Showing posts with label " the SURGE". Show all posts
Showing posts with label " the SURGE". Show all posts

Tuesday, September 16, 2014

Pope at Santa Marta: Learning from Our Lady of Sorrows




Pope Francis celebrates Mass at Santa Marta
15/09/2014


(Vatican Radio) Pope Francis marked the Feast of Our Lady of Sorrows during Monday morning Mass at Casa Santa Marta, with a reflection on how Mary learned, obeyed and suffered at the foot of the Cross.

The Holy Father said that in the liturgy of the day first we are shown the glorious Cross, then the meek ​​and humble Mother. In the Letter to the Hebrews, "Paul emphasizes three strong words": he says that Jesus "learned, obeyed and suffered". "It’s the opposite of what had happened to our father Adam, who did not want to learn what the Lord commanded, who did not want to suffer, or obey." Instead, even though Jesus is God, He "is annihilated, He humbled Himself and became a servant. This is the glory of the Cross of Jesus":

"Jesus came into the world to learn how to be a man, and by being a man, walk with men. He came into the world to obey, and He obeyed. But he learned this obedience from suffering. Adam left Paradise with a promise, a promise that lasted for so many centuries. Today, through this obedience, this self-abnegation, this humiliation, through Jesus, that promise becomes hope. And the people of God walk with sure hope. Even the Mother, 'the New Eve', as Paul himself calls her, in order to participate in her Son’s journey, learned, suffered and obeyed. And thus she becomes Mother”.

The Gospel shows us Mary at the foot of the Cross. Jesus says to John, "Behold your mother." Mary - the Pope said - "is anointed Mother"

"And this is our hope. We are not orphans, we have Mothers: Mother Mary. But the Church is Mother and the Mother Church is anointed when it takes the same path of Jesus and Mary: the path of obedience, the path of suffering, and when she has that attitude of continually learning the path of the Lord. These two women - Mary and the Church - carry on the hope that is Christ, they give us Christ, they bring forth Christ in us. Without Mary, there would be no Jesus Christ; without the Church, we cannot go forward".

"Two women and two mothers" - continued the Pope Francis - and next to them our soul, which in the words of Isaac, the abbot of Stella, is "feminine" and is like "Mary and the Church".

"Today, looking at this woman by the Cross, steadfast in following her Son in His suffering to learn obedience, looking at her we see the Church and look at our Mother. And also, we look at our little soul that will never be lost, if it continues to be a woman close to these two great women who accompany us in life: Mary and the Church. And just as our fathers left Paradise with a promise, today we can go forward with a hope: the hope that our Mother Mary, steadfast at the Cross, and our Holy Mother, the hierarchical Church, give us. "


(Emer McCarthy)


Source
.

Thursday, October 01, 2009

Liberal Lunacy: Obama Ignores Afghan War and Blows Big Bucks on Olympic Mission


Liberal Lunacy: Obama Ignores Afghan War and Blows Big Bucks on Olympic Mission
OK, WE'RE RIGHT! ^ September 30, 2009 Oscar De Los Santos and Kelly L. Goodridge

Posted on Wednesday, September 30, 2009 8:06:57 AM by OK Right

Countless articles, documentaries and films recently heralded the Woodstock Festival’s 40th anniversary. Few of the retrospectives mentioned the soldiers dying in Vietnam as stoners rocked out in rural New York.

Something similar is happening now. Afghan War Commander General McChrystal requested 40 thousand additional troops weeks ago. Instead of complying, President Barrack Hussein Obama continues to stall even as he attends to matters he deems more important than losing a war.

There’s the ongoing healthcare issue – something the president seems determined to ram down America’s throat, polls be damned. As of September 28, “Just 41% of voters nationwide now favor the healthcare reform proposed by President Obama and congressional Democrats” (“Health Care Reform: Support for Health Care Plan Hits New Low,” Rasmussen Reports, http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/september_2009/health_care_reform).


