Army Finds Troop Supply 'Getting Thin'

[Ignoramus31658]

The saddest thing is, 20,000 extra troops will not accomplish much in
Iraq. Most of these troops would be busy with supply, rear guard, etc
etc etc.
================================================== ====================
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Army could have a tough time finding
more combat troops if they are needed in Iraq. Of the service's 10
active-duty divisions, all or parts of nine are either already in
Iraq to serve 12-month tours of duty, or have just returned home in
recent weeks after a year's duty.
If extra troops are needed, soldiers may get less time at
home before going back, one top general says. The Army might also
have to consider sending troops now in South Korea. National Guard
and Reserve combat forces would simply take too long to train.
"It's getting thin," said Pat Towell, a defense expert at
the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments.
It's not yet certain that U.S. commanders in Iraq will ask
for more troops, beyond the 135,000 there now, although it appears
increasingly likely with violence high. But if they do, the Army
would have to resort to extreme measures to answer the call.
It would even be more difficult to keep the force at the
current level beyond June or so, when 20,000 soldiers whose yearlong
Iraq tours were extended by three months are due to go home. The
Army has not said which units it would call upon if it must replace
those 20,000 this summer.
The only Army division not now in Iraq or just returned is
the 3rd Infantry Division. But it is not expecting to get the Iraq
call again until about January 2005, since it already has done one
grueling tour there. Its soldiers spent months training in the
Kuwait desert before spearheading the Iraq invasion in March 2003
and capturing Baghdad, along with the 1st Marine Division, in April.
The 3rd Infantry returned to its bases in Georgia late last summer
and is in the midst of a top-to-bottom reorganization and refit.
Once reconfigured, the 3rd Infantry will have four combat
brigades instead of three, a change that is to serve as a model for
a "modular" Army with a larger number of brigades that can be
deployed more rapidly -- better suited to fight jointly with the Air
Force, Navy and Marine Corps.
Lt. Gen. Richard Cody, the Army deputy chief of staff for
operations, said recently that the 3rd Infantry is scheduled to
finish reorganizing by midsummer and could deploy after that if
necessary.
Cody said that if extra troops are needed, the Army would
have to abandon its goal of allowing soldiers at least one full year
at their home station before going back to Iraq or Afghanistan.
The Army is relying heavily on National Guard and Reserve
combat forces for the Iraq mission. But they require too much
training to deploy extra units as early as this summer.
Looked at another way, the Army has 33 active-duty brigades
within the 10-division structure. Of those 33 brigades, 27 are
either in Iraq or Afghanistan or just returned home. Of the six
others, three are in the 3rd Infantry, and two are on duty in South
Korea.
The only other brigade not otherwise occupied is the 172nd
Infantry Brigade, based at Fort Richardson and Fort Wainwright in
Alaska. It is "waist deep" into a fundamental reorganization,
spokesman Lt. Col. Ben Danner said, and has yet to receive its new
warfighting Stryker vehicles, which travel on wheels rather than
steel tracks and make the Army more agile.
That leaves several other possibilities, none of which the
Army thought it would be facing at this point, nearly a full year
after President Bush declared major combat over last May 1.
Among the options:
said the full division would not be ready in its reconfigured form
until July at the earliest. But one of its brigades has been kept
ready for a short-notice deployment in a crisis.
just completed training in its new configuration with Strykers,
early. A brigade spokesman, Capt. Tim Beninato, said the unit has
received no deployment order but is ready to go. The Army had
planned to dispatch the 1st Brigade next fall, but could accelerate
that.
been tapped extensively for Afghanistan and currently has some
soldiers in Iraq. Another battalion just returned from Iraq after
one year in combat.
stationed in South Korea -- the 2nd Infantry Division -- and send them
to Iraq. That would be a radical step, because the soldiers in South
Korea have long been considered untouchable so long as communist
North Korea poses a threat.
the Japanese island of Okinawa, in Iraq, even though they normally
are considered reinforcements for Korea.
On the Net:
Army: http://www.army.mil



--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
@ @ @ Please forgive my typos as my right hand is injured. @ @ @
char*p="char*p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}"; main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
"It's never too late to have a happy childhood."

[Orion]

Army Finds Troop Supply 'Getting Thin'

Lot's of troops sitting around in Germany...
Orion

"Ignoramus31658" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]

The saddest thing is, 20,000 extra troops will not accomplish much in Iraq. Most of these troops would be busy with supply, rear guard, etc etc etc. ================================================== ==================== WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Army could have a tough time finding more combat troops if they are needed in Iraq. Of the service's 10 active-duty divisions, all or parts of nine are either already in Iraq to serve 12-month tours of duty, or have just returned home in recent weeks after a year's duty. If extra troops are needed, soldiers may get less time at home before going back, one top general says. The Army might also have to consider sending troops now in South Korea. National Guard and Reserve combat forces would simply take too long to train. "It's getting thin," said Pat Towell, a defense expert at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. It's not yet certain that U.S. commanders in Iraq will ask for more troops, beyond the 135,000 there now, although it appears increasingly likely with violence high. But if they do, the Army would have to resort to extreme measures to answer the call. It would even be more difficult to keep the force at the current level beyond June or so, when 20,000 soldiers whose yearlong Iraq tours were extended by three months are due to go home. The Army has not said which units it would call upon if it must replace those 20,000 this summer. The only Army division not now in Iraq or just returned is the 3rd Infantry Division. But it is not expecting to get the Iraq call again until about January 2005, since it already has done one grueling tour there. Its soldiers spent months training in the Kuwait desert before spearheading the Iraq invasion in March 2003 and capturing Baghdad, along with the 1st Marine Division, in April. The 3rd Infantry returned to its bases in Georgia late last summer and is in the midst of a top-to-bottom reorganization and refit. Once reconfigured, the 3rd Infantry will have four combat brigades instead of three, a change that is to serve as a model for a "modular" Army with a larger number of brigades that can be deployed more rapidly -- better suited to fight jointly with the Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps. Lt. Gen. Richard Cody, the Army deputy chief of staff for operations, said recently that the 3rd Infantry is scheduled to finish reorganizing by midsummer and could deploy after that if necessary. Cody said that if extra troops are needed, the Army would have to abandon its goal of allowing soldiers at least one full year at their home station before going back to Iraq or Afghanistan. The Army is relying heavily on National Guard and Reserve combat forces for the Iraq mission. But they require too much training to deploy extra units as early as this summer. Looked at another way, the Army has 33 active-duty brigades within the 10-division structure. Of those 33 brigades, 27 are either in Iraq or Afghanistan or just returned home. Of the six others, three are in the 3rd Infantry, and two are on duty in South Korea. The only other brigade not otherwise occupied is the 172nd Infantry Brigade, based at Fort Richardson and Fort Wainwright in Alaska. It is "waist deep" into a fundamental reorganization, spokesman Lt. Col. Ben Danner said, and has yet to receive its new warfighting Stryker vehicles, which travel on wheels rather than steel tracks and make the Army more agile. That leaves several other possibilities, none of which the Army thought it would be facing at this point, nearly a full year after President Bush declared major combat over last May 1. Among the options: said the full division would not be ready in its reconfigured form until July at the earliest. But one of its brigades has been kept ready for a short-notice deployment in a crisis. just completed training in its new configuration with Strykers, early. A brigade spokesman, Capt. Tim Beninato, said the unit has received no deployment order but is ready to go. The Army had planned to dispatch the 1st Brigade next fall, but could accelerate that. been tapped extensively for Afghanistan and currently has some soldiers in Iraq. Another battalion just returned from Iraq after one year in combat. stationed in South Korea -- the 2nd Infantry Division -- and send them to Iraq. That would be a radical step, because the soldiers in South Korea have long been considered untouchable so long as communist North Korea poses a threat. the Japanese island of Okinawa, in Iraq, even though they normally are considered reinforcements for Korea. On the Net: Army: http://www.army.mil -- --------------------------------------------------------------------------

