Archaeologica.org

and anti-military

As opposed to the pro-military types who have run the US Army into the ground?

As opposed to the pro-military types who have run the US Army into the ground?

I'm not sure what you mean Min. It's the best Army in the world. It's an all volunteer Army, and the re-enlistment rate is high. Many are signing up for their third hitch in Iraq.

I've been there, and morale drops when you have nothing to do. I should look at the stats I guess, as I haven't done that in a while.

Tomorrow is the Indiana and S. Carolina primary. So, we have a twofer, but the only way they should have any meaningful impact is if one candidate or the other were to win them both..

I guessing that won't happen. This has been a historical primary but once the parties have one candidate and the conventions have been held, and running mates picked, it will be just another election. At that point I'll quit watching the torture vis-a-vis this forum.

Somehow I missed your comment, Beags.

Here you go. It isn't pretty. By the way, there was a more recent story detailing how the Army and Marines are granting waviers to convicted felons to fill up the ranks. It's nice to pretend that everything is hunky-dory but it isn't true.

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/ ... iness.html

After more than five years of combat in Iraq and well over six in Afghanistan, America’s ground forces are stretched to their breaking point. Over this time the Army has become severely overstretched and its overall readiness has significantly declined. The Marine Corps is suffering from many of the same strains as the Army and the situation for the Army National Guard is even worse. The deployment of more than 30,000 troops to Iraq in the president’s latest escalation and the dispatch of another 3,200 to Afghanistan have placed an unsustainable level of stress on U.S. ground forces and put their readiness to fight in other conflicts effectively in doubt.

and,

Six months after Casey testified and a full 15 months after the administration’s escalation began, General Richard Cody, the outgoing Army Vice Chief of Staff, echoed Casey’s bleak outlook: "I've never seen our lack of strategic depth be where it is today. Our readiness is being consumed as fast as we can build it.” Moreover, the Army no longer has any fully ready combat brigades on standby should a crisis occur.

Firstly, about army felons:
http://www.army.com/resources/item/2150

One of the most common questions we get is "Can I Join the Army if I have a Felony". This FAQ answers that question and outlines what other offenses may keep you from joining the U.S. Army.

All branches of the military are different when it comes to recruiting standards, but they all have regulations regarding felonies. The military maintains a high "moral" standard for recruits and is the basis for not allowing most felonies. If the felony occurred when you were a juvenile you have a better chance of getting in the military but if the felony occurred as an adult you may have a hard time getting in, if at all. In either case it all comes down to the type of offense and how long ago it was.

When you apply to the military you are required to tell the recruiting of any incidents that resulted in arrest or in charges being filed. It is a felony not to disclose this information. There's no such thing as a "sealed" or "expunged" record, as far as the military is concerned. The military requires (under federal law) that such records be revealed on enlistment and security clearance paperwork. Failure to do so is a felony

It's worth reading, as sometimes they do allow it. I wonder what report you were reading.

But there's no doubt what you were reading abot the army being stretched too thin. I'll find some mainstream stats when I have time, but from the outset of the all volunteer military, it was known that reserves would be called up in wartime. I'll find something later.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/22/washi ... ref=slogin

I'm pretty sure it was this one from late April.

Strained by the demands of a long war, the Army and the Marine Corps recruited significantly more felons into their ranks in 2007 than in 2006, including people convicted of armed robbery, arson and burglary, according to data released Monday by a House committee.

I don't think we are quite to the level of the British Army in the Napoleonic Wars -- The Duke of Wellington once commented of his men "They are scum. I don't know what they'll do to the French but they scare the devil out of me."

I'm not sure that it is a model we should be striving to emulate.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/22/washi ... ref=slogin

The number of waivers issued to active-duty Army recruits with felony convictions jumped to 511 in 2007, from 249 in 2006. Marine recruits with felony convictions rose to 350 from 208.

Over all, the numbers represent less than 1 percent of the 115,000 new enlistments last year in the active-duty Army and Marine Corps

Ok, sure, I accept that.

Big night for Obama. He won big in NC. There's drama in Indiana with Clinton leading by only 17,000 votes. She could even lose it, but in any case will not gain anything significant.

