Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 29

Thread: Report: Military not ready for U.S. attack

  1. #1

    Default Report: Military not ready for U.S. attack

    http://www.usatoday.com/news/militar...s_N.htm?csp=34

    Even fewer Army National Guard units are combat-ready today than were nearly a year ago when the Commission on the National Guard and Reserves determined that 88% of the units were not prepared for the fight, the panel says in a new report released Thursday.

    The independent commission is charged by Congress to recommend changes in law and policy concerning the Guard and Reserves.

    The commission's 400-page report concludes that the nation "does not have sufficient trained, ready forces available" to respond to a chemical, biological or nuclear weapons incident, "an appalling gap that places the nation and its citizens at greater risk."

    "Right now we don't have the forces we need, we don't have them trained, we don't have the equipment," commission Chairman Arnold Punaro said in an interview with the Associated Press. "Even though there is a lot going on in this area, we need to do a lot more. ... There's a lot of things in the pipeline, but in the world we live in — you're either ready or you're not."

    In response, Air Force Gen. Gene Renuart, chief of U.S. Northern command, said the Pentagon is putting together a specialized military team that would be designed to respond to such catastrophic events.

    "The capability for the Defense Department to respond to a chemical, biological event exists now," Renuart told the AP. "It, today, is not as robust as we would like because of the demand on the forces that we've placed across the country. ... I can do it today. It would be harder on the (military) services, but I could respond."

    Over the next year, Renuart said, specific active duty, Guard and Reserve units will be trained, equipped and assigned to a three-tiered response force totaling about 4,000 troops. There would be a few hundred first responders, who would be followed by a second wave of about 1,200 troops that would include medical and logistics forces.

    The third wave, with the remainder of that initial 4,000 troops, would include aircraft units, engineers, and other support forces, depending on the type of incident.

    Punaro, a retired Marine Corps major general, had sharp criticism for Northern Command, saying that commanders there have made little progress developing detailed response plans for attacks against the homeland.

    "NorthCom has got to get religion in this area," said Punaro. He said the military needs to avoid "pickup game" type responses, such as the much-criticized federal reaction to Hurricane Katrina, and put in place the kind of detailed plans that exist for virtually any international crisis.

    He also underscored the commission's main finding: the Pentagon must move toward making the National Guard and Reserves an integral part of the U.S. military.

    The panel, in its No. 1 recommendation, said the Defense Department must use the nation's citizen soldiers to create an operational force that would be fully trained, equipped and ready to defend the nation, respond to crises and supplement the active duty troops in combat.

    Pointing to the continued strain on the military, as it fights wars on two fronts, the panel said the U.S. has "no reasonable alternative" other than to continue to rely heavily on the reserves to supplement the active duty forces both at home and abroad.

    Using reserves as a permanent, ready force, the commission argued, is a much more cost effective way to supplement the military since they are about 70% cheaper than active duty troops.

    Asked how much it would cost to implement the panel's recommendations, Punaro said it will take billions to fully equip the Guard. The commission is going to ask the Congressional Budget Office to do a cost analysis, he said.

    In perhaps its most controversial recommendation, the panel again said that the nation's governors should be given the authority to direct active-duty troops responding to an emergency in their states. That recommendation, when it first surfaced last year, was rebuffed by the military and quickly rejected by Defense Secretary Robert Gates.

    "I believe we're going to wear him down," said Punaro.

    Renuart, however, said he believes it is unlikely that Gates will reverse himself. Renuart said he's talked to a number of state leaders on the matter, and most don't want full command of active duty troops — to include their care, feeding, discipline and logistics demands. Instead, he said, governors want to know that in a crisis, their needs will be met.
    Oh, that's right...we're fighting them "over there".



  • #2

    Default

    Exactly. And how people can say they support TWO overseas wars when we cant even defend our own home, I cant fathom!!!!
    PMs are a Ninjas best friend.

  • #3

    Default

    Yep, and while the military is spread all over the world. There are hardly any troops right here in America to defend us from an attack. All offense and no defense spells trouble. we're leaving our king wide open for checkmate

  • #4

    Default

    This should be mailed to the RON PAUL CAMPAIGN!
    KEEP THE REVOLUTION ALIVE! RUN FOR OFFICE!

  • #5

    Default

    hello draft

  • #6

    Default

    does this mean if canada or mexico attact us right now, they'll be marching to washington DC in no time?
    Bringing in Supporters One at a time!
    Become a Precinct Captain! http://voters.ronpaul2008.com/

  • #7

  • #8

    Default

    I'm a bit skeptical. This is referring to "Combat ready" troops. Well..that's quite different than being a first responder to a terror incident in the continental US. Being combat ready and entering a war zone where there are multiple hostilities has little bearing to being prepared for an NBC attack. That's why the National Guard trains in two areas...Federal mission and Domestic. I'm in a National Guard unit that deals with NBC threats primarily.
    Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect - Mark Twain

    Why Government Doesn't Work

    The American Ideal of 1776: The Twelve Basic American Principles

  • #9

    Default

    Yep. Folks whine and cry when someone suggests we bring the troops home, but those same cowards aren't bright enough to understand that we've just about broken our military.
    In this world nothing is certain but death and taxes.

  • #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Todd Morris View Post
    I'm a bit skeptical. This is referring to "Combat ready" troops. Well..that's quite different than being a first responder to a terror incident in the continental US. Being combat ready and entering a war zone where there are multiple hostilities has little bearing to being prepared for an NBC attack. That's why the National Guard trains in two areas...Federal mission and Domestic. I'm in a National Guard unit that deals with NBC threats primarily.
    The article deals specifically with NBC attacks.

    The commission's 400-page report concludes that the nation "does not have sufficient trained, ready forces available" to respond to a chemical, biological or nuclear weapons incident, "an appalling gap that places the nation and its citizens at greater risk."
    They are not talking about a war on American soil as much as being able to respond to a nuclear, biological or chemical attack inside our borders.

  • Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •