Think we could ship him to Iraq?

[MrsWildweasel]

Murtha Says Army Is 'Broken, Worn Out'


LATROBE, Pa. (AP) - Most U.S. troops will leave Iraq within a year because the Army is ``broken, worn out'' and ``living hand to mouth,'' Rep. John Murtha told a civic group.

Two weeks ago, Murtha created a storm of comment when he called for U.S. troops to leave Iraq now. The Democratic congressman spoke to a group of community and business leaders in Latrobe on Wednesday, the same day President Bush said troops would be withdrawn when they've achieved victory, not under an artificial deadline set by politicians.

Murtha predicted most troops will be out of Iraq within a year.

``I predict he'll make it look like we're staying the course,'' Murtha said, referring to Bush. ``Staying the course is not a policy.''


Murtha, 73, the ranking Democrat on the House Appropriations defense subcommittee, expressed pessimism about Iraq's stability and said the Iraqis know who the insurgents are, but don't always share that information with U.S. troops. He said a civil war is likely because of ongoing factionalism among Sunni Arabs, and Kurds and Shiites.

He also said he was wrong to vote to support the war.

``I admit I made a mistake when I voted for war,'' Murtha said. ``I'm looking at the future of the United States military.''

Murtha, a decorated Vietnam war veteran, said the Pennsylvania National Guard is ``stretched so thin'' that it won't be able to send fully equipped units to Iraq next year. Murtha predicted it will cost $50 billion to upgrade military equipment nationwide, but says the federal government is already reducing future purchases to save money.

Murtha, who represents a western Pennsylvania district that includes Latrobe, was first elected to Congress in 1974.

Lt. Col. Chris Cleaver, spokesman for the Pennsylvania National Guard at Fort Indiantown Gap, said ``there are some deployment concerns.''

Cleaver said some guard units had to leave equipment in Iraq when they returned to the United States, which could cause training problems here.

But Cleaver also said most of the 2,100 Guard troops now deployed with the 2nd Brigade Combat Team can't be sent back to Iraq for a second tour of duty anyway, because of regulations that limit redeployment.

 

[Adam_MA]

I'll accompany him personally!

I heard something interesting on Michael Grahm's show on my way home...

Something to the effect on the "New" rules of engagement with actual LAWYERS accompanying ground troops giving them the go-ahead of weather they could engage or not...

WTF is that?

 

[JonJ]

Adam, I do hope that is crap. But knowing what we know, it's probably for real. Time to

 

[MrsWildweasel]

God, I hope that is crap also. either that or the lawyer is the first casualty. [twisted]

 

[Lynne]

Ya know - I sincerely appreciate his service to his country, but me thinks that the dear might just be caving to the Libs in his party. I'm VERY sure that if he's considering running again, that a "if you want the party's support, then you'd better...." was whispered in his ear. And if anyone thinks there's not blackmailing going on within the party to keep folks on the "true path", then might I sell you a bridge or a prime piece of land in FL?

 

[MrsWildweasel]

I am sure that is true Lynne,but myself cannot even imagine selling out my brothers and sisters in the military. Would go against everything I believe in. Then again I wouldn't make a good politician either. Wouldn't be able to lie.

 

[Pilgrim]

I thought his name was spelled 'Mutha'. Should be. [evil]

 

[JonJ]

Old fool.

 

[edsmith]

he is an old warrior who has gotten senile,who needs to be retired to a home.

 

[mark056]

I think Murtha is looking at the strategic picture. The issue isn't so much where the Army and Marines are now, but where they are going to be eigtheen to twenty four months from now. What about the National Guard ?

You see starting with Bush I and then Mr. Beejay Ovaloffice, we got on this Peace Dividend kick. You remember the Peace Dividend ? Those bad old Ruskies were defeated and we didn't need an active Army of 840,000 troops and Desert Storm was the model for the new way we would wage war. Remember the Powell doctrine: overwelming superiority, a coaliton of forces, minimal casualties, and short duration. All of our great and mighty generals and service secretaries bought into this, and we gutted the Army, and we gutted the Marines and we beached a good part of the Navy and grounded a good part of the Air Force.