--

@ @ @ Please forgive my typos as my right hand is injured. @ @ @

char*p="char*p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}"; main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}

"It's never too late to have a happy childhood."

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.672 / Virus Database: 434 - Release Date: 4/28/2004

[Orion]

Army Finds Troop Supply 'Getting Thin'

Lot's of troops sitting around in Germany...
Orion

"Ignoramus31658" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]

The saddest thing is, 20,000 extra troops will not accomplish much in Iraq. Most of these troops would be busy with supply, rear guard, etc etc etc. ================================================== ==================== WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Army could have a tough time finding more combat troops if they are needed in Iraq. Of the service's 10 active-duty divisions, all or parts of nine are either already in Iraq to serve 12-month tours of duty, or have just returned home in recent weeks after a year's duty. If extra troops are needed, soldiers may get less time at home before going back, one top general says. The Army might also have to consider sending troops now in South Korea. National Guard and Reserve combat forces would simply take too long to train. "It's getting thin," said Pat Towell, a defense expert at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. It's not yet certain that U.S. commanders in Iraq will ask for more troops, beyond the 135,000 there now, although it appears increasingly likely with violence high. But if they do, the Army would have to resort to extreme measures to answer the call. It would even be more difficult to keep the force at the current level beyond June or so, when 20,000 soldiers whose yearlong Iraq tours were extended by three months are due to go home. The Army has not said which units it would call upon if it must replace those 20,000 this summer. The only Army division not now in Iraq or just returned is the 3rd Infantry Division. But it is not expecting to get the Iraq call again until about January 2005, since it already has done one grueling tour there. Its soldiers spent months training in the Kuwait desert before spearheading the Iraq invasion in March 2003 and capturing Baghdad, along with the 1st Marine Division, in April. The 3rd Infantry returned to its bases in Georgia late last summer and is in the midst of a top-to-bottom reorganization and refit. Once reconfigured, the 3rd Infantry will have four combat brigades instead of three, a change that is to serve as a model for a "modular" Army with a larger number of brigades that can be deployed more rapidly -- better suited to fight jointly with the Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps. Lt. Gen. Richard Cody, the Army deputy chief of staff for operations, said recently that the 3rd Infantry is scheduled to finish reorganizing by midsummer and could deploy after that if necessary. Cody said that if extra troops are needed, the Army would have to abandon its goal of allowing soldiers at least one full year at their home station before going back to Iraq or Afghanistan. The Army is relying heavily on National Guard and Reserve combat forces for the Iraq mission. But they require too much training to deploy extra units as early as this summer. Looked at another way, the Army has 33 active-duty brigades within the 10-division structure. Of those 33 brigades, 27 are either in Iraq or Afghanistan or just returned home. Of the six others, three are in the 3rd Infantry, and two are on duty in South Korea. The only other brigade not otherwise occupied is the 172nd Infantry Brigade, based at Fort Richardson and Fort Wainwright in Alaska. It is "waist deep" into a fundamental reorganization, spokesman Lt. Col. Ben Danner said, and has yet to receive its new warfighting Stryker vehicles, which travel on wheels rather than steel tracks and make the Army more agile. That leaves several other possibilities, none of which the Army thought it would be facing at this point, nearly a full year after President Bush declared major combat over last May 1. Among the options: said the full division would not be ready in its reconfigured form until July at the earliest. But one of its brigades has been kept ready for a short-notice deployment in a crisis. just completed training in its new configuration with Strykers, early. A brigade spokesman, Capt. Tim Beninato, said the unit has received no deployment order but is ready to go. The Army had planned to dispatch the 1st Brigade next fall, but could accelerate that. been tapped extensively for Afghanistan and currently has some soldiers in Iraq. Another battalion just returned from Iraq after one year in combat. stationed in South Korea -- the 2nd Infantry Division -- and send them to Iraq. That would be a radical step, because the soldiers in South Korea have long been considered untouchable so long as communist North Korea poses a threat. the Japanese island of Okinawa, in Iraq, even though they normally are considered reinforcements for Korea. On the Net: Army: http://www.army.mil -- --------------------------------------------------------------------------

--

@ @ @ Please forgive my typos as my right hand is injured. @ @ @

char*p="char*p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}"; main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}

"It's never too late to have a happy childhood."

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.672 / Virus Database: 434 - Release Date: 4/28/2004

[Bill in Co.]

Army Finds Troop Supply 'Getting Thin'

ANOTHER Igor crosspost????? What in hell does this have to do with divorce
or marriage?????

Answer: Nothing. (ask your son if needbe, Igor). I know it's a difficult
concept to get. But I thought you were more intelligent than this.

Ignoramus31658 wrote:

The saddest thing is, 20,000 extra troops will not accomplish much in Iraq. Most of these troops would be busy with supply, rear guard, etc etc etc. SNIP

[Bill in Co.]

Army Finds Troop Supply 'Getting Thin'

ANOTHER Igor crosspost????? What in hell does this have to do with divorce
or marriage?????

Answer: Nothing. (ask your son if needbe, Igor). I know it's a difficult
concept to get. But I thought you were more intelligent than this.

Ignoramus31658 wrote:

The saddest thing is, 20,000 extra troops will not accomplish much in Iraq. Most of these troops would be busy with supply, rear guard, etc etc etc. SNIP

[Ignoramus8917]

Army Finds Troop Supply 'Getting Thin'

In article <[email protected]>, Winston §mith wrote:

On 28 Apr 2004 19:52:05 GMT, Ignoramus31658<[email protected] > wrote:

The saddest thing is, 20,000 extra troops will not accomplish much inIraq. Most of these troops would be busy with supply, rear guard, etcetc etc.

That's why we are paying Haliburton to hire truck drivers for $100K instead of having soldier transport divisions. Of course that soldier that isn't driving the truck is guarding the $100K civilian guy that is.

Yep...

Plus, civilian population supporting insurgents acts as a force
multiplier.

Occuying army has to guard its rear, bring its food from afar, cook
it, repair expensive vehicles that are used to protect soldiers, bring
fuel to power those vehicles, drive these vehicles etc.