But Obama must consider the 2016 Olympics his most pressing political matter. He wants the games held in Chicago. So of course, he and First Lady Michelle are jetting off to Copenhagen– in separate planes – to make a personal appeal to the Olympic Committee. Never mind that the cost of Obama alone making the four thousand mile trip aboard Air Force One will set American taxpayers back anywhere from $300K to $500K, each way (Penny Starr, CNS News, September 30,2009, http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/54762). After all, there’s no other way to get in touch with the Olympic Committee except to go meet it face-to-face, right?

The Afghan war should be tops on Obama’s list. Instead, he’s doing anything but making a decision on whether or not to honor General McChrystal’s troop request. That stall is costing us lives. McChrystal admitted on last Sunday’s 60 Minutes that he’s spoken to Obama just once in the past 70 days. Never mind that there’s a chain of command in place and Obama wants McChrystal to communicate with the Pentagon first. The president can do better than have a single direct communiqué with his on-site commander in 70 days. To do otherwise is an insult to McChrystal and every soldier who volunteered to serve his country in any way it deems necessary.

Funny how Obama continues to hedge – and liberals continue to give him a pass – on an Afghan war decision. Remember how the libs crucified President George W. Bush for not taking a firmer stance on Afghanistan? Remember how they vilified W for the troop surge in Iraq, which finally turned things around?

Truth be told, the Iraq surge was a resounding success. And in that fact is the key to Obama’s fudging on a similar Afghan surge. Sure, angering liberals may account for part of the president’s hesitancy, but there’s also this to consider: To give McChrystal the additional troops he requested would be tantamount to admitting that W was right in ordering the Iraq surge.

In fact, George W. Bush was right about a lot of things. He was right about the Iraq surge and he was right about Iran. Recall that Bush was laughed at for treating Iran as a dangerous enemy determined to join the nuclear arms community. Now we’ve learned that Ahmadinejad and company have long been cooking up uranium in hidden sites throughout the country.

W understood what President Ronald Reagan understood all too well: peace is best upheld through strength. Iran wouldn’t be processing nuke fuel and preparing an Israel doomsday bomb if Reagan, George W. Bush and Dick Cheney were still in power.

And neither Reagan nor W would be running a fool’s errand to Denmark in order to secure a round of games while our troops are pleading for help.




.

Thursday, July 17, 2008

Scarborough repeats McCain's falsehood...

July 17, 2008


Scarborough repeats McCain's falsehood that he called for Rumsfeld's resignation, despite MSNBC's previous correction



Summary: On MSNBC's Morning Joe, Joe Scarborough repeated the falsehood that Sen. John McCain called for Donald Rumsfeld's resignation, saying, "I think he [McCain] was saying that Rumsfeld should be fired." Although MSNBC previously corrected this falsehood, and a McCain spokesman reportedly acknowledged that McCain "did not call for his resignation," MSNBC hosts have repeatedly failed to correct guests' assertions that he did so.



On the July 17 broadcast of MSNBC's Morning Joe, host Joe Scarborough repeated the falsehood that Sen. John McCain called for the resignation of former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, saying, "I think he [McCain] was saying that Rumsfeld should be fired." Scarborough made his comments after airing a clip from the July 16 edition of MSNBC Live, during which Mika Brzezinski failed to correct former Republican presidential candidate and Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney's false assertion that McCain "said that Rumsfeld needed to go." In fact, as Media Matters for America has repeatedly documented, McCain did not call for Rumsfeld's resignation. Moreover, MSNBC chief Washington correspondent Norah O'Donnell issued a "clarification" after falsely claiming in March that McCain "called for Don Rumsfeld's resignation."


While McCain expressed "no confidence" in Rumsfeld in 2004, the Associated Press reported at the time that McCain "said his comments were not a call for Rumsfeld's resignation." Further, when Fox News host Shepard Smith specifically asked McCain, "Does Donald Rumsfeld need to step down?" on November 8, 2006 -- hours before President Bush announced Rumsfeld's resignation -- McCain responded that it was "a decision to be made by the president."


