War Demands Strain US Military Readiness

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - War Demands Strain US Military Readiness stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

LOLITA C. BALDOR | February 8, 2008 11:21 PM EST | AP

Compare other versions »
I Like ItI Don’t Like It
Iraqi children gesture as US soldiers with the 2nd Battalion, 319th Airborne Field, patrol the Azamiyah neighborhood in north Baghdad, Iraq, Friday, Feb. 8, 2008. (AP Photo/Anja Niedringhaus)

WASHINGTON — A classified Pentagon assessment concludes that long battlefield tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, along with persistent terrorist activity and other threats, have prevented the U.S. military from improving its ability to respond to any new crisis, The Associated Press has learned.

Despite security gains in Iraq, there is still a "significant" risk that the strained U.S. military cannot quickly and fully respond to another outbreak elsewhere in the world, according to the report.

Last year the Pentagon raised that threat risk from "moderate" to "significant." This year, the report will maintain that "significant" risk level _ pointing to the U.S. military's ongoing struggle against a stubborn insurgency in Iraq and its lead role in the NATO-led war in Afghanistan.

The Pentagon, however, will say that efforts to increase the size of the military, replace equipment and bolster partnerships overseas will help lower the risk over time, defense officials said Friday. They spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the classified report.

Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has completed the risk assessment, and it is expected to be delivered to Capitol Hill this month. Because he has concluded the risk is significant, his report will include a letter from Defense Secretary Robert Gates outlining steps the Pentagon is taking to reduce it.

The risk level was raised to significant last year by Mullen's predecessor, Marine Gen. Peter Pace.

On Capitol Hill this week, Mullen provided a glimpse into his thinking on the review. And Pentagon officials Friday confirmed that the assessment is finished and acknowledged some of the factors Gates will cite in his letter.

"The risk has basically stayed consistent, stayed steady," Mullen told the House Armed Services Committee. "It is significant."

Story continues below
advertisement

He said the 15-month tours in Iraq and Afghanistan are too long and must be reduced to 12 months, with longer rest periods at home. "We continue to build risk with respect to that," he said.

Other key national security challenges include threats from countries that possess weapons of mass destruction, as well as the need to replace equipment worn out and destroyed during more than six years of war.

On a positive note, Mullen pointed to security gains in Iraq, brought on in part by the increase in U.S. forces ordered there by President Bush last year. There, "the threat has receded and al-Qaida ... is on the run," he said. "We've reduced risk there. We've got more stability there as an example."

The annual review grades the military's ability to meet the demands of the nation's military strategy _ which would include fighting the wars as well as being able to respond to any potential outbreaks in places such as North Korea, Iran, Lebanon or China.

The latest review by Mullen covers the military's status during 2007, but the readiness level has seesawed during the Iraq war. For example, the risk for 2004 was assessed as significant, but it improved to moderate in 2005 and 2006.

Last year, when Pace increased the risk level, a report from Gates accompanying the assessment warned that while the military is working to improve its warfighting capabilities, it "may take several years to reduce risk to acceptable levels."

Gates is expected to tell Congress that while the primary goal is to continue to increase the size of the military, it is also critical to step up efforts to work with other nations _ as well as other U.S. agencies _ to bolster fragile governments through economic development and other support.

And it will reflect his drumbeat for the use of more "soft power" to defeat terrorism, which includes the greater use of civilians in areas such as political development, communications and training.

Pentagon leaders argue that nontraditional conflicts _ such as the insurgents and terrorists facing coalition forces in Iraq and Afghanistan _ will be the main military battlefields for years to come. And defeating them, they say, will require more than military hardware _ or "hard power."

___

On the Net:

Defense Department: http://www.defenselink.mil

WASHINGTON — A classified Pentagon assessment concludes that long battlefield tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, along with persistent terrorist activity and other threats, have prevented the U.S. m...
WASHINGTON — A classified Pentagon assessment concludes that long battlefield tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, along with persistent terrorist activity and other threats, have prevented the U.S. m...
Filed by Nick Sabloff  |  Report Corrections
 
Comments
206
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: 1 2 3 Next › Last » (3 pages total)
- SirReal1 I'm a Fan of SirReal1 63 fans permalink

That's funny, we were in the middle of debate and he disappeared. I wonder what could have happened?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:42 PM on 02/10/2008
- research I'm a Fan of research 234 fans permalink

I read the whole exchange, SirReal1.