Insurgents get their food from civilians nearby, they do not need
those expensive protection vehicles, they do not to bring fuel from
afar etc.

So, 2,000 guerrillas are 2,000 fighting men. A 2,500 strong Marine
detachment can put forth a lot less than 2,500 people into a battle.

That's why they lost the battle for Falluja and are now retreating
from Falluja. They could not have taken a 300,000 city with a 2,500
detachment of marines, without turning it into rubble, which is
politically unadvisable. It is quite possible that they would not take
it even after they would hypothetically turn falluja into rubble.

================================================== ==================== WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Army could have a tough time findingmore combat troops if they are needed in Iraq. Of the service's 10active-duty divisions, all or parts of nine are either already inIraq to serve 12-month tours of duty, or have just returned home inrecent weeks after a year's duty. If extra troops are needed, soldiers may get less time athome before going back, one top general says. The Army might alsohave to consider sending troops now in South Korea. Followed by trouble there. Add Thailand to the list of countries having Muslim violence in the last week. Maybe time for a little China mainland vs. Taiwan action.

Like I said earlier, US "credibility" is going to be quite damaged by
having its forces tied up in an endless and unwinnable war. That's
contrary to what Bush suggests, that somehow by being stuck in this
mess, we are going to maintain our credibility.

National Guardand Reserve combat forces would simply take too long to train. "It's getting thin," said Pat Towell, a defense expert atthe Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. It's not yet certain that U.S. commanders in Iraq will askfor more troops, beyond the 135,000 there now, although it appearsincreasingly likely with violence high. But if they do, the Armywould have to resort to extreme measures to answer the call. Draft. Why can't they say it simply?

draft is not a great solution either, as has been rehashed here. Not a
great one, but one day it may be unavoidable.

Wolfawitz told us he was going to fight Iraq on the cheap, very cheap he boasted. Now how does he do that? Oh, yeah, no equipment.

hard to find much money for war, with the grand electioneering
promises and 400,000,000,000 budget deficit.

which travel on wheels rather thansteel tracks and make the Army more agile. That leaves several other possibilities, none of which theArmy thought it would be facing at this point, nearly a full yearafter President Bush declared major combat over last May 1. Before we went in, White House insiders were talking weeks, months at the most. That was the plan in Viet Nam too, not that the two wars can be compared I'm told.

When they say that we the sheeple need "political will" to "stay the
course" etc, they should remember that they sold this war to us on
false promises and promised that it will be easy. Hard to stay the
course under the current circumstances.

Among the options:said the full division would not be ready in its reconfigured formuntil July at the earliest. We are rehiring the Bathist party people in Iraq. Maybe Saddam would be willing to run things for a few months until we get a plan together.

ROTFLMAO...

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
@ @ @ Please forgive my typos as my right hand is injured. @ @ @
char*p="char*p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}"; main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
"It's never too late to have a happy childhood."

[Ignoramus8917]

Army Finds Troop Supply 'Getting Thin'

In article <[email protected]>, Winston §mith wrote:

On 28 Apr 2004 19:52:05 GMT, Ignoramus31658<[email protected] > wrote:

The saddest thing is, 20,000 extra troops will not accomplish much inIraq. Most of these troops would be busy with supply, rear guard, etcetc etc.

That's why we are paying Haliburton to hire truck drivers for $100K instead of having soldier transport divisions. Of course that soldier that isn't driving the truck is guarding the $100K civilian guy that is.

Yep...

Plus, civilian population supporting insurgents acts as a force
multiplier.

Occuying army has to guard its rear, bring its food from afar, cook
it, repair expensive vehicles that are used to protect soldiers, bring
fuel to power those vehicles, drive these vehicles etc.

Insurgents get their food from civilians nearby, they do not need
those expensive protection vehicles, they do not to bring fuel from
afar etc.

So, 2,000 guerrillas are 2,000 fighting men. A 2,500 strong Marine
detachment can put forth a lot less than 2,500 people into a battle.

That's why they lost the battle for Falluja and are now retreating
from Falluja. They could not have taken a 300,000 city with a 2,500
detachment of marines, without turning it into rubble, which is
politically unadvisable. It is quite possible that they would not take
it even after they would hypothetically turn falluja into rubble.

================================================== ==================== WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Army could have a tough time findingmore combat troops if they are needed in Iraq. Of the service's 10active-duty divisions, all or parts of nine are either already inIraq to serve 12-month tours of duty, or have just returned home inrecent weeks after a year's duty. If extra troops are needed, soldiers may get less time athome before going back, one top general says. The Army might alsohave to consider sending troops now in South Korea. Followed by trouble there. Add Thailand to the list of countries having Muslim violence in the last week. Maybe time for a little China mainland vs. Taiwan action.

Like I said earlier, US "credibility" is going to be quite damaged by
having its forces tied up in an endless and unwinnable war. That's
contrary to what Bush suggests, that somehow by being stuck in this
mess, we are going to maintain our credibility.

National Guardand Reserve combat forces would simply take too long to train. "It's getting thin," said Pat Towell, a defense expert atthe Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. It's not yet certain that U.S. commanders in Iraq will askfor more troops, beyond the 135,000 there now, although it appearsincreasingly likely with violence high. But if they do, the Armywould have to resort to extreme measures to answer the call. Draft. Why can't they say it simply?

draft is not a great solution either, as has been rehashed here. Not a
great one, but one day it may be unavoidable.

Wolfawitz told us he was going to fight Iraq on the cheap, very cheap he boasted. Now how does he do that? Oh, yeah, no equipment.

hard to find much money for war, with the grand electioneering
promises and 400,000,000,000 budget deficit.

which travel on wheels rather thansteel tracks and make the Army more agile. That leaves several other possibilities, none of which theArmy thought it would be facing at this point, nearly a full yearafter President Bush declared major combat over last May 1. Before we went in, White House insiders were talking weeks, months at the most. That was the plan in Viet Nam too, not that the two wars can be compared I'm told.

When they say that we the sheeple need "political will" to "stay the
course" etc, they should remember that they sold this war to us on
false promises and promised that it will be easy. Hard to stay the
course under the current circumstances.

Among the options:said the full division would not be ready in its reconfigured formuntil July at the earliest. We are rehiring the Bathist party people in Iraq. Maybe Saddam would be willing to run things for a few months until we get a plan together.

ROTFLMAO...

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
@ @ @ Please forgive my typos as my right hand is injured. @ @ @
char*p="char*p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}"; main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
"It's never too late to have a happy childhood."