According to a February 16 Washington Post article, "[D]uring a debate at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley, Calif., aired on CNN, McCain said, 'I'm the only one that said that Rumsfeld had to go.' A McCain spokesman acknowledged this week that that was not correct. 'He did not call for his resignation,' said the campaign's Brian Rogers. 'He always said that's the president's prerogative.' " The article also noted that "McCain's false account has been unwittingly incorporated into the narrative he is selling by some news organizations, including The Washington Post."


Nevertheless, despite O'Donnell's correction and the Post's report, MSNBC hosts have repeatedly failed to correct guests' assertions that McCain called for Rumsfeld to be fired.


From the July 17 broadcast of MSNBC's Morning Joe:



BRZEZINSKI: But the surge -- the surge has definitely had an impact that changes the conversation a bit. I mean --


SCARBOROUGH: It does. And why did it -- why did it work? It's because Bush finally got rid of Rumsfeld, brought in a great new secretary of Defense, General Petraeus. They -- he finally --


BRZEZINSKI: Oh, that wasn't John McCain?


SCARBOROUGH: He finally put the right team together. Now, let's --


BRZEZINSKI: What? Are you sure?


SCARBOROUGH: -- let's talk about the what the McCain camp --


BRZEZINSKI: It was John McCain.


SCARBOROUGH: -- were saying yesterday that was wrong, Willie.


BRZEZINSKI: He did it.


GEIST: Well, the irony also is that John McCain yesterday was tying Barack Obama to George Bush, saying, as you said --


BRZEZINSKI: Oh, no. I'm confused.


GEIST: -- you said Barack Obama's feet are in cement, and --


SCARBOROUGH: Right.


GEIST: -- and John McCain said that's exactly right, much like this past administration.


SCARBOROUGH: Really?


BRZEZINSKI: Oh.


GEIST: Hasn't America seen enough?


SCARBOROUGH: You are kidding me?


GEIST: Their policy is not flexible. They won't change given conditions on the ground. So, sort of a creative way of --


SCARBOROUGH: Bush?


BRZEZINSKI: Yeah.


SCARBOROUGH: He compared Bush and Obama?


GEIST: Bush -- he tied -- he did. He tied them together.


SCARBOROUGH: Are you serious?


GEIST: He did it on a conference call and --


SCARBOROUGH: I'm dizzy.


GEIST: and then -- yeah, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Mitt Romney, though, out yesterday --


SCARBOROUGH: Uh-huh.


GEIST: -- looking very vice-presidential --


SCARBOROUGH: Yeah.


GEIST: -- talking about the fact that the surge -- John McCain's idea.


SCARBOROUGH: Really?


BRZEZINSKI: Yeah.


ROMNEY [video clip]: John McCain understands military strategy. He, after all, was the person who authored some time ago the philosophy that said a surge would work in Iraq. He said that Rumsfeld needed to go, and you know what? He ended up being right, and Barack Obama said the surge would not work. Guess who was wrong on that one?


BRZEZINSKI: Oh. Yes.


SCARBOROUGH: All right. So, there -- that's fine. But, I mean, it was George Bush's surge. I will say John McCain was the one man in Washington who supported that, it seemed at the time, but I wouldn't go around saying that was McCain's idea.


BRZEZINSKI: I --


GEIST: Yeah.


BRZEZINSKI: I'm thinking, yeah.


GEIST: Or that -- or that he was the one who wanted Rumsfeld out, either.


BRZEZINSKI: Umm --


SCARBOROUGH: Well --


BRZEZINSKI: Well --


SCARBOROUGH: He did not like Rumsfeld.


GEIST: No.


BRZEZINSKI: He did. We gave him the credit for not liking Rumsfeld.


SCARBOROUGH: He did that. He was after Rumsfeld.


BRZEZINSKI: There was a little friction there. I think.


SCARBOROUGH: Actually, I think he was saying Rumsfeld should be fired, but --


BRZEZINSKI: Yeah, no, I think there was legitimate friction there.