Well...it is really moot now, whether we should be in Iraq. We are there, and I accept that. But we are using up our material, we are using up our manpower, the real question is: how long can the Army and Marines sustain ground combat operations, realisitically ? Hey if we had a sizeable Marine Force and 18 Army Divisions like we had back in the Cold War we could do it, with no real problem.

So its, not so much this Army, but the next Army and the Army after next that we have to be concerned about.

Now maybe I am just a senile old fool too, but unless we get our act together here at home in the security department we are going to have big problems here too. Homeland Security is a joke, run by political opportunists. Many of the people who post to this forum could do 100 times better than the jerks and clowns that I have had to deal with. As far as the war goes, it is being won at the Battalion level, but not at the MACOM or national level, and it isn't this left wing media that people complain about that is hurting us nearly as much as the boobs who run the government and run the war. I'll close with just one thought: Hurricaine Katrina and how our leadership reacted. That pretty much sums up the whole deal.

Regards,

Mark

 

[MrsWildweasel]

You know as well as I do one alphabet agency isn't going to talk to the other and share info,even though supposedly (and I use that loosely) they were going to start sharing.
Also if Clinton hadn't cut our troops, etc. we wouldn't even be having this discussion.

 

[mark056]

"You know as well as I do one alphabet agency isn't going to talk to the other and share info,even though supposedly (and I use that loosely) they were going to start sharing. " W.W.

Right, but whose fault is that ? Is it a systemic thing, or a leadership thing ? If it is a systemic thing then are we doomed to fail? If it is a leadership thing, then with effective leadership can we adapt and overcome ? If it is a systemic thing, then why continue at all ?

Let's suppose for a minute that you could do anything you wanted to resolve the Iraq War ? What would you do, or conversely do you think that you could do what you wanted to do, or would there be other forces at work to prevent you from doing it ?

I am most interested in your response.

Regards,

Mark

 

[MrsWildweasel]

I would say it's a systemic thing,only because all the different alphabets were putin place for their various needs and uses. Each one didn't have to talk to the other,because times were different. We both know the beauracracies that go with each one of these also.
The one example I can give you that happened when we were in, and in Berlin at the time. We all know of the night club bombing that happened there back in the 80's. The club was supposed to be off limits to GI's.We intercepted intel on the bombing,now it was an 8 hour difference, which said information then had to be passed on to the states,then we had to wait for a reply back. Which as we know it was too late. If we could have acted sooner, could we have prevented it, probably. We probably would not have lost an american GI, and other citizens. Yes I believe that the sytem is flawed,it needs to be fixed. How I don't know,but bringing them all together under the guise of Homeland Security isn't going to work. Each agency has its purpose, but where do you draw the line at sharing info,because not each agency would have a need to know.
Personally as far as Iraq goes,what I would want to do should have been done in the first war,and we would not be back there today. Since we are there,we have to stay the course,and see it through to the end,and not cut and run. We will have some sort of presence there for a long time to come. It will be like being stationed inTurkey, I'm sure. Or you can liken it to Bosnia since if we ever pulled out of there they'd start the genocide there the minute we left. Iraq at least has a chance at change,which would be a good thing for the Middle East.

 

[mark056]

"Since we are there,we have to stay the course,and see it through to the end,and not cut and run." W.W.

Sue,

I really do appreciate your answer and I thought your account of the Berlin Nightclub bombing amplified your point.

Okay, you say that we have to stay the course...seems reasonable, but can we stay the course, or will the politicians both in and out of uniform let us ? Now I don't mean the people in congress opposed to the war, I mean the people running the war. Do we have enough competent leadership to stay the course, or will we find ourselves in a situation where we keep staying the course, and things don't get better ? From my perspective the prosecution of the war is about competent leadership, and I am not sure that we have this at the level that we need to have it.