Brilliant!

I was getting tired.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:24 PM on 02/18/2008
- SirReal1 I'm a Fan of SirReal1 63 fans permalink

TimN?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:40 PM on 02/10/2008
- SirReal1 I'm a Fan of SirReal1 63 fans permalink

TimN,

I take it back. I thought you were "smart enough" to "re-think" your position.

Instead, you have simply proven that "educated" DOES NOT EQUATE to "smart".

I'd like to stay and play some more, but my Son would like to debate the merits of skateboarding. At least with him I'll get "rational" arguments.

Have a nice day.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:46 PM on 02/10/2008
- realpolitic I'm a Fan of realpolitic 139 fans permalink

What side are you on in the skateboarding wars? Skateboarding should be our national past time or criminalize it and lock up all skateboarders on sight.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:44 PM on 02/10/2008
- SirReal1 I'm a Fan of SirReal1 63 fans permalink

I'm firmly in the middle. I don't think it poses an inherent threat on its own merit, but, I do think that "some peoples kids" need to demonstrate a bit more courtesy when pursuing their passion.

I've never encountered a kid who didn't see it my way within a couple minutes of discussion.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:49 PM on 02/10/2008
- SirReal1 I'm a Fan of SirReal1 63 fans permalink

TimN (if you're still here),

I just posted a comment to your first post on this thread, but I see that the thread is getting difficult to follow, so I will ask a couple questions here.

I seriously want to know; Is THIS the America that you want your kid's and grandkid's to grow up in? Seriously! You spent the "better part" of your life serving in the Military, fighting against certain "ideologies" that were contrary to the "American Ideal". Now, ON THIS BLOG, you make the statement "China is INVESTING in US"? China? The same Government that you dedicated your life to opposing, you now will gladly "shake hands" with and allow to "invest" (some would call it "purchase") our country? You're seriously willing to "cozy up" to Communism, more readily than to support a partnership with "liberals" who want to get our country off the "debt teat" that they see as a threat?

You "slam" Social Security (in typical conservative fashion), and say you are "more worried about your grandkids paying for that "liberal pyramid scheme" than you are about them having to pay the "$9 TRILLION" in debt that has, in large part, been created by the policies of TWO PRESIDENTS (that you apparently support)?

COME ON! You are way to smart to make such a statement! Do the math! How much has your "contribution" to SS taken from your pay since "day 1"? How much will $9 TRILLION of debt take from YOU, YOUR KIDS, YOUR GRANDKIDS, YOUR GREAT GRANDKIDS...., before it is "PAID IN FULL"???

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:52 AM on 02/10/2008
- SirReal1 I'm a Fan of SirReal1 63 fans permalink

You commented, with uncanny "conservative think" bluster that:

>I've been 'investing' in Social Security since >1978. I'm due to retire in 2025. The payout >would be about $1,700/mo at a life expentancy >of 78 that amounts - that amounts to a total >payout of less than $300k. If that money had >been invested in a fund that equaled the DOW >for 47 years it would easily be worth at least >FIVE TIMES the pay out of social security.

Do you not realize that "investing in a fund that EQUALED the DOW for 47 years" is a virtual impossibility? Do you not realize that MOST OF THE PROFIT would have been offset by the increase in INFLATION that has occurred (most of it occurring during REPUBLICAN administrations)?

What was your total contribution, and what is your "LOSS" after you receive your "less than 300k" payout? How much would you have lost if your "fund" didn't pay at the rate you assume (like if it paid at the rate of reality).

I'm guessing by your comments about SS, that any "insurance plan" is a "pyramid scheme" by your definition. I wouldn't lose too much sleep over the likelihood of SS being "broke by '2042'", at the rate that "your boy Georgie" is piling up debt, our Country will be "OWNED" by someone else, long before then.

This one was the real topper for me. You have apparently acquired a large volume of "facts" with which to defend your position, but you just as obviously have not acquired the ability to "critically evaluate" those facts.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:40 PM on 02/10/2008
- SirReal1 I'm a Fan of SirReal1 63 fans permalink

Your comment:

>The real 'progressive' solution isn't failed >19th Marxist/co­ntemporary Liberal wealth >re-distrution. It is privatization and >exploitation of the natural energy of >capitalism and free markets.

