Another principled conservative tells it like it is

[cardcounter0]

If you cannot see the reality behind the fact that having tens of thousands of National Guard sent to another hemisphere would impact the response of that same resource domestically, then there is no hope.

Buy back in Fish.

Really need a link to the second? Cut and paste and google. Let me know when you learn how. Either that or just follow the links from the OP that you have already been given.

[Roybert]

[ QUOTE ]
I was in the regular army and the reserves.
Forces deployed in Iraq should have ZERO impact on how fast domestic forces can be deployed.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was, too. The fact that we were gives neither of us any explicit knowledge of the credibility of your second statement. You know this.

[Felix_Nietsche]

My specialty is logistics and yours is ________?

[Felix_Nietsche]

If you cannot see the reality behind the fact that having tens of thousands of National Guard sent to another hemisphere would impact the response of that same resource domestically, then there is no hope.
************************************************** ****
Please explain genius.....I could use a good laugh. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
Feel free to share your military experience as well.

[ QUOTE ]
If you cannot see the reality behind the fact that having tens of thousands of National Guard sent to another hemisphere would impact the response of that same resource domestically, then there is no hope.

Buy back in Fish.

Really need a link to the second? Cut and paste and google. Let me know when you learn how. Either that or just follow the links from the OP that you have already been given.

[/ QUOTE ]

wow. this is [censored] devestating.

[whiskeytown]

Hmmm....

we have a Lt. General and a Senator saying deployment was delayed because of the use of several National Guard units in Iraq.

A person I don't know and don't know the credentials of says this is wrong, and when taken to task by other Military soldiers, prompts the response of "well, I was Logistics - who were you?" -

The fact that you could have SUCKED at that job is unknown - as is your claim, whereas I am reasonably certain that I am sure of the credentials of the people in the article, as well as their participation within the rescue operations.

I can't possibly take your response with more then a grain of salt - the only thing that even remotely backs you up is the Lt. General said "arguably" in his comment on the delays - that's all you've got

I will not be backing you in this tournament - my money is on your opponents - [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

RB

[Cyrus]

Isn't this really about something as simple as subtraction ?

When you have x National Guardsmen in Louisiana and you deduct y National Guardsmen from x for whatever reason, isn't (x-y) < x, always, for any "x" and "y" that are positive integers and y<x?

If you claim equality instead, then that means that "y equals zero" and I wanna know what you're implying about the Louisiana National Guardsmen! [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[Felix_Nietsche]

Which is easier?
1. To mobilize (A) 10 soldiers (B) 1,000,000 soldiers.
2. To mobilize (A) 100 soldiers (B) 500,000 soldiers.
3. To mobilize (A) 1000 soldiers (B) 250,000 soldiers.
4. To mobilize (A) 10,000 soldiers (B) 125,000 soldiers.

Ther answer is "A" to all four questions. This should be intuitive to someone with a 3rd grade education. Smaller forces are FAR easier to mobilize and support logistically. The MISSISSIPPI general who made this idiotic claim was either (1) Misquoted (2) Covering-his-ass to delect would be criticism on the deployment of the national guard (3) Has political motives to increase the funding of the national guard (4) Has political motives (dislikes Bush).

The only people he is fooling with this assinine statement is people who want to believe this nonsense. I bet if this "expert" had made a statement which contradicted the beliefs of the left on this forum........then you would not have been trumpeting this general's statements as if it was from the mouth of god.

The problem is not simply deploying (x) number of troops. You need to deploy the right kind of NG soldiers and equipment in a timely fashion.

The 155th and 256th Infantry Brigades took their infantrymen and trucks/commo gear/etc. with them to Iraq.

What kind of NG troops were left in LA/MS? Having (y) troops available to deploy in the wake of Katrina doesn't do anyone any good if (y) only consists of dental hygenists/cooks/band members etc.

There's plenty of blame to go around at the local/state/federal level in the handling of this disaster, but not for the NG.

[MtSmalls]

It is easier to mobilize fewer troops, IF YOU HAVE THE VEHICLES AND SUPPORT TO MOVE THEM

NG and FEMA teams from Oregon and NYC (SAR teams, structural engineers etc) had to be BUSSED to Louisiana, BECAUSE THERE WERE NO PLANES TO FLY THEM. The Federal government could not find a single plane available to ferry them and their equipment to Louisiana. Instead it took FOUR days for them to drive from Oregon.