[Xenos the elder]

Army Finds Troop Supply 'Getting Thin'



Ignoramus31658 wrote:

The saddest thing is, 20,000 extra troops will not accomplish much in Iraq. Most of these troops would be busy with supply, rear guard, etc etc etc. ================================================== ==================== WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Army could have a tough time finding more combat troops if they are needed in Iraq. Of the service's 10 active-duty divisions, all or parts of nine are either already in Iraq to serve 12-month tours of duty, or have just returned home in recent weeks after a year's duty. If extra troops are needed, soldiers may get less time at home before going back, one top general says. The Army might also have to consider sending troops now in South Korea. National Guard and Reserve combat forces would simply take too long to train. "It's getting thin," said Pat Towell, a defense expert at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. It's not yet certain that U.S. commanders in Iraq will ask for more troops, beyond the 135,000 there now, although it appears increasingly likely with violence high. But if they do, the Army would have to resort to extreme measures to answer the call. It would even be more difficult to keep the force at the current level beyond June or so, when 20,000 soldiers whose yearlong Iraq tours were extended by three months are due to go home. The Army has not said which units it would call upon if it must replace those 20,000 this summer. The only Army division not now in Iraq or just returned is the 3rd Infantry Division. But it is not expecting to get the Iraq call again until about January 2005, since it already has done one grueling tour there. Its soldiers spent months training in the Kuwait desert before spearheading the Iraq invasion in March 2003 and capturing Baghdad, along with the 1st Marine Division, in April. The 3rd Infantry returned to its bases in Georgia late last summer and is in the midst of a top-to-bottom reorganization and refit. Once reconfigured, the 3rd Infantry will have four combat brigades instead of three, a change that is to serve as a model for a "modular" Army with a larger number of brigades that can be deployed more rapidly -- better suited to fight jointly with the Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps. Lt. Gen. Richard Cody, the Army deputy chief of staff for operations, said recently that the 3rd Infantry is scheduled to finish reorganizing by midsummer and could deploy after that if necessary. Cody said that if extra troops are needed, the Army would have to abandon its goal of allowing soldiers at least one full year at their home station before going back to Iraq or Afghanistan. The Army is relying heavily on National Guard and Reserve combat forces for the Iraq mission. But they require too much training to deploy extra units as early as this summer. Looked at another way, the Army has 33 active-duty brigades within the 10-division structure. Of those 33 brigades, 27 are either in Iraq or Afghanistan or just returned home. Of the six others, three are in the 3rd Infantry, and two are on duty in South Korea. The only other brigade not otherwise occupied is the 172nd Infantry Brigade, based at Fort Richardson and Fort Wainwright in Alaska. It is "waist deep" into a fundamental reorganization, spokesman Lt. Col. Ben Danner said, and has yet to receive its new warfighting Stryker vehicles, which travel on wheels rather than steel tracks and make the Army more agile. That leaves several other possibilities, none of which the Army thought it would be facing at this point, nearly a full year after President Bush declared major combat over last May 1. Among the options: said the full division would not be ready in its reconfigured form until July at the earliest. But one of its brigades has been kept ready for a short-notice deployment in a crisis. just completed training in its new configuration with Strykers, early. A brigade spokesman, Capt. Tim Beninato, said the unit has received no deployment order but is ready to go. The Army had planned to dispatch the 1st Brigade next fall, but could accelerate that. been tapped extensively for Afghanistan and currently has some soldiers in Iraq. Another battalion just returned from Iraq after one year in combat. stationed in South Korea -- the 2nd Infantry Division -- and send them to Iraq. That would be a radical step, because the soldiers in South Korea have long been considered untouchable so long as communist North Korea poses a threat. the Japanese island of Okinawa, in Iraq, even though they normally are considered reinforcements for Korea. On the Net: Army: http://www.army.mil

More to come:

http://www.interventionmag.com/cms/m...=News&file=art
icle&sid=720 The Bush Administration knows about the health and the
environmental consequences of using depleted uranium but it doesn't
care.

By Mick Youther

When I first heard the term depleted uranium, I thought it must be
uranium after the radioactivity was gone. I was wrong.

Depleted uranium (DU) is the highly toxic and radioactive byproduct
of the uranium enrichment process.... Depleted uranium is roughly
60% as radioactive as naturally occurring uranium, and has a half
life of 4.5 billion years. As a result of 50 years of enriching
uranium for use in nuclear weapons and reactors, the U.S. has in
excess of 1.1 billion pounds of DU waste material.-- Dan Fahey,
Metal of Dishonor (1997)

More ordinance was rained down on Iraq during the six weeks of the
Gulf War than during the whole of the Second World War.

Unknown to the public or the Allied troops at the time, much of it
was coated with depleted uranium (DU)-- Felicity Arbuthnot, New
Internationalist, September 1999

The Pentagon and the United Nations estimate that the U.S. and
Britain used 1,100 to 2,200 tons of armor-piercing shells made of
depleted uranium during attacks on Iraq in March and April [2003]--far
more than the 375 tons used in the 1991 Gulf War.-- Seattle Post
Intelligencer, 8/4/03

Since the U.S. military's widespread use of DU in the Gulf became
known in 1991, the Pentagon has struggled to suppress mounting
evidence that DU munitions are simply too toxic to use. It has
cashiered or attempted to discredit its own experts, ignored their
advice, impeded scientific research into DU's health effects and
assembled a disinformation campaign to confuse the issue.--
Environmental Magazine, May/Jun 2003

When I spoke out within the military about how bad [depleted uranium]
was, my life ended, my career ended. I received threats, warnings,
sent to the reserve from full active duty."-- Dr. Doug Rokke, former
Army Major, who was in charge of the military's environmental
clean-up following the first Gulf War, ABC News, 5/5/03 (Thirty
members of Rokkes cleanup team have already died, and he has 5,000
times the acceptable level of radiation in his body, resulting in
damage to his lungs and kidneys, brain lesions, skin pustules,
chronic fatigue, continual wheezing and painful fibromyalgia.

After the Gulf War, Rokke was assigned to make a training video to
teach soldiers how to handle depleted uranium. It was a never shown
to the troops.)

....General Calvin Waller told NBC's Dateline that
neither he nor General Norman Schwartzkopf were ever told about the
health hazards of DU.-- Military Toxics Project's Depleted Uranium
Citizens' Network, 1/16/96

Military men are dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns for foreign
policy.-- Henry Kissinger, quoted by Bob Woodward in The Final Days
(1976)

Our studies indicate that more than forty percent of the population
around Basra will get cancer. We are living through another Hiroshima--
Dr.

Jawad Al-Ali, an oncologist and member England's Royal Society of
Physicians, quoted by islamonline.net, 5/15/03

The leukemia rate in Sarajevo, pummeled by American bombs in 1996,
has tripled in the last five years. But it's not just the Serbs who
are ill and dying. NATO and UN peacekeepers in the region are also
coming down with cancer.-- Baltimore Chronicle, 12/5/01

Drought-stricken Afghanistan's underground water supply is now
contaminated by these nuclear weapons. Experts with the Uranium
Medical Research Center report that urine samples of Afghanis show
the highest level of uranium ever recorded in a civilian population.--
Amy Worthington, Idaho Observer, April 2003

By now, half of all the 697,000 U.S. soldiers involved in the 1991
war have reported serious illnesses. According to the American Gulf
War Veterans Association, more than 30 percent of these soldiers
are chronically ill and are receiving disability benefits from the
Veterans Administration.-- Sara Flounders and John Catalinotto,
Swans Commentary, 2/2/04

Gulf War Syndrome not only killed, maimed, and made soldiers sick,
they brought it home. In a study of 251 Gulf War veterans' families
in Mississippi, 67 percent of their children were born without eyes,
ears or a brain, had fused fingers, blood infections, respiratory
problems or thyroid and other organ malformations.-- Leuren Moret,
environmental geologist, San Francisco Bay View, 11/7/01

In America, war means money - lots of it - and to the corporations
which profit from war, our soldiers are nothing more than an
expendable item.