This is a rhetorical question: but how are we going to meet the material and manpower shortfalls in the future ?

To those who want to send the National Guard to the Mexican Border: Can the Guard assume this mission and still provide 40 percent or more of the manpower in Iraq ?

Is some kind of draft or national service obligation inevitable, and if so, how will that impact on American society ? Are the youth of America, at large, willing to don a uniform for two years and go the Middle East and fight ?

I think the ultimate question is: just how much longer can we stay the course before things start cracking at the seams, and when they start cracking are the American people willing to make the necessary sacrifices ?

These are the questions that trouble me at night, when I try to sleep.

How do we address our vulnerabilities to enemy (terrorist) attack here at home ?

Perhaps these are the issues that bother Congressman Murtha, then again perhaps not. People keep saying that we are winning the war and that the media is shielding us from the truth to pursue its own agenda. But what is its agenda ?

If someone could tell me with any certainty that we have the sustainability to continue to fight as we do now through 2007, then my opinion could change. I have yet, to find anything to suggest that we have the sustainability to fight for the next two years at the level that we are now. The counter argument is that the Iraqi Army will come on line and eventually replace the Americans. Well, we said the same of the South Vietnamese and they never could do it. The South Korean Army, is today a pretty decent conscript army that can defend the penninsula, but in truth, the ability has only emerged in the last ten years or so. It took forty years for us to get them to that point. How are we going to do it with the Iraqis ?

I think Ms. W.W. is quite correct when she states that we will have troops in country for many years to come, but can we support this without a major change in the way we think and do business ?

If you actually got through all of this, give yourself a gold star

Regards,

Mark

 

[MrsWildweasel]

Okay here goes. I don't think our President is willing to back down from this war. Which is good. Now as far as the rest of the leadership,I would at least hope that the ones in uniform would stay the course and have the guts to finish it to the end. If we pulled out now,we would be seen in the middle east and to all terrorist that we don't have the resolve or strength to finish what we started,and would look weak. Which would give the terrorist a field day. Now if the politicians can't see that, then they shouldn't be in office.
Everyday things are getting better over there,granted for most politicians and Americans it is baby steps, and yes there are set backs,but at least the Iraqi's want this bad enough that they keep trying. I try to put things in perspective....In traiining the Iraqi forces, I liken it to Basic Training. You can only train up so many people at once. They have to learn to trust each other and learn to work together. Your also having to train them senior NCO's can make decisions, etc. It takes time. You can only do so much at once. We are getting there little by little. As we are able we do turn more and more over to the Iraqi's.
Meeting the manpower shortfalls, as long as we still have people wanting to put a uniform on and serve works. I know they have raised the age limit, and are relaxing the standards for prior service,which may or may not help. If they'll raise the age limit a few more years I'll go back. I don't think a draft would be beneficial. You either want to serve or you don't. Lets face it not everyone is cut out to be in the military either. Granted the fall of the Berlin Wall and the fall of the Soviet union really hurt our military. Our leadership couldn't look beyond their nose, and see that something like this could happen in the future. So now we have to deal with this,but congress and the President have to realise we can not be the peace keepers of the world. They need to pick and choose wisely. So now we are in Iraq, give them the support, the manpower, and equipment for them to do the job that they have to do.
I think alot of our youth are stepping up to the plate, and are willing to put the uniform on and serve their country. I have seen alot of it here,and I am proud of each and everyone of them that takes that challenge.
I believe that most Americans would be willing to make the necessary sacrifices for us to win. I also keep telling myself it is the vocal minority that is making all these rumblings.
No I don't think the National Guard can have both missions of being in Iraq and going to the Mexican border. Technically you wouldn't be able to use these units coming back from Iraq,since they can only do one deployment in a 6 year hitch.
Addressing our vulnerbilities, we should close the borders,tighten immigration, and yes racial profile,since we know which countries these terrorist come, run passenger names through a database, and get rid of the PC crap that we may offend which ever group because of it. Other countries do this and we should have done it years ago. Homeland Security is a farse and was a bandaid to shut up whichever Congress critter was screaming the loudest. We do have to make changes amungst the Alphabet agencies, and it would have to be a huge overhaul. The times have changed and so have their misisions. The mission is always going to change and we have to be willing to roll with the punches,and not back down once we have started.
The one thing that needs to be looked at is continually sending our men and women back to Iraq and Afghanistan,for a second and third tour. It is one thing to volunteer for that,but another thing to be made to go back. Granted during the VietNam War we had the draft,today we have an all volunteer military,but I look at the possible burn out,and no one knows what the eventual effect are going to have.