TIKI BARBER (NBC News correspondent): So did a host of other people.


BRZEZINSKI: Yeah.


SCARBOROUGH: Well, OK. Everybody in America, but George Bush. Talk about your feet in cement.


—C.S.


Source: http://mediamatters.org/items/200807170008?f=h_latest

Friday, May 30, 2008

SECRET PENTAGON STUDY NARROWS DOWN IRAQ



Secret Pentagon Study Narrows Down Iraq

Thursday, January 25, 2007

WASHINGTON - A Pentagon review of Iraq has come up with three options - injecting more troops into Iraq, shrinking the force but staying longer or pulling out, The Washington Post reported Monday.

The newspaper quoted senior defense officials as dubbing the three alternatives "Go big, go long and go home."

The secret military study was commissioned by Gen. Peter Pace, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and comes as political and military leaders struggle with how to conduct a war that is increasingly unpopular, both in the United States and in occupied Iraq.

The postelection debate over Iraq is intensifying as members of Congress from both parties pose remedies and the Bush administration hunts for answers.

Democratic Rep. Charles Rangel of New York proposed a military draft, which the administration has repeatedly said it doesn't need.

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said more troops should be sent in and that the soldiers there now are "fighting and dying for a failed policy."

Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., the incoming chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said troop withdrawals must begin within four to six months.

"I believe the consequences of failure are catastrophic," said McCain. "It will spread to the region. You will see Iran more emboldened. Eventually, you could see Iran pose a greater threat to the state of Israel."

Taking the opposite tack, newly empowered Democrats pressed their case for a phased withdrawal of American forces.

They hope a blue-ribbon advisory panel led by Bush family friend and former Secretary of State James Baker and former U.S. Rep. Lee Hamilton, would propose a way ahead for Iraq, while making clear the U.S. military mission shouldn't last indefinitely.

Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del., the incoming chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said he'd like to see the commission assert that U.S. troop commitments are not open-ended; propose a clear political road map for Iraq; and recommend engaging Iraq's neighbors in a political and diplomatic solution.

The United States should "begin to let the Iraqi leadership know we're not going to be staying," he said Monday on NBC's "Today" program.

"Over the next four months let them know we're going to start to phase out, force them to have to address the central issue. That is not how to stand up Iraqis, but how to get Iraqis to stand together," Biden said.

"The idea that we're going to have 140,000 troops in Iraq this time next year is just not reasonable," he said.

McCain, a front-running GOP presidential hopeful for 2008, said the U.S. must send an overwhelming number of troops to stabilize Iraq or face more attacks - in the region and possibly on American soil.

"The consequences of failure are so severe that I will exhaust every possibility to try to fix this situation. Because it's not the end when American troops leave. The battleground shifts, and we'll be fighting them again," McCain said. "You read Zarqawi, and you read bin Laden. ... It's not just Iraq that they're interested in. It's the region, and then us." He was referring to Osama bin-Laden and the late al-Qaida leader in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.

With about 141,000 U.S. troops in Iraq more than 3 1/2 years into the war, the American military has strained to provide enough forces while allowing for adequate rest and retraining between deployments.

Rangel, the incoming chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, said Sunday "there's no question in my mind that this president and this administration would never have invaded Iraq, especially on the flimsy evidence that was presented to the Congress, if indeed we had a draft."

In a speech Monday at Baruch College, Rangel said he wants to hold hearings into current troop levels and future plans for Iraq and other potential conflict regions, noting that the administration has said more troops may be needed.

If they are, the congressman said, it is impossible not to ask where more troops would come from - making the draft an egalitarian way to meet those demands.

"If the country's in danger, everyone should share in the sacrifice," Rangel said.

Speaking with reporters afterward, Rangel said, "You cannot increase the military without raising the possibility of the draft."

He said the purpose of a hearing would be to ask questions, such as, "Mr. President, share with me what is victory, and if you have any clue what you're talking about, who is the enemy ... who do we negotiate the victory with ... who sets the agenda in the Middle East?"

