Skip to comments.
(Military) Stretched too thin By Kay Bailey Hutchison (R)
Washington Times ^
| 20 Aug 03
| Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison
Posted on 08/20/2003 8:16:24 AM PDT by xzins
Edited on 07/12/2004 4:07:00 PM PDT by Jim Robinson.
[history]
"You may fly over a land forever; you may bomb it, atomize it, pulverize it and wipe it clean of life
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; Government; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: active; deployment; guard; military; optempo; reserves; troopstrength
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-43 next last
Hutchison has been a supporter of the military for some time. If she says something is broke, then it's broke.
The Army was drawn down far too small after Gulf War I. Now it is fractured. It needs to be fixed, or it will totally break.
1
posted on
08/20/2003 8:16:25 AM PDT
by
xzins
To: All
We get to choose:
1. Spend money on a prescription drug program.
2. Spend money on boosting the size of the military.
The money (peace dividend) formerly belonged to the military BEFORE it was cut too much.
If you give it to a prescription entitlement you will never see it again, and the nation's security will suffer.
2
posted on
08/20/2003 8:19:28 AM PDT
by
xzins
(In the Beginning was the Word)
To: xzins
Let's not forget that other nations with similiar interests need to participate. When Britain needed the U.S.A. for help in WWII, Winston Churchill helped deliver the goods. I love Dubya and his cabinet, I am 100% behind the war on terrorism, but if it takes dirty pool to force the other powers into the war then so be it.
To: xzins
After observing the misguided tatooed, pierced, spoiled youth at the mall this summer, I'm for a draft. These kids need to have their a##es kicked by drill sgt and learn civics, hygene, respect, patriotism and all the other important things that high school neglects.
To: xzins
When our units in Kosovo, Bosnia and the Sinai Peninsula complete their six-month rotations, they will be replaced with National Guard units. There is no question they can do the job. But should they? No - get our troops out of the Balkans.
To: reed_inthe_wind
Our military force structure shouldn't be determined by what other nations do.
We SHOULD have a two major war strategy, in which we are structured to fight, win, and occupy until peace is established. In my mind that's a return to the 18 division Army.
6
posted on
08/20/2003 8:27:26 AM PDT
by
xzins
(In the Beginning was the Word)
To: mountaineer
What's our deployment level in the Balkans? I just don't have a feel for our level of commitment there.
7
posted on
08/20/2003 8:27:28 AM PDT
by
Frank_Discussion
(May the wings of Liberty never lose a feather!)
To: Frank_Discussion
2 brigades.....a divison minus a brigade.
8
posted on
08/20/2003 8:28:42 AM PDT
by
xzins
(In the Beginning was the Word)
To: xzins
I's be a civilian, please translate into numbers of soldiers.
9
posted on
08/20/2003 8:30:39 AM PDT
by
Frank_Discussion
(May the wings of Liberty never lose a feather!)
To: xzins
Hutchinson is a credit to the senate, while the other female senators, especially the RepublicRATs are a disgrace!
The DemocRAT senators are, as usual, dog meat.
To: rageaholic
Here's where I would support conscription.....
If we have an 18 division army, I'd have no problem with three of those divisions dedicated to a new Border Guard, under the DoD. Conscripts would have 18 months, would be Border Guards and not be warfighters except in dire national emergency, and would gain eligibility for a modified version of the GI Bill.
11
posted on
08/20/2003 8:32:06 AM PDT
by
xzins
(In the Beginning was the Word)
To: xzins
1. Spend money on a prescription drug program.
NO 2. Spend money on boosting the size of the military.YES
Thank you for the opportunity to vote in this poll.
To: Frank_Discussion
A brigade, with it's supply tail, is about 5-7 thousand troops.
13
posted on
08/20/2003 8:34:55 AM PDT
by
xzins
(In the Beginning was the Word)
To: xzins
We SHOULD have a two major war strategy, in which we are structured to fight, win, and occupy until peace is established. In my mind that's a return to the 18 division Army. I agree.
Luckily for us, we weren't forced to confront the thin lines of our forces this spring. What if NK had decided to move south while we were fighting in Iraq? Well, it would have been scary, to say the least.
The chances of resolving some nightmare scenario like that one without nukes are dangerously low. Right now, we don't really have the conventional forces necessary to fight two major conflicts at once.
A buildup is expensive, but insurance is expensive too, and seems especially so when you don't need it. The whole point is to avoid the cost of a major war, and compared against that incalculable cost a military buildup is a small price to pay.
14
posted on
08/20/2003 8:37:19 AM PDT
by
Timm
Comment #15 Removed by Moderator
To: Palm_OScar
Sen Kay Bailey Hutchison is a republican from Texas who is certainly no loser.
Rumsfeld's wrong on this one.
The Generals are right.
16
posted on
08/20/2003 8:41:34 AM PDT
by
xzins
(In the Beginning was the Word)
To: rageaholic
The problem with this issue is the increase in funding for this project, which the liberals and moderates will scream about, because it would take prescious money from their pet pork causes.
Maybe there should be 3 year service, with some college credits attached for further academic schooling.
Nah. Never happen. People (namely, young men) would become being men again. And the Femnazis would never tolerate this to happen.
17
posted on
08/20/2003 8:45:26 AM PDT
by
Maigrey
(Watch your wallets! Socialists on the loose! They want your money for their pork!)
To: xzins
The problem with this analysis is that it is focussed on the troops, as befits an Oprahfied culture.
An analysis which focussed on the mission, as opposed to the troops, would conclude that we need an army of ten million, a Marine Corps (or Marines plus other expeditionary forces) twice the present size, a 15-20 carrier Navy, and a draft.
This is what I honestly believe. My first vanity after 9/11 was titled, "Should We Surrender?"
GWB was right to go to war over 9/11, but he was and is wrong, wrong, wrong to fail to mobilize our people for a war of the size and scope that is coming.
If we are not prepared to do what is necessary to occupy Arabia, the Horn of Africa, and Afghano-Pakistan, while deterring China and destroying the DPRK military then I believe we should seek terms from our enemies before anybody else gets killed.
To: xzins
In my mind that's a return to the 18 division ArmyNot enough.
Not nearly enough.
To: Timm
The chances of resolving some nightmare scenario like that one without nukes are dangerously lowThe chances of resolving them with nukes are likewise dangerously low.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-43 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson