Is U.S. Military Stretched Too Thin?

The Salt Lake Tribune ^ | SUNDAY, March 30, 2003 | Tom Infield - Knight Ridder News Service

[Grampa Dave]

[Grampa Dave]

[Mister Baredog]

ROTFLMAO!

[cynicom]

Are the grunts too few??? Yes indeed they, thanks to Clinton. We went from 18 army divisions to 10.

[cynicom]

Yes indeed they are...

[Timm]

Yeah, really. Where were all of these stories about a too-small military when Clinton was in office? No one cares about these mistakes until a Republican is president?

[cynicom]

Timm

See my first post. No one complained when Clinton axed the 8 divisions. Now we pay for it. The proof is in the number of reservists doing regular duty.

[AFPhys]

This article demonstrates especially well the addage "Generals tend to fight the last war"... This goes double for retired generals, who have not had the benefit of "play testing" modern theory of warfare. With few exceptions, they are being demonstrated to have egg on their face in their commentary of this action. The active duty leadership has created a superb battle plan, and is demonstrably NOT fighting the last war, and is executing this plan with extraordinary skill.

I am looking forward to reading the memoirs of this "War Against Saadumb Hussein" --- (hmmm... not a bad acronym, at that...WASH)

[demlosers]

There also is 21 U.S. COMBAT brigades this dingbat failed to mention.

[Parley Baer]

Exactly. This again points out the left wing politics of the press. I have not seen it brought up that "maybe" Klintoon cut the military to much. Parley

[niteowl77]

No one cares about the garbage until it is too obtrusive to ignore, then a Republican has to carry it to the curb. Afterwards, he's blamed for creating the garbage, not removing the garbage sooner, and for being unprincipled about garbage in general.

[Willie Green]

No one complained when Clinton axed the 8 divisions.

Actually, there were many who complained.
But I can see where you might be under a false impression since Cheney and Rumsfeld were also at the forefront of many base closures as part of their effort to downsize and modernize the armed forces with high-tech bells and whistles.

[El Gato]

Is U.S. Military Stretched Too Thin?

Sure is, thanks to Clintonsizing. Bush41 started a moderate and sensible post cold war draw down, even before Desert Shield/Storm. Clinton, along with Congress, turned that draw down into a near death spiral. At times that Congress was partly controlled by Republicans. Democrats want to cut the military for two reasons. First because like Clinton, they loathe the military, and secondly because they want to use the money to buy votes to keep themselves in power. When Republicans want to cut the defense budget it's usually because they want to lower taxes or other economic reasons.

[cynicom]

willie...

Not under any false impression...Perhaps I shoud have made it plain that those that now complain of too few grunts were nowhere to be seen when clinton was using a meatcleaver on the army.

[Viva Le Dissention]

Or maybe the military is too big and we should just quit sending troops to every damn corner of the world every time the wind blows.

You know, our founders didn't much care for the idea of a standing Army--in fact, they thought so little of the idea they even gave explicit limits to military funding in the Constitution (Art. I, Section 8, Clause 12). Of course, like many of the lessons learned by these people, they've been lost in history--sort of like the "avoid entangling alliances" thing...

[centurion316]

There also is 21 U.S. COMBAT brigades this dingbat failed to mention.

Really?

Well, lets call the roll and see where we stand:

1st Inf Div (M) 3 Bdes 1 bde at Ft. Riley (available) 1 bde in Kosovo (committed) 1 bde - elements in Turkey and probably Iraq (committed)

2d Inf Div 3 Bdes 2 bdes in Korea (committed) 1 bde at Ft. Lewis (Stryker Bde) - Undergoing final operational testing - not available until June

3d Inf Div 3 Bdes 3 bdes in Iraq (committed)

4th Inf Div 3 Bdes 3 bdes enroute to Iraq (committed)

10th Mtn Div 2 Bdes 2 Bdes at Ft. Drum - available

25th Inf Div 3 Bdes 2 bdes in Hawaii (available, but probably earmarked for Korea) 1 bde at Ft. Lewis (Stryker Bde) (undergoing reorg.)

82d Abn Div 3 Bdes 1 bde in Afghanistan (committed) 1 bde in Iraq (committed) 1 bde at Ft. Bragg (available)

101st Abn Div 3 Bdes 3 bdes in Iraq (committed)

1st Armd Div 3 Bdes 1 bde in Iraq (committed) 2 bde in Europe preparing to deploy (committed)

1st Cav Div 3 Bdes 3 Bdes at Ft. Hood (available, could go to either Korea or Iraq)

172d Inf Bde Alaska (avaiable, probably earmarked for Korea)

173d Abn Bde in Iraq (committed)

3d Armd Cav Regt enroute to Iraq (committed)

2d Armd Cav Regt enroute to Iraq (committed

Seems to my simple little infantry mind that we might just be stretched a tiny bit thin - sure hope the Canadians don't decide the time is ripe to invade.

[Grampa Dave]

[gcruse]

But with commitments in Colombia
              Stop the idiotic WOD, free up the troops.
peacekeeping duties in Bosnia and Kosovo
              That's Europe's backyard and headache.
               Free up those troops.
One Army division is permanently stationed in South Korea
              This isn't enough to hold off NK, and SK doesn't
              want us there.  Free up those troops.
If war in Iraq is important enough to fight, it is important enough
to tell our freeloading former allies to get off our backs and make
arrangements for their own defense.

[DD938]

the views of the founding fathers in this day and age are not relevent.