Joint Chiefs pick sees strain on military

United Press International by way of ImediNews (Georgia) ^ | 12JUN07 | UPI

[familyop]

WASHINGTON, June 12 (UPI) — Associates of Adm. Michael Mullen, the Bush administration's pick to lead the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said he thinks current wars are straining the military.

Longtime military associates of Mullen, who currently serves as chief of naval operations for the U.S. Navy, said he is concerned that the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq are straining the U.S. fighting force and if he accepted as chairmen of the Joint Chiefs he would likely push for political solutions to the conflicts, The Washington Post reported Tuesday.

He's concerned the Army has been carrying the heavy load for some time, said retired U.S. Army Gen. William Kernan, the former supreme allied commander, Atlantic, who commanded Mullen in 2000. He recognizes you can only stretch the rubber band so far.

Retired U.S. Navy Adm. Robert Natter, who attended the Naval Academy with Mullen, told the Post the admiral's Navy background would cause his decisions on Iraq and Afghanistan to be made from a different perspective, with a greater focus on political dynamics. He described Mullen as a realist.

A realist would say this is as much a political issue solvable only by the Iraqis as it is a military force issue partially solvable by the U.S. military, Natter said to the newspaper.

[familyop]

Or "The real reason for Pace's Dismissal?"

[Jay Howard Smith]

.....said he thinks current wars are straining the military.

Wars tend to do that..!

[ConorMacNessa]

If they’re not prepared to fight wars, what are they here for?

[processing please hold]

imho, I think Pace has other things he might be looking at. He and Mullen were speakers at The North American Forum in Jan. ‘07.

[familyop]

"If they’re not prepared to fight wars, what are they here for?"

...high ranking officers? They're training toward their future positions as corporate officers in import businesses.

[NY Attitude]

I really have serious doubts about this guy. These words are only benefiting the enemy.

[ConorMacNessa]

I belive Pace and Giambastiani were engaged in waging war - even a “straining” war. Apparantly some people don’t understand that we are faced with a struggle more deadly and consequential than WWII.

[mad_as_he$$]

Ah, another Rummy ringer who comes up with a “duh’ conclusion. Ok General what you going to do about it? Why isn’t the Army twice the size it was on 9/11? Why is the Navy investing in the wrong weapons for the WOT? Why did you REMF’s fight the WOT like a couple kids playing Stratego in a basement in Aurora, OH? F’in genius.

[ZULU]

“Longtime military associates of Mullen, who currently serves as chief of naval operations for the U.S. Navy, said he is concerned that the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq are straining the U.S. fighting force and if he accepted as chairmen of the Joint Chiefs he would likely push for political solutions to the conflicts,..”

The only “political” solution is to pull out of Iraq - they win, we loose.

We are at war with Islam and need a larger military establishment. It is neither fair nor reasonable to expect a small professional army backed with National Guard units to wage a major war from home.

Either we buy a larger professional army or we secure one through other means. But this Administration has, through its ineptitude, made the latter alternative impossible for the present.

[familyop]

"Apparantly some people don’t understand that we are faced with a struggle more deadly and consequential than WWII."

Yes. If the current scenario were happening in the late 1950s or early 1960s, we would have a real civil defense program, be building family bomb shelters, and be preparing for an eventual chain of nuclear exchanges. I believe that unfortunately, within three or four years, we'll find out as to who were and/or are more intelligent: we Baby Boomers or our forefathers.

[Ramius]

Uh... where’d this expectation come from that we could fight in two significant theaters, maintain operations elsewhere all over the world, and have it have no effect on the military?

Fighting wars stresses the organization. Well, Duh?

What war wasn’t?

[sgtbono2002]

Sounds like the President blew another one.

[Griddlee]

“He’s concerned the Army has been carrying the heavy load for some time”

Swabbies could give more help to doggies ashore.

Navy medics could serve in Army infantry platoons like they do in the Marines.

[jocko12]

It’s time for M ullen to leave already.

[em2vn]

Corpsman, I don’t think the stress of war is the strain that is being mentioned in the article.
I think the strain is another word for overload and from what I have seen of the current Navy I have to agree.
Things that would have never happened in the Vietnam era Navy are now just sadly common. I think the problem is military wide.

EM2,RVN,1969-70, Advisor in the Delta.

[ConorMacNessa]

Then, in my opinion, we need Joint Chiefs who will battle for the kind of budget needed to field a larger and stronger military. We need it immediately if not sooner.

[Christian4Bush]

.....said he thinks current wars are straining the military.

Wars tend to do that..!

---

“May I have your attention please. Lt. Cmdr. Hunter feels that...morale might be a bit low...that you are...”

“(whispers) On edge.”

“’On edge’. So I suggest this: any man who is uncomfortable with the situation...can leave the ship (submarine)...RIGHT NOW! Gentlemen, we’re at DefCon 3. War is IMMINENT! This is the Captain. That is all.”

/Capt. Ramsey, “Crimson Tide”

[MNJohnnie]

Or maybe innuendo and rumor are not news? After the dozens of fraudlent news reports spewed froth by the DC Noise machine over the last 10 years, I would expect Conservatives to learn to take any “news” that doesn’t name it sources with a very large grain of salt.