Article

2004-12-10 Iraq-Jordan

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by ed 2004-12-10 8:15:52 AM|| || Front Page|| [3 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 There are combat, combat support and combat service support elements in the Army. The transportation, maintenance, and medical personnel make up a part of the CSS element. The CSS has never been given the field and combat training the combat and CS elements receive back in garrison. The division and brigade commanders are rated on how well their maneuver units, largely composed of the combat elements, perform. The CSS elements spend most of their time supporting that training. The unit and personnel inventory are designed such that there are no extra units to pick up the support responsibilities for the combat elements if their organic or dedicated CSS units are deployed for focused training. As divisions are given fixed amounts of training resources [dollars, range and field time, etc], they have been traditionally distributed to the combat/maneuver elements. The CSS and to a lesser extent the CS elements are the ones who do not receive significant combat environment training. Basic training is not enough, the training has to be continuously reinforced for all elements, not just for the combat elements. This is the pathology of the beast. To properly address it will require a significant expansion of the forces, not just 24K Congress just approved. The service also has to ignor the critics who alway harp about the tooth to tail ratio of our force. No other Army operates a half a world away with as much of its forces as the US does, requiring a much higher level of CSS than most other armies. Back in GW1, the regular Army was 750K. Both parties cut that down to under 500K in the following years. The most expensive item in the military inventory is the cost of personnel, so don't expect anyone with serious influence to start pumping 100K or more back into the force structure.

Posted by Don 2004-12-10 10:04:16 AM|| 2004-12-10 10:04:16 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 really, my only gripe with the embedded reporter's "trick" yesterday was the "gotcha" aspect and the obvious delight he showed in his email of putting one over on Rumsfeld

Posted by Frank G 2004-12-10 10:17:21 AM|| 2004-12-10 10:17:21 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 Ditto, Frank G in #2. In principle a valid question. In execution, a typical bit of ambush journalism.

Posted by eLarson 2004-12-10 10:43:36 AM|| [http://larsonian.blogspot.com] 2004-12-10 10:43:36 AM|| Front Page Top

#4 The DemLeft didn't want the USA under Dubya to obey the UNO Resolutions [oobey the UNO]and go to war because it would bust their sacred sancrosant "Clinton balance budget/surplus", the one that Bill himself now disavows any responsibility for. As was indic on the "MY WORD" show vv FOXNEWS, nothing will keep the ordinary combat soldier from upping his equipment no matter how protected or armored it is. DEATH STAR(S) to the M113, nuthing is ever enuff, nor will be enuff.

Posted by JosephMendiola 2004-12-10 9:01:02 PM|| [http://n/a] 2004-12-10 9:01:02 PM|| Front Page Top

04:07 on1117
03:52 on1117
00:15 Darth VAda
00:10 tipper
23:31 Darth VAda
23:14 VRWconspiracy
23:13 .com
23:09 WingedAvenger
23:09 WingedAvenger
23:06 WingedAvenger
23:05 Desert Blondie
23:03 WingedAvenger
23:03 OldSpook
22:58 Barbara Skolaut
22:55 Pappy
22:53 Desert Blondie
22:49 Don
22:43 ST
22:41 Frank G
22:37 someone
22:35 .com
22:35 Frank G
22:30 Frank G
22:25 Sock Puppet of Doom