The Pentagon and the military corporations clearly consider
contamination of their own soldiers as an acceptable cost.-- S.R.

Shearer, The End Times Network, 5/10/99

How can we do this to our soldiers, their families and the other
victims of war? How can anyone think this is a good idea?

------ Mick Youther is an Instructor in the Department of Physiology
at Southern Illinois University in Carbondale, IL. You can email
your comments to [email protected]

[Xenos the elder]

Army Finds Troop Supply 'Getting Thin'



Ignoramus31658 wrote:

The saddest thing is, 20,000 extra troops will not accomplish much in Iraq. Most of these troops would be busy with supply, rear guard, etc etc etc. ================================================== ==================== WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Army could have a tough time finding more combat troops if they are needed in Iraq. Of the service's 10 active-duty divisions, all or parts of nine are either already in Iraq to serve 12-month tours of duty, or have just returned home in recent weeks after a year's duty. If extra troops are needed, soldiers may get less time at home before going back, one top general says. The Army might also have to consider sending troops now in South Korea. National Guard and Reserve combat forces would simply take too long to train. "It's getting thin," said Pat Towell, a defense expert at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. It's not yet certain that U.S. commanders in Iraq will ask for more troops, beyond the 135,000 there now, although it appears increasingly likely with violence high. But if they do, the Army would have to resort to extreme measures to answer the call. It would even be more difficult to keep the force at the current level beyond June or so, when 20,000 soldiers whose yearlong Iraq tours were extended by three months are due to go home. The Army has not said which units it would call upon if it must replace those 20,000 this summer. The only Army division not now in Iraq or just returned is the 3rd Infantry Division. But it is not expecting to get the Iraq call again until about January 2005, since it already has done one grueling tour there. Its soldiers spent months training in the Kuwait desert before spearheading the Iraq invasion in March 2003 and capturing Baghdad, along with the 1st Marine Division, in April. The 3rd Infantry returned to its bases in Georgia late last summer and is in the midst of a top-to-bottom reorganization and refit. Once reconfigured, the 3rd Infantry will have four combat brigades instead of three, a change that is to serve as a model for a "modular" Army with a larger number of brigades that can be deployed more rapidly -- better suited to fight jointly with the Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps. Lt. Gen. Richard Cody, the Army deputy chief of staff for operations, said recently that the 3rd Infantry is scheduled to finish reorganizing by midsummer and could deploy after that if necessary. Cody said that if extra troops are needed, the Army would have to abandon its goal of allowing soldiers at least one full year at their home station before going back to Iraq or Afghanistan. The Army is relying heavily on National Guard and Reserve combat forces for the Iraq mission. But they require too much training to deploy extra units as early as this summer. Looked at another way, the Army has 33 active-duty brigades within the 10-division structure. Of those 33 brigades, 27 are either in Iraq or Afghanistan or just returned home. Of the six others, three are in the 3rd Infantry, and two are on duty in South Korea. The only other brigade not otherwise occupied is the 172nd Infantry Brigade, based at Fort Richardson and Fort Wainwright in Alaska. It is "waist deep" into a fundamental reorganization, spokesman Lt. Col. Ben Danner said, and has yet to receive its new warfighting Stryker vehicles, which travel on wheels rather than steel tracks and make the Army more agile. That leaves several other possibilities, none of which the Army thought it would be facing at this point, nearly a full year after President Bush declared major combat over last May 1. Among the options: said the full division would not be ready in its reconfigured form until July at the earliest. But one of its brigades has been kept ready for a short-notice deployment in a crisis. just completed training in its new configuration with Strykers, early. A brigade spokesman, Capt. Tim Beninato, said the unit has received no deployment order but is ready to go. The Army had planned to dispatch the 1st Brigade next fall, but could accelerate that. been tapped extensively for Afghanistan and currently has some soldiers in Iraq. Another battalion just returned from Iraq after one year in combat. stationed in South Korea -- the 2nd Infantry Division -- and send them to Iraq. That would be a radical step, because the soldiers in South Korea have long been considered untouchable so long as communist North Korea poses a threat. the Japanese island of Okinawa, in Iraq, even though they normally are considered reinforcements for Korea. On the Net: Army: http://www.army.mil

More to come:

http://www.interventionmag.com/cms/m...=News&file=art
icle&sid=720 The Bush Administration knows about the health and the
environmental consequences of using depleted uranium but it doesn't
care.

By Mick Youther

When I first heard the term depleted uranium, I thought it must be
uranium after the radioactivity was gone. I was wrong.

Depleted uranium (DU) is the highly toxic and radioactive byproduct
of the uranium enrichment process.... Depleted uranium is roughly
60% as radioactive as naturally occurring uranium, and has a half
life of 4.5 billion years. As a result of 50 years of enriching
uranium for use in nuclear weapons and reactors, the U.S. has in
excess of 1.1 billion pounds of DU waste material.-- Dan Fahey,
Metal of Dishonor (1997)

More ordinance was rained down on Iraq during the six weeks of the
Gulf War than during the whole of the Second World War.

Unknown to the public or the Allied troops at the time, much of it
was coated with depleted uranium (DU)-- Felicity Arbuthnot, New
Internationalist, September 1999

The Pentagon and the United Nations estimate that the U.S. and
Britain used 1,100 to 2,200 tons of armor-piercing shells made of
depleted uranium during attacks on Iraq in March and April [2003]--far
more than the 375 tons used in the 1991 Gulf War.-- Seattle Post
Intelligencer, 8/4/03

Since the U.S. military's widespread use of DU in the Gulf became
known in 1991, the Pentagon has struggled to suppress mounting
evidence that DU munitions are simply too toxic to use. It has
cashiered or attempted to discredit its own experts, ignored their
advice, impeded scientific research into DU's health effects and
assembled a disinformation campaign to confuse the issue.--
Environmental Magazine, May/Jun 2003

When I spoke out within the military about how bad [depleted uranium]
was, my life ended, my career ended. I received threats, warnings,
sent to the reserve from full active duty."-- Dr. Doug Rokke, former
Army Major, who was in charge of the military's environmental
clean-up following the first Gulf War, ABC News, 5/5/03 (Thirty
members of Rokkes cleanup team have already died, and he has 5,000
times the acceptable level of radiation in his body, resulting in
damage to his lungs and kidneys, brain lesions, skin pustules,
chronic fatigue, continual wheezing and painful fibromyalgia.

After the Gulf War, Rokke was assigned to make a training video to
teach soldiers how to handle depleted uranium. It was a never shown
to the troops.)

....General Calvin Waller told NBC's Dateline that
neither he nor General Norman Schwartzkopf were ever told about the
health hazards of DU.-- Military Toxics Project's Depleted Uranium
Citizens' Network, 1/16/96

Military men are dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns for foreign
policy.-- Henry Kissinger, quoted by Bob Woodward in The Final Days
(1976)

Our studies indicate that more than forty percent of the population
around Basra will get cancer. We are living through another Hiroshima--
Dr.

Jawad Al-Ali, an oncologist and member England's Royal Society of
Physicians, quoted by islamonline.net, 5/15/03

The leukemia rate in Sarajevo, pummeled by American bombs in 1996,
has tripled in the last five years. But it's not just the Serbs who
are ill and dying. NATO and UN peacekeepers in the region are also
coming down with cancer.-- Baltimore Chronicle, 12/5/01

Drought-stricken Afghanistan's underground water supply is now
contaminated by these nuclear weapons. Experts with the Uranium
Medical Research Center report that urine samples of Afghanis show
the highest level of uranium ever recorded in a civilian population.--
Amy Worthington, Idaho Observer, April 2003

By now, half of all the 697,000 U.S. soldiers involved in the 1991
war have reported serious illnesses. According to the American Gulf
War Veterans Association, more than 30 percent of these soldiers
are chronically ill and are receiving disability benefits from the
Veterans Administration.-- Sara Flounders and John Catalinotto,
Swans Commentary, 2/2/04

Gulf War Syndrome not only killed, maimed, and made soldiers sick,
they brought it home. In a study of 251 Gulf War veterans' families
in Mississippi, 67 percent of their children were born without eyes,
ears or a brain, had fused fingers, blood infections, respiratory
problems or thyroid and other organ malformations.-- Leuren Moret,
environmental geologist, San Francisco Bay View, 11/7/01

In America, war means money - lots of it - and to the corporations
which profit from war, our soldiers are nothing more than an
expendable item.

The Pentagon and the military corporations clearly consider
contamination of their own soldiers as an acceptable cost.-- S.R.

Shearer, The End Times Network, 5/10/99

How can we do this to our soldiers, their families and the other
victims of war? How can anyone think this is a good idea?

------ Mick Youther is an Instructor in the Department of Physiology
at Southern Illinois University in Carbondale, IL. You can email
your comments to [email protected]

[Amy D]

Army Finds Troop Supply 'Getting Thin'



Ignoramus8917 wrote:

In article <[email protected]>, Winston §mith wrote:

On 28 Apr 2004 19:52:05 GMT, Ignoramus31658<[email protected] > wrote:

The saddest thing is, 20,000 extra troops will not accomplish much inIraq. Most of these troops would be busy with supply, rear guard, etcetc etc.

That's why we are paying Haliburton to hire truck drivers for $100Kinstead of having soldier transport divisions. Of course that soldierthat isn't driving the truck is guarding the $100K civilian guy thatis.

Yep... Plus, civilian population supporting insurgents acts as a force multiplier. Occuying army has to guard its rear, bring its food from afar, cook it, repair expensive vehicles that are used to protect soldiers, bring fuel to power those vehicles, drive these vehicles etc. Insurgents get their food from civilians nearby, they do not need those expensive protection vehicles, they do not to bring fuel from afar etc. So, 2,000 guerrillas are 2,000 fighting men. A 2,500 strong Marine detachment can put forth a lot less than 2,500 people into a battle. That's why they lost the battle for Falluja and are now retreating from Falluja. They could not have taken a 300,000 city with a 2,500 detachment of marines, without turning it into rubble, which is politically unadvisable. It is quite possible that they would not take it even after they would hypothetically turn falluja into rubble.

================================================== ==================== WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Army could have a tough time findingmore combat troops if they are needed in Iraq. Of the service's 10active-duty divisions, all or parts of nine are either already inIraq to serve 12-month tours of duty, or have just returned home inrecent weeks after a year's duty. If extra troops are needed, soldiers may get less time athome before going back, one top general says. The Army might alsohave to consider sending troops now in South Korea.Followed by trouble there. Add Thailand to the list of countrieshaving Muslim violence in the last week. Maybe time for a littleChina mainland vs. Taiwan action.

Like I said earlier, US "credibility" is going to be quite damaged by having its forces tied up in an endless and unwinnable war. That's contrary to what Bush suggests, that somehow by being stuck in this mess, we are going to maintain our credibility.

National Guardand Reserve combat forces would simply take too long to train. "It's getting thin," said Pat Towell, a defense expert atthe Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. It's not yet certain that U.S. commanders in Iraq will askfor more troops, beyond the 135,000 there now, although it appearsincreasingly likely with violence high. But if they do, the Armywould have to resort to extreme measures to answer the call.Draft. Why can't they say it simply?

draft is not a great solution either, as has been rehashed here. Not a great one, but one day it may be unavoidable.

Wolfawitz told us he was going to fight Iraq on the cheap, very cheaphe boasted. Now how does he do that? Oh, yeah, no equipment.

hard to find much money for war, with the grand electioneering promises and 400,000,000,000 budget deficit.

which travel on wheels rather thansteel tracks and make the Army more agile. That leaves several other possibilities, none of which theArmy thought it would be facing at this point, nearly a full yearafter President Bush declared major combat over last May 1.Before we went in, White House insiders were talking weeks, months atthe most. That was the plan in Viet Nam too, not that the two warscan be compared I'm told.

When they say that we the sheeple need "political will" to "stay the course" etc, they should remember that they sold this war to us on false promises and promised that it will be easy. Hard to stay the course under the current circumstances.

Among the options:said the full division would not be ready in its reconfigured formuntil July at the earliest.We are rehiring the Bathist party people in Iraq. Maybe Saddam wouldbe willing to run things for a few months until we get a plantogether.

ROTFLMAO... ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- @ @ @ Please forgive my typos as my right hand is injured. @ @ @ char*p="char*p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}"; main(){printf(p,34,p,34);} "It's never too late to have a happy childhood."

Halliburton is in Bush's back pocket. Maybe you don't know any of
Halliburton's employees being captured and tortured. Or maybe they are
just dumb truckdrivers to you. But while the two I know were captured
-- one from Mississippi and one from my town of Mobile, AL Halliburton
was bickering with the government about WHO pays to try to rescue these
guys. Hamill, from Mississippi just escaped. No news yet on our local
driver. They all have families, kids.

They are luring our truckdrivers over there with promises of $100,000+
tax-free which is alot of money for a truckdriver. Hamill sold his
dairy farm to go over there.

Now I'm not a radical consiracy theorist but think about it -- the
government is starving out our truckdrivers with fuel up to $2.50 a
gallon in California. All of California is protesting. GOOD FOR THEM!!
But think of it on a political level.....we are occupying an oil-rich
company. What is wrong with this picture?? Halliburton is offering
them $100,000 tax free. During our worst years California didn't go
much over $2.00 for fuel. Since they are shutting down this week the
East Coast can pretty much not count on their strawberries. I don't
necessarily believe all this but I can **** sure tell you SOMETHING IS
WRONG. But I CAN tell you for fact that California is shutting down big
time and I can email you pictures of rallies, strikes, protests,
articles, if you would like.

