Situation worse than expected

General Casey, the ground commander in Iraq, told the senate yesterday that there are about 100,000 civilian contractors in Iraq helping run the war. This was a quantity that he admitted to when asked. He did say only about 20,000 of those were really into the war and the rest were doing "logistics."
Many of these civilians are former military people who can make 5-10 times as much money there as civilians. Makes our soldiers feel real good.
I'm not going to argue here whether or not real soldiers ought to take care of themselves--I don't know enough about our "new" army to do that.
What I do want to say though is that now we have approximately a quarter million soldiers and civilians to REMOVE at some point. That assumes that we ever intended to do so.
I suppose the equipment they use would be given to Iraq, don't know about spare parts and mechanics, since we would never get it all home in less than 2-3 years. Much of it is worn-out now anyway.
What will our army do for equipment after this war? We haven't been giving them all they need up to this point,
while there.
Also, I am fully disgusted with those stupid critics who keep telling people like me to "back our soldiers," what the hell do you think I have in mind now?

dollaradayandfound's blog | login to post comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Submitted by dollaradayandfound on Mon, 02/05/2007 - 6:26pm.

What WWll numbers do you want?
I take your answer to mean you support anything they want to tell us in order to continue a mistake? You would still fit in at the Pentagon!

Submitted by dollaradayandfound on Mon, 02/05/2007 - 4:39pm.

In round numbers we have been told for sometime that about 21,000 soldiers had been wounded in the current war.
Newsweek magazine this week says now that over 50,000 have been wounded, the difference being "non-combat" wounded.
I suppose it also doesn't count any of the "contractors."
No one is counting Iraqi wounded, I don't think. Must be hundreds of thousands.
The numbers bother me greatly, but the deception by the Pentagon, on orders, I'm sure, is serious.
If we can't be honest about wounded and dead, even when it is considered necessary for the war effort, then just how are we training or threatening our "military reporters" these days to obtain false numbers? It is still not too late to corrct this blunder.

ArmyMAJretired's picture
Submitted by ArmyMAJretired on Mon, 02/05/2007 - 4:44pm.

Agenda driven media wants picture of coffins to back their spin. Show me any reports from WWII or Korea that told the enemy how effective they are?

OPSEC, look it up. By the way, where does Al Queda post theuir casualty figures, I'm very interested.

Submitted by dollaradayandfound on Tue, 02/06/2007 - 9:03am.

I've decided to call myself " ArmyGeneralsemi-retired" since I can't now believe for a minute that you represent our military!
I remember the old Apache attack movies where the army set up dead soldiers with guns in their hands to fool the poor dumb Indians. It always worked just long enough for the Cavalry (who was on patrol, I suppose) to return and save the fort.
If war planners are stupid enough to base their plans on enemy killed instead of plans and logistics, then they deserve to lose. Number of dead makes no difference to idiots as was shown in Japan in WWll. Had it not been for the Emperor, the Generals would still be fighting the war, even after two atomic bombs! My friend, it is to hide misdeeds, not to keep anything away from the enemy.

Basmati's picture
Submitted by Basmati on Fri, 02/02/2007 - 8:40pm.

Well said, Dollaraday! I couldn't agree with you more. Richard Hobbs will be along shortly to impugn your patriotism for failing to parrot the Bush party line.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.