 

[Garys]

I think the big problem, and it's one thing the President has been rather poor in addressing, is that most of the country doesn't believe we are at war. Some of the blame for that falls on the MSM because they don't treat this as if it were war. Whether you believe the Iraq is a part of the War against the Terrorists or not, we in fact in a war against the Terrorists.

If I were advising the President, I would have had him start giving speeches like he has for the past month or so in 2003. He's let the MSM, the Democrats and "soft" Republicans frame the debate.

I know he's not the most gifted public speaker, but he does pretty good delivering pre written speaches. He should be doing about one every other week on national TV. Yeah, I know he'll get picked apart by the MSM, but I think that the public is becoming less trusting of them. As to the Democrats the good news is that everytime they speak, they lose votes. Most Americans don't want a repeat of Vietnam where we were winning until we decided that we had lost.

Gary

 

[dwarven1]

Arrghh... I have no idea why my mother forwarded this to me unless she's really trying to see if my BP can be raised...

Subject: Iraq, the Congress, and the Truth
Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 08:10:35 -0800 (PST)
From: "Rep. John Murtha, DCCC" <[email protected]>
Reply-To: "Rep. John Murtha, DCCC" <[email protected]>
To: My oh-so-liberal [email protected]

<http://whatcounts.com/t?ctl=101B079:3C9DC2D>

Dear Betty,

America wants and deserves real answers on Iraq: What is the clear definition of success? Is there a plan? How much longer and how many more lives? In short, what is the end game?

Because we in Congress are charged with overseeing the safety of our sons and daughters when the president sends them into battle, it is our responsibility, our obligation to speak out for them. This obligation has not been met. That's why I am speaking out now.

I offered a concrete plan to get our troops out of harm's way, where they have become the target. I don't expect every member of Congress to agree with my specific proposal in this debate - but I do expect them to take part in that debate, not to squash it.

I am asking you to join me in demanding a real discussion of the war in Iraq from the U.S. House of Representatives.

Tell Congress to Have an Honest Debate For the Safety of Our Troops. <http://whatcounts.com/t?ctl=101B079:3C9DC2D>

For too long Congress has counted itself out of any real debate on Iraq policy. We didn't talk about troop levels, even after the White House fired General Shinseki because he complained the levels were too low. One problem we encountered was the lack of proper training for our troops; service members were placed to guard the prisons but weren't trained; consequently we had Abu Ghraib, and no action from Congress. And if you look at the casualties, they have doubled since then. It's time to change our course - we can't just sit back any longer.

I've taken a lot of trips to Iraq. When I came back from my last one, I had become convinced we were making no progress at all. This can't be Republican and Democrat. It can't be recrimination one way or the other. We have to work this thing out, and we can't let a real solution get caught in the crossfire of an understandably heated political fight.

It's time for a serious conversation, not more rhetoric.

Tell Congress to Have an Honest Debate For the Safety of Our Troops. <http://whatcounts.com/t?ctl=101B079:3C9DC2D>

The past few weeks have had a lot of firsts for me. I have never sought out the spotlight, or even taken the lead in a House floor debate the way I did a few weeks ago. And I've never signed an email like this before. But I see the beginning of a debate that is long overdue, and we can't afford to let it get overtaken by talking points or the news cycle.

I'm offering this petition, which will be delivered to Speaker of the House in order to keep our Congress focused where it should have been all along. I hope you'll sign if you agree.