House Speaker-elect Nancy Pelosi said Monday that restoring the draft will not be on that list and was not something she supported. "The speaker and I discussed scheduling and it did not include that," said her top deputy, incoming House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer.

Rangel spoke Sunday on CBS's "Face the Nation," McCain appeared on ABC's "This Week," Levin on CNN's "Late Edition," and Biden wrote in Sunday's Washington Post.

Source: http://home.peoplepc.com/psp/newsstory.asp?cat=politics&id=20070125/45b83950_3ca6_1552620070125-423188286

Sunday, November 25, 2007

FOREIGN FIGHTERS IN IRAQ ARE TIED TO U.S. ALLIES

Foreign Fighters in Iraq Are Tied to Allies of U.S.


The Insurgent's Tale Photo

Published: November 22, 2007

BAGHDAD — Saudi Arabia and Libya, both considered allies by the United States in its fight against terrorism, were the source of about 60 percent of the foreign fighters who came to Iraq in the past year to serve as suicide bombers or to facilitate other attacks, according to senior American military officials.

The data come largely from a trove of documents and computers discovered in September, when American forces raided a tent camp in the desert near Sinjar, close to the Syrian border. The raid’s target was an insurgent cell believed to be responsible for smuggling the vast majority of foreign fighters into Iraq.

The most significant discovery was a collection of biographical sketches that listed hometowns and other details for more than 700 fighters brought into Iraq since August 2006.

The records also underscore how the insurgency in Iraq remains both overwhelmingly Iraqi and Sunni. American officials now estimate that the flow of foreign fighters was 80 to 110 per month during the first half of this year and about 60 per month during the summer. The numbers fell sharply in October to no more than 40, partly as a result of the Sinjar raid, the American officials say.

Saudis accounted for the largest number of fighters listed on the records by far — 305, or 41 percent — American intelligence officers found as they combed through documents and computers in the weeks after the raid. The data show that despite increased efforts by Saudi Arabia to clamp down on would-be terrorists since Sept. 11, 2001, when 15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudi, some Saudi fighters are still getting through.

Libyans accounted for 137 foreign fighters, or 18 percent of the total, the senior American military officials said. They discussed the raid with the stipulation that they not be named because of the delicate nature of the issue.

United States officials have previously offered only rough estimates of the breakdown of foreign fighters inside Iraq. But the trove found in Sinjar is so vast and detailed that American officials believe that the patterns and percentages revealed by it offer for the first time a far more precise account of the personal circumstances of foreign fighters throughout the country.

In contrast to the comparatively small number of foreigners, more than 25,000 inmates are in American detention centers in Iraq. Of those, only about 290, or some 1.2 percent, are foreigners, military officials say.

They contend that all of the detainees either are suspected of insurgent activity or are an “imperative threat” to security. Some American officials also believe that Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia, a homegrown insurgent group that claims a loose allegiance to Osama bin Laden, may by itself have as many as 10,000 members in Iraq.

About four out of every five detainees in American detention centers are Sunni Arab, even though Sunni Arabs make up just one-fifth of Iraq’s population. All of the foreign fighters listed on the materials found near Sinjar, excluding two from France, also came from countries that are predominantly Sunni.

Over the years, the Syrian border has been the principal entry point into Iraq for foreign insurgents, officials say. Many had come through Anbar Province, in west-central Iraq. But with the Sunni tribal revolt against extremist militants that began last year in Anbar, Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia and other jihadists concentrated their smuggling efforts on the area north of the Euphrates River along the Syrian border, the officials said.

The officials added that, based on the captured documents and other intelligence, they believe that the Sinjar cell that was raided in September was responsible for the smuggling of foreign fighters along a stretch of the border from Qaim, in Anbar, almost to the border with Turkey, a length of nearly 200 miles. They said that was why they were confident that the cell was responsible for such a large portion of the incoming foreign fighters.

American military and diplomatic officials who discussed the flow of fighters from Saudi Arabia were careful to draw a distinction between the Saudi government and the charities and individuals who they said encouraged young Saudi men to fight in Iraq. After United States officials put pressure on Saudi leaders in the summer, the Saudi government took some steps that have begun to curb the flow of fighters, the officials said.

Yet the senior American military officials said they also believed that Saudi citizens provided the majority of financing for Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia. “They don’t want to see the Shias come to dominate in Iraq,” one American official said.

The Sinjar materials showed that 291 fighters, or about 39 percent, came from North African nations during the period beginning in August 2006. That is far higher than previous military estimates of 10 to 13 percent from North Africa. The largest foreign fighter hometown was Darnah, Libya, which supplied 50 fighters.

For years American officials included Libya on the list of state sponsors of terrorism. But last year the United States removed it from that list and re-established full diplomatic relations, citing what Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice described as Libya’s “continued commitment to its renunciation of terrorism and the excellent cooperation” it has provided in the antiterrorism fight.

Also striking among the Sinjar materials were the smaller numbers from other countries that had been thought to be major suppliers of foreign fighters. As recently as the summer, American officials estimated that 20 percent came from Syria and Lebanon. But there were no Lebanese listed among the Sinjar trove, and only 56 Syrians, or 8 percent of the total.

American officials have accused Iran, the largest Shiite nation in the Middle East, of sending powerful bombs to Iraq and of supporting and financing Shiite militias that attack American troops. They also contend that top Iranian leaders support efforts to arm Shiite fighters.

But whatever aid Iran provides to militias inside Iraq does not seem to extend to supplying actual combatants: Only 11 Iranians are in American detention, United States officials say.

After the raid on the Sinjar cell, the number of suicide bombings in Iraq fell to 16 in October — half the number seen during the summer months and down sharply from a peak of 59 in March. American military officials believe that perhaps 90 percent of such bombings are carried out by foreign fighters. They also believe that about half of the foreign fighters who come to Iraq become suicide bombers.

“We cut the head off, but the tail is still left,” warned one of the senior American military officials, discussing the aftermath of the Sinjar raid. “Regeneration is completely within the realm of possibility.”

The documents indicate that each foreigner brought about $1,000 with him, used mostly to finance operations of the smuggling cell. Saudis brought more money per person than fighters from other nations, the American officials said.

Among the Saudi fighters described in the materials, 45 had come from Riyadh, 38 from Mecca, 20 from Buraidah and the surrounding area, 15 from Jawf and Sakakah, 13 from Jidda, and 12 from Medina.

American officials publicly expressed anger over the summer at Saudi policies that were destabilizing Iraq. Sunni tribal sheiks in Iraq who risked their lives to fight extremist militants also faulted Saudi clerics.

“The bad imams tell the young people to go to Iraq and fight the American Army, because if you kill them or they kill you, you will go to paradise,” Sheik Adnan Khames Jamiel, a leader of the Albu Alwan tribe in Ramadi, said in an interview.

One senior American diplomat said the Saudi government had “taken important steps to interdict individuals, particularly military-aged males with one-way tickets.” He said those efforts had helped cause an “appreciable decrease in the flow of foreign terrorists and suicide bombers.” But he added that still more work remained “to cut off malign financing from private sources within the kingdom.”

American officials cite a government program on Saudi television in which a would-be suicide bomber who survived his attack urges others not to travel to Iraq. The officials were also encouraged in October when the grand mufti of Saudi Arabia, Sheik Abdulaziz al-Asheik, condemned “mischievous parties” who send young Saudis abroad to carry out “heinous acts which have no association with Islam whatsoever.”

Armed with information from the raid, American officials say they have used military, law enforcement and diplomatic channels to put pressure on the countries named as homes to large numbers of fighters. They have also shared information with these countries on 300 more men who the records showed were being recruited to fight in Iraq.

Surrounded by desolate prairie and desert, Sinjar has long been a way station for foreign fighters. The insurgent cell raided by American troops was believed to have been smuggling up to 90 percent of all foreign fighters into Iraq, military officials say.

The raid happened in the predawn hours of Sept. 11, when American forces acting on a tip surrounded some tents six miles from the Syrian border. A fierce firefight killed six men outside, and two more were killed when one of them detonated a suicide vest inside a tent, military officials said. All were leaders of the insurgent smuggling cell, including one prominent Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia commander known as Muthanna, they said.

In addition to $18,000 in cash and assorted weapons, troops found five terabytes of data that included detailed questionnaires filled out by incoming fighters. Background information on more than 900 fighters was found, or about 750 after eliminating duplicates and questionnaires that were mostly incomplete.

According to the rosters found in the raid, the third-largest source of foreign fighters was Yemen, with 68. There were 64 from Algeria, 50 from Morocco, 38 from Tunisia, 14 from Jordan, 6 from Turkey and 2 from Egypt.

Most of the fighters smuggled by the cell were believed to have flown into Damascus Airport, and the rest came into Syria overland through Jordan, the officials said.

In some cases, one senior American military official said, Syrian authorities captured fighters and released them after determining they were not a threat to the Syrian government. Syria has made some recent efforts to turn back or detain suspected foreign fighters bound for Iraq, he said, adding, “The key word is ‘some.’”

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/22/world/middleeast/22fighters.html?ei=5070&en=852f9709fcd7fbb1&ex=1196398800&emc=eta1&pagewanted=all

Sunday, May 13, 2007

WAR HAS GUTTED NATIONAL GUARD



Governors say war has gutted Guard

States fear lack of disaster response

By Kirsten Scharnberg
Tribune national correspondent
Published May 13, 2007

As wildfires, floods and tornadoes batter the nation, the readiness of the National Guard to deal with those disasters, as well as potential terrorist assaults, is so depleted by deployments to foreign wars and equipment shortfalls that Congress is considering moves to curtail the president's powers over the Guard and require the Defense Department to analyze how prepared the country is for domestic emergencies.

The debate over the state of the National Guard has been intensifying for several years, but a powerful tornado in Kansas early this month has spun the topic back into the spotlight.

E-mail this story
Printable format
Search archives

RSS


Feds: States can share

The administration has said that while the problem is a concern, it believes states can overcome any issues by sharing among themselves during disasters. In addition, Defense Secretary Robert Gates last week said that the administration is asking Congress for $22 billion for the Army National Guard over the next five years, which would take Guard equipment levels up to 76 percent. Still, the GAO recently determined that "this equipment may be deployed to meet overseas demands."

Warning signs have been emerging for years relating to readiness of the National Guard, the oldest component of the nation's military force. The Guard was begun as a force of "citizen soldiers" to ensure their protection in their new land. Later the Constitution ensured that the Guard would be a dual federal-state force by giving the federal government the responsibility of funding, arming and organizing the Guard while mandating that the appointment of officers and routine training fall under the responsibility of each state, with the governor the commander in chief except during the rare instances when the Guard is "federalized," traditionally in times of war.

In late 2005, a GAO report found that almost every state's National Guard had just a fraction of the equipment it was supposed to have. Another GAO report issued just months ago took the criticism further. "The high use of the National Guard for federal overseas missions has reduced equipment available for its state-led domestic missions," it concluded. The top commander of the National Guard, Lt. Gen. Steven Blum, testified to Congress last month that the continuous use of its forces for overseas missions has "resulted in a decline of readiness for units here at home."

Missing equipment—much of which has been shipped to Iraq or destroyed there—is a large part of the problem. Certain states are worse off: Arizona has just 34 percent of its allotted equipment; New Jersey and Idaho 42 percent; and Louisiana, ground zero for the worst natural disaster in modern memory, remains at less than 50 percent.

Connecticut Gov. M. Jodi Rell, a Republican, wrote in March to the House Armed Services Committee that her state's National Guard was missing the kinds of vehicles it would need to dig out from a late-spring northeaster or to evacuate residents in the wake of a flood. The California National Guard, routinely called up in the event of earthquakes and any subsequent looting, is missing 700 Humvees, and it has only half the high-water vehicles it should and less than a third of its required stockpile of machine guns.

