Arkansas Blog

Where are all those Rich W loving bumper stickers lovers when their country needs them. it's a shame that our Troops have been pawns in the war on Iraq

The Looming Tower book review about why 9/11 happen

http://tinyurl.com/knl8f

Bush is drunk again!

http://tinyurl.com/cn2r3

In modern war, generals and leaders stay far behind the lines and are in little or no danger of getting killed or wounded. The supreme sacrifice must be made by the young people. Knowing this, it is apparent the leaders and generals still see war as an option in settling conflicts between nations and people. I'm not just referring to our country but to this planet in general. These suicide terrorists are the young who have been brainwashed but it is no different than in other countries. I see no hope for the future. Man doesn't change. Frued had us pegged when he concluded man has a self-destructive mode and loves to see his fellow man suffer.

"The supreme sacrifice must be made by the young people"

This statement is incorrect. Look at the list below and you will be surprised by the average age of the people who are paying the ultimate price. This also shows how depended our country has become on the Guard and Reserves.

http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2003/iraq/forces/casualties/

There have been 2,920 coalition deaths, 2,691 Americans, two Australians, 117 Britons, 13 Bulgarians, four Danes, two Dutch, two Estonians, one Fijian, one Hungarian, 31 Italians, one Kazakh, one Latvian, 17 Poles, two Romanians, two Salvadoran, three Slovaks, 11 Spaniards, two Thai and 18 Ukrainians in the war in Iraq as of September 21, 2006, according to a CNN count. (Graphical breakdown of casualties). The list below is the names of the soldiers, Marines, airmen, sailors and Coast Guardsmen whose deaths have been reported by their country's governments. The list also includes seven employees of the U.S. Defense Department.

And let us not forget that 64 of the Americans on this list were female soldiers killed in Iraq. Every news organization in the world is reporting that American troops are too few in Iraq and the ones that are there are worn out. Some on their 3rd tour of duty, many far from being young. The NY Times list shows how many 40 to 55 year old US soldiers died of a heart attack in the 120 degree heat.

Any moron would know that at the rate we're going the Decider and Chief has 2 choices, either declare victory and bring our troops home or instigate the draft. I'm sure he's busy right now have that torture loving Gonzales think up some legislation that gets our kids drafted, but leaves out Jenna and not-Jenna.

He's probably crazy enough to use the draft as punishment to the American people should the Democrat sweep the November elections and he sees the handwriting on the wall. He's just that insane. I still smell sulfur. Bush in the house!

I guess it depends on your meaning of "young." I have looked at that post before and though there are casualties in their forties and such the bulk are "youngsters" in their twenties.

Here is the Arkansas list. They would mostly be labeled "young" by me. And I have yet to see any general's names on any of the lists I have seen. Have you?

http://www.daytondailynews.com/news/content/shared/oh/iraq/states/arkansas.html

Like in chess, you guard your "kings/generals" as best you can. I think most generals have put in their time or they would not be in the slot they are. Most, if not all, have combat experience.

In Vietnam, the average age of a soldier was 22. In Iraq, it is 29.

To me, when your average age is 29, we are not fighting with youngsters. (But I am only in my mid-30s)

"I think most generals have put in their time or they would not be in the slot they are. Most, if not all, have combat experience."

I dunno about the combat thing. Especially in the last great conflict we fought - Vietnam.

In 1969, our Armed Forces totalled 3.5 million troops.

---we had 1,338 generals and admirals. We had more 3 & 4 star generals than we had at the height of WW II with 14 million troops.

---we had 18,277 colonels and Navy captains.

---we had a total of 407,951 officers; 1 for every 8 men.

In Vietnam, we had 75 Brigades.

---colonels served as brigade commanders.

---we had 6,000 colonels, 2,000 actively seeking brigade commands (for career considerations)

---the top brass created a 6 month rotation of command to try to meet requests of their brotherhood. (enlisted men had 12 months combat tour). Great resentment of officers by the enlisted men. The officer corp had ballooned to epic proportions.

The US had 13 Divisions

---divisions are commanded by major generals.

---we had 200 major generals.

We had 4 generals who died in the 14 years of war in Vietnam: one by sniper fire, three because of bad weather crashes. By 1969, 57 generals had returned from Vietnam. 26 had received awards and mdedals for valor. No American general resigned in protest over ANY issue in Vietnam.

8 colonels died from enemy fire. Hundreds anf hundreds of majors and captains died in the war, some at the hands of their own troops.

Company grade officers in Vietnam created "GROWN" fraternity: Get Rid Of Westmoreland Now. Lt. Col. Anthony Herbert was a major participant of the movement. (read his book, "Soldier.")

One bit more: At the beginning, "lifers" did most of the combat but as the war ddragged on and the enemy didn't collapse from "shock and awe," the military began to depend more and more on draftees to fill combat units (keep in mind of the 540,000 troops in Vietnam, only 10% were combat infantry). Look what happened to the casualty rates:

1965 - 16% of battle deaths were draftees.
1966 - 21 %
1967 - 37%
1969 - 62 %
1970 - 70 %

The lower one was in education and the lower in the socio/economic background, the higher the rate of being killed or wounded

Thanks for the info Rasputin, that is some good intel.

NO HOPE IN SIGHT !

Not coming soon: US troop cuts in Iraq
The Pentagon may have to boost the Army's size or call up more reserves to ease the war's burden.
By Peter Grier | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor
WASHINGTON - In recent days, US military commanders have delivered a bleak message about Iraq: The number of American troops there is not likely to be substantially reduced anytime soon.

Yet the current force may have been strained near the breaking point by frequent deployments to the region, say experts. That means in the months to come, the Pentagon could face increased pressure to expand the size of the active-duty Army, or rely even more heavily on call-ups of National Guard and Reserve units.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0922/p01s03-usmi.html