Tell Congress to Have an Honest Debate For the Safety of Our Troops. <http://whatcounts.com/t?ctl=101B079:3C9DC2D>

Sincerely,

John Murtha
Pennsylvania's 12th District

It is very important to spread Rep. John Murtha's call for an honest debate on Iraq. Please take this opportunity to forward his message to your friends and family. <http://whatcounts.com/t?ctl=101B07B:3C9DC2D>

 

[Lynne]

I've taken a lot of trips to Iraq. When I came back from my last one, I had become convinced we were making no progress at all.

Really? Seems that Joe Liberman came back saying things are going very well, and that he's seen improvement just since his last visit, and even more improvement since his first visit. Hmmm... Maybe Mr. Murtha needs a new spectacle script.

 

[Nickle]

Because we in Congress are charged with overseeing the safety of our sons and daughters when the president sends them into battle, it is our responsibility, our obligation to speak out for them. This obligation has not been met. That's why I am speaking out now.

I've taken a lot of trips to Iraq. When I came back from my last one, I had become convinced we were making no progress at all.

I think the troops can speak for themselves. Another typical F234ing Liberal that "Knows what is best for us children". F@#$ him.

And I see he went to a different Iraq than Joe Lieberman, or my son and Tank went to. They say we're doing the right thing. They say we're winning.

This POS should be medically retired from politics because he's clearly SENILE. (And an embarassment to the Marine Corps and the Military in general.)

 

[dwarven1]

I think the troops can speak for themselves. Another typical F234ing Liberal that "Knows what is best for us children". F@#$ him.

And I see he went to a different Iraq than Joe Lieberman, or my son and Tank went to. They say we're doing the right thing. They say we're winning.

This POS should be medically retired from politics because he's clearly SENILE. (And an embarassment to the Marine Corps and the Military in general.)

Comment forwarded to my mom. [twisted]

 

[MrsWildweasel]

I was going to say ask any service memeber no matter what branch, and I think they would say they could speak for themselves. Maybe Murtha needs a one way ticket over there.
Shoot, every election over there proves we are winning,not to mention the long lines of them standing in line to try and get a job in the Iraqi military, etc,even though the terrorist target them,but they go back day after day,for just a chance. If we are not making progress,that what are we making?
He's obviously lost his mind and need to be out of office. What a flaming jackass. [evil]

 

[Lynne]

What a flaming jackass. [evil]

You're being too kind, sister Mod. And shame on him for helping to make the soldiers feel like their crap. HE more than any of the others should know that. <insert numerous unflattering cuss words here on your own, cuz if I did, I'd have to Mod myself>

 

[MrsWildweasel]

That's as close as I could get with out Mod'ing myself.

 

[djsmiles]

i saw this on another forum. thought i'd share.