In Illinois, the GAO estimates that the Guard has just 45 percent of its authorized equipment on hand and that it is particularly short of trucks, earthmovers and other equipment critical to emergency response.

"That's under half of what we need to dam the Mississippi if it overflows," Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), a Democratic presidential candidate, wrote Bush last week.

Readiness questions

As troubling as the equipment shortfalls may be, that is only part of the worry among governors, the GAO and the Commission on the National Guard and Reserves, a federally appointed group of former generals and other military experts. All are critical of the fact that the Pentagon does not routinely measure the equipment readiness of non-deployed National Guard forces for domestic missions. There is now a push that this information be collected and reported to Congress.

The other hot-button issue between the governors and the president regarding the National Guard involves the Insurrection Act, the law that governs when the National Guard can be "federalized" for domestic law enforcement without the consent of a governor. A 2006 revision to the act expanded the president's power to assume control of the Guard during domestic events, something that governors say threatens to derail state disaster planning and response. Sens. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Kit Bond (R-Mo.), co-chairmen of the Senate National Guard Caucus, have introduced a bill to repeal the changes.

One of the healthy byproducts of the fight between the president and governors over the National Guard is that states have learned to work closely with one another. After Katrina, Guard leaders and state officials developed the Emergency Management Assistance Compact, an agreement that if one state is in short supply of people or gear when disaster strikes, it can borrow from other states.

Yet borrowing from neighbors is not always feasible, as Gregoire found out at that meeting between governors last year. A map drawn up by the GAO illustrates that there are many neighboring states with such severe equipment shortages they might have trouble borrowing from one another. North Carolina, for example, has only about 39 percent of its equipment while South Carolina sits at about 49 percent.

"You want to tap into the resources of the closest available state," said Lt. Col. Denis Riel, spokesman for the Rhode Island National Guard, "because time translates to lives in disaster scenarios."

Some states satisfied

There are a few spots for optimism.

The Tennessee National Guard, the only armored Guard unit in the nation, has received about $170 million in replacement equipment and is currently better prepared than most states to respond to a disaster, a spokesman announced recently. Rhode Island, which just completed the largest hurricane drill in the nation, concluded that its National Guard's response indicated that it was adequately equipped and trained to respond to such an event, despite the fact that much of its key engineering heavy equipment is in Iraq.

Officials in Florida, which is predicted to have a busy hurricane season this year, say they are prepared for whatever storms come, despite having just about half of the Guard's allotted equipment.

"I feel very good that way," Gov. Charlie Crist said.

It seems everyone fears the same thing: the kind of massive disaster that might cross state boundaries and demand a full-scale emergency response that would dwarf what was required this month in Kansas.

"This isn't just a week when a little town in Kansas was torn apart," said Thompson, the military analyst. "It is also a week when there were wildfires across Georgia and Florida, a week when the Missouri River flooded. We have natural disasters every week in this country, and that's why the National Guard needs to be ready to respond every week. It's not."

kscharnberg@tribune.com

Copyright © 2007, Chicago Tribune

Source: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-070513govs-guard-story,1,3999163.story


Monday, April 09, 2007

THE SURGE


The Surge,

Or what was previously known as Escalation.
Is this an episode of "Cops from Baghdad"?
Baghdad, Baghdad
What you gonna do?
What you gonna do when they come for You?
---------------------------------------------------
Has Iraq become a Police Academy for Urban Warfare training?
Search and seizure, wet fire, hands-on, live-action exercise for preparing young people into modern-day Storm Troopers?
When this "War" is over, what will we do with all these Storm Troopers when they return home? Will we offer them jobs in the Prisons and Jails, or will they patrol the "mean streets" of America? Humh? These are facts for deep concern.
First, Shock and Awe, now The Surge. What's next Kill-o-What?
Will these guys finally win the domestic wars, on Drugs, on Crime, and Poverty?