Posted on 11/14/2007 4:37:13 AM PST by NCDragon
THIS nation's Army was never intended to fight a long ground war. But, since October 2001, the Army has been waging counterinsurgency campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan with some 200,000 troops constantly deployed. This raises the question of whether the Army would be able to handle another operation, for example, in Iran.
In his first news conference since taking over as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Adm. Michael Mullen claimed that despite the active Army's massive involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan, the United States still has the resources to undertake contingency operations like an attack on Iran, should that become necessary. "There is more than enough reserve to respond [militarily] if that, in fact, is what the national leadership wanted to do," Mullen noted.
Mullen's claim echoed that of his predecessor, retired Gen. Peter Pace, who argued in congressional testimony last February that while an American response "will not be as precise as we would like," the military would be ready to respond by "reallocat[ing] resources and remobiliz[ing] the Guard and reserves."
(Excerpt) Read more at seattletimes.nwsource.com ...
To Korb and Duggan: How do you know?
This will probably come as a surprise to the folks who have planned and executed our military since WWII.
To Korb and Duggan: How do you know?
That has never been military doctrine for this country. If it were it would be idiotic. Because doctrine dictates strategy which in turn brings about war plans and proposed solutions to possible scenarios. That means the President and the DoD wouldn't be able to do what needs to be done to prepare this country for every possible contingency. Methinks Korb and Duggan are a couple foolish men.
With an opening line this stupid, I can't even read the whole excerpt.
We should reinstate the old two-and-a-half war policy as soon as possible.
Bring back Reagan’s six-hundred-ship navy.
We shoulda done this on 9/12/01—but “Mr. Nice Guy” didn’t want to stir things up.............
How’s that workin’, Jorge?
This will probably come as a surprise to the folks who have planned and executed our military since WWII.
Hello! We've been fighting a two front war for 6 years now with a peace time force level. When we fought WW2, we did not keep our military at a pre-war level. We increased it. One thing Rumsfield was opposed to doing.
OK,.... then we’ll do it like FDR did, they’re called to Active Service and they are in the theater of operations,.... until the unconditional surrender document is signed by the enemy and that ain’t the US!
If any outside country thinks the U.S. Army and U.S. Army National Gaurd aren't ready for more conflict, they badly misjudge this country.
We have about a million soldiers in the total Army (active, guard and reserve), and lots have combat experience. So even with 150,000 in Iraq, I think we could still scrape up a few soldiers to address other "issues" around the world if we need to.
How long were/have we been in Kosovo?? I can’t quite remember, it’s been so many years.
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.