You really don't realize that in that comment you are essentially describing the last 5 Republican Administrations? You whine about how the "Liberal Pyramid Scheme" has hurt your "bottom line" but fail to see how the "truly wealthy" in this Country are getting "Rich from redistributing the profits from YOUR PRODUCTION, into their pockets? Do you think that top 5% are LIBERALS?

Remember George's quote "This is an impressive crowd: The Have's and Have-more's. Some people call you the elites. I call you my base."

If you are not "one of them", your labor's have gone to make "profit" for them.

So you think this makes you sound smart? Do you think that it makes you look even smarter to "come here because debating you morons makes me feel smart"?

If you are not wealthy, you don't look very "smart" to me, given your support for those who are. If you are wealthy, and one of those who still scrambles for every penny he can get his hands on, and NO COMPASSION for those who only want a fair chance at survival, you again don't impress me as "smart", you are more worthy of "pity", "derision" or "disgust".

Your "Guilty pleasure" at your perceived "superiority" is either based on fallacy or greed, either way, I know, YOU can't help it.

NEXT!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:41 PM on 02/10/2008
- TimN I'm a Fan of TimN 19 fans permalink

Of course I'm still here.

I see an economic lesson is in order. First of all, the People's Republic of China is not a communist country. Let me repeat that the PRC is NOT a communist country. It abandoned communism in the late 1980's under the regime of Dung Chow Ping and his move toward market-based reforms. As you probably don't know (and I'll be happy to give you a lesson on) market based economies are in complete contradiction to Communist/Marxist economy theory. In the global scheme of things China, Japan, South Korea, the US and Western Europe are capitalistic industrial economies. The economies of Russia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Yemen, UAE, Qatar, Indonesia, Brunei, Norway and Kuwait are based upon petroleum production. The fear of industrial economies is that the flow of oil might be disrupted. This disruption can take place in one of two ways 1) hegemony of production by a hostile state or 2) continued or escalated conflict in the Mideast. Obviously, (I can't imagine how this escapes you and the other HuffPo Einsteins) China has a vested interest that there be no disruption in the flow of oil. In other words (I'll break it down for you) China (as well as all industrial economies) has a vested interest that the US military succeeds in Iraq and in the continued defence of Western Europe and countries friendly to us in Asia. So much so that if the US underwent a drastic change in policy and in the size of our force structure the governments of the industrial world would absolutely panic.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:41 PM on 02/10/2008
- SirReal1 I'm a Fan of SirReal1 63 fans permalink

TimN,

I have to ask; Do you just make up your own reality, or do you actually believe that you know more about the world than OUR OWN CIA?

Government China Top of Page
Country name:
Definition Field Listing
conventional long form: People's Republic of China
conventional short form: China
local long form: Zhonghua Renmin Gongheguo
local short form: Zhongguo
abbreviation: PRC
Government type:

Communist state

SOURCE: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ch.html

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:58 PM on 02/10/2008
- TimN I'm a Fan of TimN 19 fans permalink



Now, onto the national deficit. Greenspan and Bernake have stated clearly, repeatedly, emphatically - Social Security and Medicare ARE our national deficit. You.can't seperate the two. Privitization (as I have already demonstrated) would solve the problem of Social Security and I believe to some extant privatization would also take alleviate some of the financial catasphrophe we see on the horizon with Medicare.

As I demonstrated earlier, demographics do not lie. When Social Security was inacted in 1940 there were 70 working citizens for every recipient. In 2042 (when social security is expected to be bankrupt) there will be 4 working citizens for every recipient.

This is reality. Deal with it.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:41 PM on 02/10/2008
- SirReal1 I'm a Fan of SirReal1 63 fans permalink

So the "National Debt" is actually a $9 Trillion deficit in Social Security? Then I guess the "will be broke by 2042" line is just a lie, right?