> With Warmest Regards
>
> GEN Schoomaker
>
> **************************************************
> All: Notes from a student at the Naval War College on GEN Abizaid's
> recent
> speech:
> __________________________________________________ ______________________
> ____
>
> General Abizaid (Commander, U. S. Central Command whose responsibilities
> include Iraq and Afghanistan) spoke to the Naval War College last week.
> The audience comprised primarily War College students who are
> mid-grade/senior military officers. The majority of these officers have
> served in the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, so there was a real
> understanding of the dynamics of the region... BS would not sell to this
> audience.
>
> Here is a short summary of General Abizaid's comments, from
> contemporaneous
> notes:
>
> He is amazed as he goes around the country and testifies before the
> Congress how many of our countrymen do not know or understand what we
> are doing or how we are doing. There are very few members of Congress
> who have ever worn the uniform (of our Armed Forces). He said that the
> questions he gets from some in Congress convince him that they have the
> idea that we are about to pushed out of Iraq and Afghanistan. There is
> no relation between this and the reality on the ground.
>
> As he goes around the region and talks to troops and junior officers he
> is very impressed by their morale and their achievements. They are
> confident that they are capable of defeating the enemy. You will never
> see a headline in this country about a school opening or a power station
> being built and coming on line, or a community doing well. Only the
> negative things will get coverage in the media. He told the
> mid-grade/senior officers to go to their local Lions Clubs when they go
> home and tell the people what they are doing. If they don't get the
> word out, the American people will not know what is really happening.
>
> The insurgency is in four of 18 provinces in Iraq, not all 18. You do
> not hear about the 14 provinces where there is no insurgency and where
> things are going well. The insurgency in Afghanistan is primarily in
> Kandahar province (home of the Taliban) and in the mountain region on
> the Pakistani border. The rest of the country is doing well.
>
> Iraq now has over 200,000 soldiers/police under arms and growing. They
> are starting to eclipse the US/coalition forces. Their casualty rate is
> more than double that of the US. There are more than 70,000 soldiers
> under the moderate government in Afghanistan and growing.
>
> He predicted that the insurgencies in the four Sunni provinces in
> northern/central Iraq and in Southwestern Afghanistan will be there for
> the foreseeable future, but they will be stabilized and become small
> enough so the moderate governments will be able to keep them under
> control.
>
> 2006 will be a transition year in Iraq and that will see the Iraqi
> forces take much more of the mission from the US forces. This is
> necessary to bring stability to Iraq. We need to be fewer in numbers
> and less in the midst of the people for the moderate Iraqi government to
> succeed.
>
> Our primary enemy is not the insurgency in Iraq and Afghanistan. It is
> al Qaida and their ideology. We are at a period now that is similar to
> the 1920s where Communism and Nazism had not taken hold in Russia and
> Germany.
> The ideology of Al Qaida is out there and it has not taken hold in any
> country in the Middle East. We need to make sure that it does not and
> we are doing that, but it will be a long problem with a long commitment.
>
> He said that we are focused on the things that we (Americans) have done
> wrong, like Abu Ghraib, and not talking about this enemy. We need to
> talk about this enemy. al Qaida is all over the world. Their goal is
> to get the US out of the region and come to power in the Islamic
> countries of the region. From there, their goal is to establish a
> Caliphate (under a single Islamic ruler) that goes from the Atlantic in
> North Africa to Indonesia in the Pacific. Fifty years after this
> happens, their goal is to rule the rest of the world.
>
> Since Desert Storm in 1991, US forces have not lost any combat
> engagement in the region at the platoon-level or above. al Qaida has no
> beliefs that they can defeat us militarily. They see our center of
> gravity as being the will of the American People. That is influenced by
> the media and they are playing to that. They don't need to win any
> battles. Their plan is keep the casualties in front of the American
> people in the media for long enough that we become convinced that we
> cannot win and leave the region. This would be tragic for our country.
>
> The battle against al Qaida will not be primarily military. It will be
> political, economic, and ideological. It will require the international
> community to fight too. We must not let al Qaida get hold in any
> country.
> It will result in our worst nightmare. Picture life in Afghanistan
> under the Taliban, that is what Al Qaida's ideology has as a goal.
>
> If you look at the geography (of al Qaida), there is no place to put a
> military solution. They are networked and they are all over the world.
> They are a virtual organization connected by the Internet. They use it
> to proselytize, recruit, raise money, educate and organize. They have
> many pieces that we must focus on: the propaganda battle in the media,
> safe houses, front companies, sympathetic members of legitimate
> governments, human capital, fighters and leaders, technical expertise,
> weapons suppliers, ideologically sympathetic non-government
> organizations (charities), financers, smugglers, and facilitators. A
> lot of their money comes from drugs.
>
> We are winning but we have got to maintain constant pressure over time
> with the international community and across the US government agencies.
> No one is afraid that we can't defeat the enemy. Our troops have the
> confidence, the courage, and the competence. We need the will of the
> American people to be sustained for the long haul.
> Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
> Caveats: FOUO

 

[dwarven1]

Very interesting post! Thank you for copying it.

 

[Lynne]

Thanks dj!