For those totally "shipping stupid" a truck gets on average 6 mpg.


amy

[Amy D]

Army Finds Troop Supply 'Getting Thin'



Ignoramus8917 wrote:

In article <[email protected]>, Winston §mith wrote:

On 28 Apr 2004 19:52:05 GMT, Ignoramus31658<[email protected] > wrote:

The saddest thing is, 20,000 extra troops will not accomplish much inIraq. Most of these troops would be busy with supply, rear guard, etcetc etc.

That's why we are paying Haliburton to hire truck drivers for $100Kinstead of having soldier transport divisions. Of course that soldierthat isn't driving the truck is guarding the $100K civilian guy thatis.

Yep... Plus, civilian population supporting insurgents acts as a force multiplier. Occuying army has to guard its rear, bring its food from afar, cook it, repair expensive vehicles that are used to protect soldiers, bring fuel to power those vehicles, drive these vehicles etc. Insurgents get their food from civilians nearby, they do not need those expensive protection vehicles, they do not to bring fuel from afar etc. So, 2,000 guerrillas are 2,000 fighting men. A 2,500 strong Marine detachment can put forth a lot less than 2,500 people into a battle. That's why they lost the battle for Falluja and are now retreating from Falluja. They could not have taken a 300,000 city with a 2,500 detachment of marines, without turning it into rubble, which is politically unadvisable. It is quite possible that they would not take it even after they would hypothetically turn falluja into rubble.

================================================== ==================== WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Army could have a tough time findingmore combat troops if they are needed in Iraq. Of the service's 10active-duty divisions, all or parts of nine are either already inIraq to serve 12-month tours of duty, or have just returned home inrecent weeks after a year's duty. If extra troops are needed, soldiers may get less time athome before going back, one top general says. The Army might alsohave to consider sending troops now in South Korea.Followed by trouble there. Add Thailand to the list of countrieshaving Muslim violence in the last week. Maybe time for a littleChina mainland vs. Taiwan action.

Like I said earlier, US "credibility" is going to be quite damaged by having its forces tied up in an endless and unwinnable war. That's contrary to what Bush suggests, that somehow by being stuck in this mess, we are going to maintain our credibility.

National Guardand Reserve combat forces would simply take too long to train. "It's getting thin," said Pat Towell, a defense expert atthe Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. It's not yet certain that U.S. commanders in Iraq will askfor more troops, beyond the 135,000 there now, although it appearsincreasingly likely with violence high. But if they do, the Armywould have to resort to extreme measures to answer the call.Draft. Why can't they say it simply?

draft is not a great solution either, as has been rehashed here. Not a great one, but one day it may be unavoidable.

Wolfawitz told us he was going to fight Iraq on the cheap, very cheaphe boasted. Now how does he do that? Oh, yeah, no equipment.

hard to find much money for war, with the grand electioneering promises and 400,000,000,000 budget deficit.

which travel on wheels rather thansteel tracks and make the Army more agile. That leaves several other possibilities, none of which theArmy thought it would be facing at this point, nearly a full yearafter President Bush declared major combat over last May 1.Before we went in, White House insiders were talking weeks, months atthe most. That was the plan in Viet Nam too, not that the two warscan be compared I'm told.

When they say that we the sheeple need "political will" to "stay the course" etc, they should remember that they sold this war to us on false promises and promised that it will be easy. Hard to stay the course under the current circumstances.

Among the options:said the full division would not be ready in its reconfigured formuntil July at the earliest.We are rehiring the Bathist party people in Iraq. Maybe Saddam wouldbe willing to run things for a few months until we get a plantogether.

ROTFLMAO... ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- @ @ @ Please forgive my typos as my right hand is injured. @ @ @ char*p="char*p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}"; main(){printf(p,34,p,34);} "It's never too late to have a happy childhood."

Halliburton is in Bush's back pocket. Maybe you don't know any of
Halliburton's employees being captured and tortured. Or maybe they are
just dumb truckdrivers to you. But while the two I know were captured
-- one from Mississippi and one from my town of Mobile, AL Halliburton
was bickering with the government about WHO pays to try to rescue these
guys. Hamill, from Mississippi just escaped. No news yet on our local
driver. They all have families, kids.

They are luring our truckdrivers over there with promises of $100,000+
tax-free which is alot of money for a truckdriver. Hamill sold his
dairy farm to go over there.

Now I'm not a radical consiracy theorist but think about it -- the
government is starving out our truckdrivers with fuel up to $2.50 a
gallon in California. All of California is protesting. GOOD FOR THEM!!
But think of it on a political level.....we are occupying an oil-rich
company. What is wrong with this picture?? Halliburton is offering
them $100,000 tax free. During our worst years California didn't go
much over $2.00 for fuel. Since they are shutting down this week the
East Coast can pretty much not count on their strawberries. I don't
necessarily believe all this but I can **** sure tell you SOMETHING IS
WRONG. But I CAN tell you for fact that California is shutting down big
time and I can email you pictures of rallies, strikes, protests,
articles, if you would like.

For those totally "shipping stupid" a truck gets on average 6 mpg.


amy

[JWB]

Army Finds Troop Supply 'Getting Thin'

"Amy D" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]

Halliburton is in Bush's back pocket. Maybe you don't know any of Halliburton's employees being captured and tortured. Or maybe they are just dumb truckdrivers to you. But while the two I know were captured -- one from Mississippi and one from my town of Mobile, AL Halliburton was bickering with the government about WHO pays to try to rescue these guys. Hamill, from Mississippi just escaped. No news yet on our local driver. They all have families, kids. They are luring our truckdrivers over there with promises of $100,000+ tax-free which is alot of money for a truckdriver. Hamill sold his dairy farm to go over there.

He's nuts, then. 100k isn't enough money. You couldn't pay me one million to
go over there. I value my life and my loved ones too much.

apparantly, he (and the others who go over there for the $) feel differently
about family and money than I do. Some people are easy to "lure", I guess.

Now I'm not a radical consiracy theorist but think about it -- the government is starving out our truckdrivers with fuel up to $2.50 a gallon in California. All of California is protesting. GOOD FOR THEM!! But think of it on a political level.....we are occupying an oil-rich company. What is wrong with this picture?? Halliburton is offering them $100,000 tax free. During our worst years California didn't go much over $2.00 for fuel. Since they are shutting down this week the East Coast can pretty much not count on their strawberries. I don't necessarily believe all this but I can **** sure tell you SOMETHING IS WRONG. But I CAN tell you for fact that California is shutting down big time and I can email you pictures of rallies, strikes, protests, articles, if you would like. For those totally "shipping stupid" a truck gets on average 6 mpg.

How much was fuel in 1960? In 1980? How much is it today? Take inflation
into account.