How do you get your brain to twist itself up like that?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:06 PM on 02/10/2008

ON JUN 6, 1944 THE :
AMERICANS
BRITTS
FRENCH
ETC. INVADED FRANCE BY NORMANDY BEACH ON THE BEACH ALONE THOUSANDS OF MEN WERE CUT DOWN BEFORE THEY REACHED THE DRY SANDS.
AND YOU CAN CALL IT LUCK, OR JUST STUPITITY BUT AS WE INVADED " HILTER SLEEPT " AND ALL FEARED TO WAKE HIM UP.
THE SAME IS HAPPING WHEN THE CIA AND THE UN INSPECTORS SAID THERE WERE NO :
WMD'S
CHEMICAL WEPONS
NO NUCKS
ETC
ALL FEARED TO WAKE THE MINDE OF BUSH BECAUSE OF FEAR
WHEN WE HAD IRAQ IN OUR CONTROL ALL INCHARGE FEARED TO WAKE BUSHS MINDE AND INFORM HIM TO SECURE THE COUNTRY.
AND STILL NOW ALL ARE GONE AND EVEN THE NEW AROUND HIM STILL FEAR AWAKING BUSHS MINDE FEARING TO BE CALLED UNAMERICAN.
NOW BUSH SEATS OUT THE NEXT MONTHS OUTRIGHT VETOING ALL BILLS
REFUSING TO HOLD IRAQ GOVERMENT TO ANY EAR MARKS.
STILL PRASING HIS SERGE OF A YEAR AGO.
BUT HE WILL STILL LEAVE OFFICE AS THE PRESIDENT WHO MURDERED :

4,000 PLUS U.S. SOLDIERS
WOUNDING 27,000 PLUS U.S. SOLDIERS
MAKING IRAQ THE NEW HOME OF 180,000 U.S. SOLDIERS FOR THE NEXT HUNDRED YEARS.
AS MC CANN HAS BOSTED.
IF THE GOP WIN AND THE WAR CONTINUES THE WILL BE A DRAFT .
THE QUESTION IS
" FOR MORE YEARS OF BUSH WITH WHOM EVER REPUBLICAN WINES.
ITS YOUR SON WHO WILL PAY THE PRICE .

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:43 PM on 02/09/2008
- realpolitic I'm a Fan of realpolitic 139 fans permalink

This administration is still pretending that we are fighting Al Qaeda in Iraq. Shame on them! Generals have long said that Al Qaeda represents only 5% or so of the total enemy combatants in Iraq.

As long as we keep pretending we are fighting Al Qaeda, our strategy in Iraq will be misguided.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:42 PM on 02/09/2008

Not to worry, the entire gene pools of the Bush, Cheney Romney clan will soon enlist and with bibles waving over their head lead us to total victory.

_I am a gay. Before, My life is full of loneliness and discrimination. I had few friends. Till one day, my friends told a good place gaysinglehunt.com, where i made many gay friends. My life changed, no longer lonely,no discrimination. I am a happy gay now.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:09 AM on 02/10/2008
- escobar I'm a Fan of escobar 18 fans permalink

President McCain has the answer, he and his neo-cons will drop the small nukes and neutron bombs they have been developing.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:47 PM on 02/09/2008
- arvada I'm a Fan of arvada 60 fans permalink
photo

conversation with nurse in a hospital in greeley,colorado

nurse:the democrats are gonna raise my taxes

me:you got a trillion dollar war in iraq you haven't paid a dime for

nurse: i don't want to get my head chopped off

me: in greeley colorado?

yikes

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:09 PM on 02/09/2008

This week our nation had some of the worst storms in history. Thank God our National Guard was in place to handle the crisis. Ooops! I forgot, The Southern Republican Party put our NGs overseas to defend us.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:42 AM on 02/09/2008
- Horst I'm a Fan of Horst 21 fans permalink

Americans learn geography by going to war...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:11 AM on 02/09/2008

In a move of incredibly stupidity bill clinton declared a peace dividend and reduce the size of the US military by 500,000 when he was president.

It's no wonder that the US military is strained.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:47 AM on 02/09/2008
- getoffmedz I'm a Fan of getoffmedz 108 fans permalink
photo

Independent_voter - ah but you forgot to mention the blowjob? Rush gonna be on soon, better git.

Where do you asshats come from? Seems there is an endless supply?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:57 AM on 02/09/2008

Actually it was Bush Sr that did, not Clinton

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:31 PM on 02/09/2008
- realpolitic I'm a Fan of realpolitic 139 fans permalink

Yes, the Soviet Union had been broken up for awhile by the time Clinton arrived in office.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:14 PM on 02/12/2008
- SirReal1 I'm a Fan of SirReal1 63 fans permalink

Independent_voter,

Quite obviously an oxymoron! I find it somewhat humorous (in the "dark comedy" sort of way), that you, and many like you, consider themselves "independent" and then demonstrate such intellectual derision at a single perspective (to the extent that you embrace utter lies to support your view).

