Mind-as-Sponge

Tuesday, September 26, 2006

Here is some more context on the Army budget issue that is beginning to percolate.

This time its an ARMY TIMES article that with quotes directly from the Army budgetary head.

Repair and refit of existing equipment is not coverred under the series of "emergency" appropriations that have been funding the two wars. Because of this, the army feels that there is no way to fund their transformation (as directed by the Secratary for Defense, which is a strong proponent of force transformation, as am I), and maintain their current forces in a combat ready state.

Rock -> Army <- Hardplace. Im-movable object (Bush) -> Army <- Irresistable force (maintenance, and replenishment) From the Slate story which contained the above link.
  • A month earlier, Government Executive reported that Schoomaker had told a group of congressional staffers about grave backlogs at the Army's repair depots. Nearly 1,500 Humvees, M2 Bradley fighting vehicles, and other vehicles were awaiting repair at the Red River Army Depot in Texas. The same was true of 500 M1 tanks at the Anniston depot in Alabama. None of the Army's five largest depots was operating at more than 50 percent capacity—all because of a shortage of money.
  • Meanwhile, to meet enlistment targets, the Army has raised the maximum age of recruits to 41, , and—in another recent gulp—relaxed moral and disciplinary standards. The Army has always waived these standards to let in a small number of applicants. But since the Iraq war, this number has risen substantially. In 2001, just 10.07 percent of Army recruits were given moral waivers—i.e., were allowed into the Army, even though they had committed misdemeanors or had once-prohibited problems with drugs and alcohol, records of serious misconduct, or disqualifying medical conditions. By 2004, this number had risen to 11.98 percent. But in 2005, it soared to 15.02 percent. And as of April 2006, according to a fact sheet obtained from an Army officer, the number has leapt to 15.49 percent.

3 Comments:

  • I have re-read this a couple of times and I am still trying to find points of dis-agreement between these two views. They are obviously informed by different sources, but I think we are drawing very similar conclusions.

    By Blogger Bluefin, at 9:25 AM  

  • Hmm. That is an interesting perspective. The journalistic tone is a challenge on many levels. It is incresingly true that sourcing of information has a disproportionate impact on the way people view its context. There is a developing distrust of publications based on their perceived bias. The left has an inherant distrust of information persented on Fox or by other publications "associated" with the right. The same is true of conservative oppinion of the NYTimes, or other "left leaning" publications.

    I am much more interested in informing myself, from any source. I won't lie and say that I don't struggle to read more "right leaning" sources. There are different linguistic styles, buzzwords, and jargon that make gleaning the basic value difficult for me. That is in no way universally true, there are several voices normally associated with the right that I do find very reasonable part or all of the time. I am guessing that's true in some cases for you as well when reading from certain sources.

    I did not see the pieces as anti-military at all, actually. There are a set of funding, procurement and logistcal challenges that should be addressed in order for our fighting forces to succeed, and not be put in unneccessary danger. At least personally, I find that to be an intensely pro-miliarty point of view.

    There are certainly other authors, whom I have not yet read, dealing with this subject and perhaps doing a better job. It appears to me, however, that you and I are drawing very similar conclusions from very different sources. That should be a net positive reflection on both of our sources, even if there are details, buzzwords, or vernacular, that we find objectionable.

    By Blogger Bluefin, at 1:59 PM  

  • I am enjoying this thread immensely as well its very thought provoking.

    It seems to be headed towards a critique of the media, however which I think deserves its own time.

    I yield to the gentleman from Nokomis, we can resume our debate on a thread of your choosing.

    By Blogger Bluefin, at 7:42 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home