I've got to give it up, and I'll find out tomorrow.

From the front page of today's Arizona Republic.

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepubli ... y0508.html

WASHINGTON - More than 43,000 U.S. troops listed as medically unfit for combat in the weeks before their scheduled deployment to Iraq or Afghanistan since 2003 were sent anyway, Pentagon records show.

This reliance on troops found medically "non-deployable" is another sign of stress placed on a military that has sent 1.6 million service members to the war zones, soldier-advocacy groups say.

"It is a consequence of the consistent churning of our troops," said Bobby Muller, president of Veterans for America. "They are repeatedly exposed to high-intensity combat with insufficient time at home to rest and heal before redeploying."

Coming a day after this report:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/05/06/ ... =hpmostpop

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The chairman of the House Veterans Committee blasted the Veterans Affairs Department on Tuesday, accusing the agency of criminal failure to respond to evidence of rising suicide rates among former soldiers.

The picture which is emerging is not a pretty one.

http://apnews.excite.com/article/200805 ... JIBG0.html

And the part that Bush never wants to talk about!

WASHINGTON (AP) - Increasing numbers of U.S. troops have left the military with damaged bodies and minds, an ever-larger pool of disabled veterans that will cost the nation billions for decades to come - even as the total population of America's vets shrinks.

Despite the decline in total vets - as soldiers from World War II and Korea die - the government expects to be spending $59 billion a year to compensate injured warriors in 25 years, up from today's $29 billion, according to internal documents obtained by The Associated Press. And the Veterans Affairs Department concedes the bill could be much higher.

Why?

Worse wounds. More disabilities. More vets aware of the benefits and quicker to file for them.

Oh boy, I just came here to say a word about tomorrows primary. I see there are some posts that I've missed.

Firstly, I don't want to comment on everything the Dems say, especially in an election year.

I have some experience with military fitness though, so I'll tell you what I know. The Army and the Marine Corps. have the most stringent fit testing of the Armed Services. The troops are fit tested annually, and often spend the entire day getting finished. They are required to do many exercises, etc. ( just about everything you can think of) in an alloted amount of time.

For instance, if a soldier completes a two mile run, but doesn't finish in the alloted amout of time, the soldier ggets an "unsatisfactory" in that category. There is a consideration for age (over 35 I think) that provides a little break, but no consideration is given for gender. This can get very rough for a 33 yr. old female.

The soldier, with an unsatisfactory mark, must reschedule at a later date to test again for that one category. After two attempts and still being unsatisfactory, the soldier can be processed out. Reservists are always mustered out. Career gone. However, in wartime, that one mark will not prevent deployment. Nor should it. These folks are in great shape because their very career depends on it. Any one of those young women could kick all of our asses.

I guess one could listen to election year silliness or better yet, go watch a deployment. Large crowds gather up at the 101st Airborne at Fort Campbell to see the troops off and to welcome them home. There's even a lot of (gasp) flag waving going on. My first experience with the military began in 1970. I have never seen the troops in better shape.

And the good news just keeps coming!

http://www.govexec.com/story_page.cfm?a ... dcn=e_gvet

Defense Secretary Robert Gates acknowledged Tuesday that the military can manipulate its fiscal 2008 base budget to pay soldiers until late July, but warned that doing so would only provide temporary relief and could have significant consequences for the armed services.
Appearing before the Senate Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, Gates said the Pentagon could dip into the Air Force and Navy's fourth-quarter military personnel accounts to cover troop costs through most of July.
"Doing so, however, is a shell game which will disrupt existing programs and push the services' [operations and maintenance] accounts to the edge of fiscal viability," Gates told the panel.

Hmm...I don't know Min, this sounds pretty normal to me. These appropriations committees stay pretty busy listening to various people asking for money. They will definately fund the military.

Gates reminding them that thousands of civilians would lose their jobs first has been pulled before, even way back when I was in the military.

So how many more billions, that we'll have to borrow from the Chinese and Saudis, are we going to have to pour into that shithole to sustain Bush's (and now McCain's) delusions of grandeur?