What is it that you base the claim of independence on? Have you, on occasion, voted "Libertarian" as opposed to "Republican"? (or vice versa?). Wow! That is "independent" huh?

As others have pointed out, and as you could easily verify if you chose to; it was, in fact "papa bush" who decimated our Military, largely at the behest of, I suspect, people like you, who saw the ever enticing "cut in taxes" that your type seems to live for! Go ahead, look it up! By the time Clinton took office, GHWB had rammed through massive cuts in the Military, and had "mandated" reductions that continued through most of Clinton's term. I know, I was Active Duty at the time, which you quite obviously were not.

Chickenhawk much?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:05 AM on 02/10/2008
- TimN I'm a Fan of TimN 19 fans permalink

That is correct. It was George H.W. Bush who initiated the 40% troop reduction. It was a prudent act as the main reason for a large military, Soviet aggression, was no longer a factor.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:44 PM on 02/10/2008
- realpolitic I'm a Fan of realpolitic 139 fans permalink

Independentvoter, actually the peace dividend was a very good idea. Once the Soviet Union collapsed who would not want to take some of the billions that went into the military and make an investment in our citizenry. Also, with the demise of the Soviet Union certain weapons systems were immediately obsolete, such as battleships.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:19 PM on 02/12/2008
- wolf58 I'm a Fan of wolf58 31 fans permalink

well five more were killed today thirteen for the month so far and don't forget the forty that died last month the highest since Sept 07. But if you notice that really has not been reported. Yet the powers to be and the power that want to be will tell us the surge is working. We have payed both sides to play nice with each other and us, we have a truce with Al-Sadr which could collapse at any time and the military is walking around him on egg shells so not to upset him. Yea right the surge is working. I say take all these chickenhawk conservative load up on a plane and send them to fight the war they love to cheer for but who are to cowardice to fight.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:48 AM on 02/09/2008
photo



When wars strain the military enough for it to be dismantled then and only then will it be strained enough for me.

America must break its chains to militarism.

Do not support warriors or their wars.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:51 AM on 02/09/2008
- wolf58 I'm a Fan of wolf58 31 fans permalink

Always support the warriors you fool, they are the ones who protect your right to say what you say. Always question the leadership why they send them into war and fight to insure they are not being sent for some bullshit lies or the delusions of a mad man.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:45 AM on 02/09/2008
- helonias I'm a Fan of helonias 218 fans permalink
photo

Not to worry, the entire gene pools of the Bush, Cheney Romney clan will soon enlist and with bibles waving over their head lead us to total victory.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:39 AM on 02/09/2008
- lastams I'm a Fan of lastams 49 fans permalink

So McCain wants to take on the Democrats over Iraq.
So be it.
Perhaps this will give the Democratic contenders something to focus on other than each other’s foibles.
Let’s see who will be the first to come out and state flatly,
No, we are not aiding a young Democracy bravely fighting AlQaeda and Iran.
What we are doing is pumping weapons and money into dozens and dozens of armed groups while trying to broker a cease-fire. This is like pouring gasoline on a fire … pour it on fast enough and you may actually put the fire out … until the next spark sets it off.
So yes, let’s make this about Iraq, and see who is willing to inject a bit of reality into a dialog that has been sorely lacking in truth and intelligence..

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:22 AM on 02/09/2008
- waynesmyer I'm a Fan of waynesmyer 10 fans permalink

"I think that we must bomb them all and let Fuck-Thee Cheney sort them out" Your next beloved War Presinator, John "Ride The Bomb" McCaine

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:36 AM on 02/09/2008

THIS SHOULD BE AT THE TOP OF THE PAGE HUFFPO!!!
No real concern though, they just hire more private contractors. they are killing (literally & figuratively- and any other way they can) our Armed services through attrition.

this has been the plan...Pri­vatization of the military- then who will be responsible for oversight- the budget committee? Probably will do a better job then the Armed Services Com (con) has done.
All Senators on that committee should be thrown out- and Hillary disqualifed for running for Pres- due to her Dereliction of Duty - OVERSIGHT !!!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:24 AM on 02/09/2008
Page: 1 2 3 Next › Last » (3 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect