of hard work in his life. He's one of those 'silver platter' guys.

Amicus you truly don't understand world affairs. Like all neocons, you look at the world through the prism of an extremist political point of view. It warps your world view. It makes you think that conquered people will throw flowers at the feet of their conquerors when instead they obviously will throw only bombs.

America has taken the torch from the Brits to continue to extend civilization into even the darkest corners of the world.

Hurrah! We'll bring Walmarts and MacDonalds to those benighted land of picininnies and pagens. We'll civilize their asses!

Eat shit, Amicus

 

[amicus]

Eat shit, Amicus


That sums up your social status as trailer trash Bullet, when you cannot present a logical argument, you resort to that...


farewell...

 

[cantdog]

Lovely duck, amicus, but it left you open to the haymaker. Ducking the jab and ignoring the right hand is not sane tactics.

So you concede his points?

You do seem to duck when you have no good answer.

Your criticism of the Times as well as bullet as 'people who do not understand war' is fallacious. The arguments the Times article employs are the very arguments our generals have been using in opposition to Rumsfeld and the rest of the civilian Pentagon. "War on the cheap" is word-for-word from those arguments.

The source is the professional leadership of the American armed forces, whose plans were gutted, deployments stopped, logistics interrupted, troop requests denied, all in order to reduce the costs. Armies are not efficient, and there was the rub. Kerry's figure of 40,000 more troops needed was fed him by those same generals.

Now how about the rest of our arguments? Or do you simply have more invective?

 

[cantdog]

Hello?

Hello?

Nope. The cowardly MF is gone again.

bullet 1, amicus -1

 

[rgraham666]

Amicus, you're on my ignore, but other people were kind enough to quote you.

If our system is socialist, you have a really strange idea of what socialism is.

By my main standards; education, social mobility and child mortality, your country is closer to the Third World than mine.

Apologies to the other Americans on this board, but that's how I see it.

As far as war goes, I've been studying it since I was nine. I mostly study the failures because you can't succeed it you don't know what fails. And what fails is hubris. The Greeks fell when they began to think they were unbeatable. So did the Romans. And the Franks. And the city states of Italy. And the Spanish. And the Ottoman Turks. And the French. And the Germans. And the Japanese. And the British. Your country is next, amicus. You believe your power is so great, that it is impossible for you to fail. That's always the end.

And as far as Canadians and war goes, we, and the Australians, were the go-to guys when the Brits needed something done. We fought in the major wars, long before the U.S. did, and we paid a mighty high price for it.

Maybe that's why we try so hard to be peaceful now. We've paid the price. Maybe you ought to put your ass on the line. For once.

Been drinking. Ranting a bit. And pointy headed scum bags like our 'friend' get up my nose.

If I've offended anybody else, I'm sorry.

 

[thebullet]

As usual, you have your head up your Liberal ass.

amicus...

It's okay for you to use invectives against us, Amicus, but we don't dare use your tactics against you, right?

I notice you pointed out my little insult but failed to respond to any of my points. Why is that Amicus?

Be a man, Amicus. For once, be a man.

 

[Boxlicker101]

amicus:
The sixty years since the end of world war two have seen the defeat of international communism and the advent of a democratic form of government in dozens of countries around the world.


Such as? If there are dozens, perhaps naming five could be a good start?

Name five of these democratic governments we brought about. Exclude Japan's constitution.

Why shoulc we exclude Japan? We were certainly instrumental in bringing that change about.

Okay: Japan, South Korea (Formerly part of the Japanese Empire), Taiwan (also part of Japan), The Philippines (formerly US possession), India (formerly British possession), Italy, Germany, Israel, Finland, Russia, Poland, Spain, South Africa, Austria (formerly part of Germany), Czech Republic, Slovakia, Romania, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Finland, Egypt, Hungary, Mexico, Chile, Nicaragua, and that's more than two dozen.

By the way, I'm not defending anybody and I do believe that, since we are committed, we should do what is needed to complete the mission we have undertaken, and that might mean more troops and more expenditures.

 

[amicus]

Boxlicker...hey, cool dude...thanks....it get lonely out here at times...much appreciated...


amicus...

 

[amicus]

rggraham....

My country is next? Maybe...maybe not...in my next novel, canada becomes part of the United States of North America, from the North pole to the Panama canal...

how do you like them apples?

 

[amicus]

the Bullet....


"quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As an amateur history buff of world war two
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Stress the word amateur, Amicus...."




I made a point of saying 'amateur' for a reason, the difference between amateur and 'professional' is that a professional is paid for his/her efforts...an amateur is not.

I am paid to write, and paid to broadcast, whereas no one would pay to hear your anti american, anti business, anti capitalist rants.

You are such a jerk...

 

[Xelebes]

your high prices,

HA ha haHA HA ahah HAHA hah AHA haha

 

[Virtual_Burlesque]

. . . in my next novel, canada becomes part of the United States of North America, from the North pole to the Panama canal . . .

Don’t take your imaginary occupation into Quebec, Animus.

The waiters there will pee in your Poutine.

 

[rgraham666]

Originally posted by Amicus
. . . in my next novel, canada becomes part of the United States of North America, from the North pole to the Panama canal . . .

Not fucking likely 'friend'.

Try it and your troops will be begging to be transfered to Iraq, for a rest.

 

[Boxlicker101]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Amicus
. . . in my next novel, canada becomes part of the United States of North America, from the North pole to the Panama canal . . .