I'm sorry - Fuel is cheap. I paid a buck fifty a gallon 22 years ago when I
started driving.

You know my attitude about this - if the job isn't paying enough, it's time
to find another career. Protesting to the govt isn't going to do squat. The
truckers will cave like they always do.

[JWB]

Army Finds Troop Supply 'Getting Thin'

"Amy D" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]

Halliburton is in Bush's back pocket. Maybe you don't know any of Halliburton's employees being captured and tortured. Or maybe they are just dumb truckdrivers to you. But while the two I know were captured -- one from Mississippi and one from my town of Mobile, AL Halliburton was bickering with the government about WHO pays to try to rescue these guys. Hamill, from Mississippi just escaped. No news yet on our local driver. They all have families, kids. They are luring our truckdrivers over there with promises of $100,000+ tax-free which is alot of money for a truckdriver. Hamill sold his dairy farm to go over there.

He's nuts, then. 100k isn't enough money. You couldn't pay me one million to
go over there. I value my life and my loved ones too much.

apparantly, he (and the others who go over there for the $) feel differently
about family and money than I do. Some people are easy to "lure", I guess.

Now I'm not a radical consiracy theorist but think about it -- the government is starving out our truckdrivers with fuel up to $2.50 a gallon in California. All of California is protesting. GOOD FOR THEM!! But think of it on a political level.....we are occupying an oil-rich company. What is wrong with this picture?? Halliburton is offering them $100,000 tax free. During our worst years California didn't go much over $2.00 for fuel. Since they are shutting down this week the East Coast can pretty much not count on their strawberries. I don't necessarily believe all this but I can **** sure tell you SOMETHING IS WRONG. But I CAN tell you for fact that California is shutting down big time and I can email you pictures of rallies, strikes, protests, articles, if you would like. For those totally "shipping stupid" a truck gets on average 6 mpg.

How much was fuel in 1960? In 1980? How much is it today? Take inflation
into account.

I'm sorry - Fuel is cheap. I paid a buck fifty a gallon 22 years ago when I
started driving.

You know my attitude about this - if the job isn't paying enough, it's time
to find another career. Protesting to the govt isn't going to do squat. The
truckers will cave like they always do.

[Amy D]

Army Finds Troop Supply 'Getting Thin'



JWB wrote:

"Amy D" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]

Halliburton is in Bush's back pocket. Maybe you don't know any ofHalliburton's employees being captured and tortured. Or maybe they arejust dumb truckdrivers to you. But while the two I know were captured-- one from Mississippi and one from my town of Mobile, AL Halliburtonwas bickering with the government about WHO pays to try to rescue theseguys. Hamill, from Mississippi just escaped. No news yet on our localdriver. They all have families, kids.They are luring our truckdrivers over there with promises of $100,000+tax-free which is alot of money for a truckdriver. Hamill sold hisdairy farm to go over there.

He's nuts, then. 100k isn't enough money. You couldn't pay me one million to go over there. I value my life and my loved ones too much. apparantly, he (and the others who go over there for the $) feel differently about family and money than I do. Some people are easy to "lure", I guess.

Now I'm not a radical consiracy theorist but think about it -- thegovernment is starving out our truckdrivers with fuel up to $2.50 agallon in California. All of California is protesting. GOOD FOR THEM!! But think of it on a political level.....we are occupying an oil-richcompany. What is wrong with this picture?? Halliburton is offeringthem $100,000 tax free. During our worst years California didn't gomuch over $2.00 for fuel. Since they are shutting down this week theEast Coast can pretty much not count on their strawberries. I don'tnecessarily believe all this but I can **** sure tell you SOMETHING ISWRONG. But I CAN tell you for fact that California is shutting down bigtime and I can email you pictures of rallies, strikes, protests,articles, if you would like.For those totally "shipping stupid" a truck gets on average 6 mpg.

How much was fuel in 1960? In 1980? How much is it today? Take inflation into account. I'm sorry - Fuel is cheap. I paid a buck fifty a gallon 22 years ago when I started driving. You know my attitude about this - if the job isn't paying enough, it's time to find another career. Protesting to the govt isn't going to do squat. The truckers will cave like they always do.

I agree with you on $100000 ain't enough. I'm made my thought loud and
clear at home.

But $2.50 is ridiculous for diesel and California IS protesting -- good
for them! They aren't protesting to the government. THey are locking
down freeways of commuters.

Okay, you paid 1.50. You ARE a young'un. What were your mpg? I've
already told you freight rates haven't risen much since the 70's and
fuel has about quadrupled right now.

Luckily, we don't run California BUT almost wish we were so we could
protest and rally, too.


amy

[Amy D]

Army Finds Troop Supply 'Getting Thin'



JWB wrote:

"Amy D" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]

Halliburton is in Bush's back pocket. Maybe you don't know any ofHalliburton's employees being captured and tortured. Or maybe they arejust dumb truckdrivers to you. But while the two I know were captured-- one from Mississippi and one from my town of Mobile, AL Halliburtonwas bickering with the government about WHO pays to try to rescue theseguys. Hamill, from Mississippi just escaped. No news yet on our localdriver. They all have families, kids.They are luring our truckdrivers over there with promises of $100,000+tax-free which is alot of money for a truckdriver. Hamill sold hisdairy farm to go over there.

He's nuts, then. 100k isn't enough money. You couldn't pay me one million to go over there. I value my life and my loved ones too much. apparantly, he (and the others who go over there for the $) feel differently about family and money than I do. Some people are easy to "lure", I guess.

Now I'm not a radical consiracy theorist but think about it -- thegovernment is starving out our truckdrivers with fuel up to $2.50 agallon in California. All of California is protesting. GOOD FOR THEM!! But think of it on a political level.....we are occupying an oil-richcompany. What is wrong with this picture?? Halliburton is offeringthem $100,000 tax free. During our worst years California didn't gomuch over $2.00 for fuel. Since they are shutting down this week theEast Coast can pretty much not count on their strawberries. I don'tnecessarily believe all this but I can **** sure tell you SOMETHING ISWRONG. But I CAN tell you for fact that California is shutting down bigtime and I can email you pictures of rallies, strikes, protests,articles, if you would like.For those totally "shipping stupid" a truck gets on average 6 mpg.

How much was fuel in 1960? In 1980? How much is it today? Take inflation into account. I'm sorry - Fuel is cheap. I paid a buck fifty a gallon 22 years ago when I started driving. You know my attitude about this - if the job isn't paying enough, it's time to find another career. Protesting to the govt isn't going to do squat. The truckers will cave like they always do.

I agree with you on $100000 ain't enough. I'm made my thought loud and
clear at home.

But $2.50 is ridiculous for diesel and California IS protesting -- good
for them! They aren't protesting to the government. THey are locking
down freeways of commuters.

Okay, you paid 1.50. You ARE a young'un. What were your mpg? I've
already told you freight rates haven't risen much since the 70's and
fuel has about quadrupled right now.

Luckily, we don't run California BUT almost wish we were so we could
protest and rally, too.


amy