Don’t take your imaginary occupation into Quebec, Animus.

The waiters there will pee in your Poutine.

If such a thing were to ever come to pass, it would probably be the result of Quebec seceding from The Dominion to become independent and then the eastern and western segments deciding it would be in their best interests to merge with the U. S. I don't believe there would ever be any actual invasion although there have been several in history. The last one was almost two hundred years ago.

 

[amicus]

well...my canadian and american friends...it is the two million kids abandoned each year...the homeless, the latch key, the abandoned kids...two million a year...that are given shelter and eventually rise up and toss your pornographic asses out of control.

And canada....have you looked at your teenage suicide rate lately? Have you compared the rate of mental disorder, adhd, bi polar acclivity and wondered if maybe your socialist, egalitarian society might be at fault? Of course you have not.

The kids...the ones you cast off...will rise and replace you...at least in my novel they do.

Look for it soon...titled "The Amicus Files" a compendium of how you betrayed your children. Should be a best seller...

 

[amicus]

welll..whoever was going to pee in my poutine...my 14 pound, unabridged random house dictionary apparently does not accept the french bastardization 'poutine' as a word.

But then, french never was a real language outside of a cook book and baudiness, anyway..so who cares...

amicus

I be a really bad man, and I apologize to the 37 french girls I knew intimately...

 

[Virtual_Burlesque]

. . . Look for it soon...titled "The Amicus Files" a compendium of how you betrayed your children. Should be a best seller...

I've seen it

The Amicus Files

Two months so far, with nothing more insightful than a single page of self-propmotion.

And you still haven't learned how to load an image to show the cover of your opus.

 

[Pure]

Amicus said, //The sixty years since the end of world war two have seen the defeat of international communism and the advent of a democratic form of government in dozens of countries around the world.

As with the Brits, it has been costly to the Americans.//

He seems to claiming A)some substantive American help and responsibility in setting up the alleged democracies, but alternatively he's simply saying B) democracies started to exist for whatever reason (US in some possibly indirect connection; or maybe no connection).

Boxlicker's list.

Okay: Japan, (excluded as part of the challenge)

South Korea (Formerly part of the Japanese Empire),
Taiwan (also part of Japan),
---these are quasi democracies with huge infusions of US military funds. South Korea has jailed lots of dissident candidates, and has thousands of US troops there to 'protect' it.

The Philippines (formerly US possession),
---The US opposed the democratic mvt early in the century. The US was very cosy with the longrunning Marcos regime, which is better classed as right wing dictatorship. Major US military presence for many years. Some democratic mvt since Marcos, but quite corrupt.

India (formerly British possession),
---OK, but US role is unclear and likely minimal.

Italy, Germany,
---both, esp. Germany *had democracies prior to the fascists. US helped re-institute democracy with W Germany as military ally.
There's good reason to exclude these, with Japan as special cases, under US occupation.

Israel,
---democratic state founded; heavy US military subsidy.

Finland,
---complicated case, but no clear role of the US; indeed Finns got independence from Russian by being neutral. (Avoiding US connections.)

Russia,
---recent paper article mentioned taking Russia off the 'free countries' list.

Austria (formerly part of Germany);
--special case classed with Germany.

Poland,Czech Republic, Slovakia, Romania, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Hungary,
---former E. European (and Baltic) countries. Some degree of democracy, but highly unstable, created in wake of end of Soviet Union.

Spain,
---US supported Franco for decades and the suppression of democracy. Later eased and allowed some democracy.

South Africa
---Complex case; independence from Britain; fascist period for decades with Mandela in prison. US supported, armed and funded.

Chile, Nicaragua,
--- US installed military dictatorship in the former, undermined the democracy in the latter.

This is getting boring.

Mexico.
Egypt
----
First Summary. If the claim is merely that democracies emerged, several did so in the wake of British, French, Dutch, and American colonial efforts.

The Philippines is perhaps the best case to illustrate 'helpful' effects of US (induction of many of the women into prostitution around the US bases) 'education in democracy' following US control.

Germany was a pre-existing democracy.

As to Eastern Europe, the ballots are still out. Witness present Ukraine situation. Czech Republic is perhaps the best case, though it's unclear what the US did to help, if anything. In general I suppose amicus, box, Rummy, Wolfie, etc. are going to claim 'liberation' of E. Europe.

In a number of other cases the results of US help are quite mixed, as in supporting Pinochet's coup and executions of enemies at one time, now supporting a more democratic gov. So there are a number of cases of alternate dictatorship/democracy, with US on both sides of the fence (at different times, mostly), as it suits the US.

Second, more concise summary, and narrowing of the thesis. I'd say that, confining onself to cases where US controlled the place, then fostered democracy, you've got one, maybe a couple more arguable cases (Philippines, Taiwan, S. Korea)

We exclude US control(=occupation) of combatants of WWII as special cases.

The cases you have left present generally an opportunistic and very mixed picture where the US had strong influence; moving to fascism or democracy with huge concessions to US companies as convenient (e.g., Chile).

How does this bear on Iraq?

The Bushies want to liken Iraq to Germany or Japan, and neither is a good analogy. Japan is the best of the bad analogies. [No American occupiers were killed in Japan during the reconstruction period. Think about it.]

Whether 'democracy' will come to either Agh'n or Iraq as a result of US is very questionable, and the above list doesn't give reason to be optimistic. If you ask me, there's a bit of resemblance to the case of Chile, for the US supported Saddam--like Pinochet-- for quite a while.