In the recent past, some consistent posters here with an decided anti-war, anti-America, anti-Bush venom have held aloft the recruiting problems as a method to undercut public opinion on the effectiveness of the military to meet recruiting and re-enlistment goals.

Guess what? It turns out we won't be hearing anymore of that nonsense from the "We Support the Troops but are soft on the War on Terror" crowd.

Why?

Enlistments are doing very well. Recruitment is going better than the military professionals expected but there's room for improvement.

So the LibLeft now will abandon the policy arguments on "no one wants to fight" and its attendant argument that Iraq is another VietNam 'cause the volunteer army ain't working... didn't we hear John-but-I-will-release-my-war-records-Kerry say a draft might be needed?

Ha.

Here's what the Army's General in charge of troop utility said:

"WASHINGTON (AFP) - High re-enlistment rates in combat units that have served in Iraq shows the army is far from being a broken force despite a likely shortfall in recruiting, the army’s chief of staff said.

“I think we’re a heck of a long way away from the breaking the army. It is a lot more resilient than people believe,” General Peter Schoomaker told reporters here.

His comments came amid a chorus of criticism from members of Congress and retired military leaders that the longer than expected war in Iraq has strained the army to the breaking point, putting in question the viability of the all-volunteer force created after the Vietnam War.

Schoomaker said the army probably will fall short of the active duty forces recruitment goal this year by about 2,000, and he acknowledged that the recruiting climate is likely to remain tough next year as well.

But he said re-enlistment rates in the active duty force are exceeding requirements.

And a reorganization of the army’s active duty divisions and the national guard and reserve forces have generated more deployable units, he said.

“The negative drumbeat that we hear is not helpful,” Schoomaker said. “The overemphasis on the negative is not helpful.”


I really like the "the negative drumbeat" part 'cause it addresses how the mindless anti-war LibLefties are undercutting America's resolve to stand united in the face of Terror.

Translation: Recruiting is the shitty pits right now.

<<In the recent past, some consistent posters here with an decided anti-war, anti-America, anti-Bush venom

I'm very anti-war. Aside from the fact that war is evil, this one was beguin under false pretenses, continued under another set of excuses, and is getting nowhere.

Why does this mean I am anti-America? And I always thought I loved this country... I guess pacifist Quakers, Christians who oppose war - are all anti-America?

Why cannot one be anti-Bush? If one disagrees with his policies, is it somehow partiotic to love him anyway? That's not how democracy works.

I suppose all those venomous anti-Clinton people were anti-America? or was that somewhow different?

Why is it somehow partiotic to think in black-and-white, all-or-nothing sound bites?

Actually Horn, it's off because: 1) the military stepped down its recruiting in the summer in order to address policies on improper recruitment efforts and 2) the constant drumbeat by the MSM on the negative consequences of the WOT.

Re-enlistment is up, Horn. And this month, recruitment numbers are up for the 1st time in 2005. Hmmm? Let's not let those pesky facts get in the way.

Some in America know how to be patriotic; but not the slur mongering anti-war Doom-ocrat activists who can only repeat "chickenhawk, chickenhawk". Who'd of thought the anti-war left would use senile Frank Launtenberg for a poster boy of witty retorts? LOL

Nat, "false pretenses"? Really? Have you not been paying attention? False pretenses, my God.

Your quote only talks about re-enlistment and not actuall recruitment.

How about this article

Please note: It is definetly not from a libleft orginization.

They can still sustain the forces in Iraq and have surpassed their re-enlistment projections, but ..

Mitigation does not sound like it is going great. They are trying to find ways to alleviate the problem.

It does look like the Army met its goal in June after it failed the four previous months, but
..

Nine months below goal, oh yeah it is going well. 5.5% below strength and continuing to fail to meet their goal is just great.

The one good thing is at least FOX news can report the good and the bad, whereas you only reported the portion of the story that reinforced your arguement.

Who is spinning now?

[ August 25, 2005, 06:26 PM: Message edited by: kujhawker ]

Only trolls spin, MiMatt. Guess what that makes you? Go ahead, take a guess...times up! Ding ding ding! You win...you ARE the troll! Happy spinning and trolling! Do you ever tire of having a brown nose? It doesn't go well with your pasty complextion.

what's interesting is that MIMatt says in his first post, "Enlistments are doing very well. Recruitment is going better than the military professionals expected..."

ok.... But then the article he cites says "Schoomaker said the army probably will fall short of the active duty forces recruitment goal this year by about 2,000, and he acknowledged that the recruiting climate is likely to remain tough next year as well."

So here's the problem with his apparent failure to understand simple english used in his own citation.

The article states REenlistments are up. But enlistments/recruiting is down. In fact. it'll be 2000 short of goal even AFTER the army lowered its recruitment target for the year.

and the article states that deployment will be staffed using National Guard and Reserve units. May I remind the honorable HisMatt in his foxhole in michigan that the reserves and especially the National Guards were not meant to be used like the regular troops.(Just ask the Commander-in-chief about his days in the Nat'l Guard unit working on someone's re-election campaign. VERY hazardous duty there) They do not have nearly the amount of training and skills necessary compared to regular enlisted. Why is that? Cuz a few weekends a month is not the same as having a full time job as a soldier.

I figure herMatt is someone who likes to play soldier and dress up like one probably. He probably has a "ARMY" or "USMC" t-shirt or two.
Right? well it's not the same as actually BEING a soldier and facing enemy fire.

[ August 26, 2005, 05:47 AM: Message edited by: ung ]

Much like his hero the chickenhawk-in-chief, its so much easier (and safer) to put on a flight suit and play dress up than actually show up and fight.

Razing'hacks? Aren't you about done with the discredited chickenhawk slur? Remember your poster boi leader's retort: "We can use images like Cindy Sheehan's only for so long and then there's diminishing returns..." on the PR utility (Michael Moore, Aug 20).

So, time to MoveOn and identify a new slur... find a new bucket of worms to toss.

[ August 26, 2005, 08:42 AM: Message edited by: MiMatt38 ]

Go crawl back inside Karl Rove's ass from whence you were accidentally expelled the last time he hit the men's room.

So JiPster, joining in with Razin'hack on the slur festival, eh? You go dude; it rocks. So mature.

"Excretion wins!"

No fan of MiMatt, but it looks like he's got the upper hand to me.

Joe, Aqua and Fanthomas are acting like 4 years old trying to throw a kid out of the sandbox.

Paging BTmuscle/mimatt/mib/verantas

your table of one is ready....

Thanks BT --don't be bugged by the jipster, he's not well and 2005 hasn't been a good year for him... but thanks and I echo your comment elsewhere about Fantomas (no "h": he's the self-described super villian comic book anti-hero dude) --his ideas ARE scarey, fault ridden, fact challenged and way out in Left field.

He'd fit in better in France --like his namesake-- than in the US.

MiMatt isn't coming off as a literate, educated adult on these forums at the moment himself. I don't suppose being a sulky adolescent is that much better than being a rebellious toddler.

all these replies/retorts by HerMatt. But have you noticed? He doesn't address the fallacy in his logic that I pointed out earlier......

all these replies/retorts by HerMatt. But have you noticed? He doesn't address the fallacy in his logic that I pointed out earlier......

or double posting...

tally ho ho ho CNN

yes girl? did you say something?

ok then.. have a good wknd girl!

You too Mr CNN

See today's NYT, from which the following two excerpts:

"John McCain has talked about sending more troops to rectify our disastrous failure to secure the country, but he'll have to round them up himself door to door. As the retired Gen. Barry McCaffrey reported to the Senate, the National Guard is "in the stage of meltdown and in 24 months we'll be coming apart." At the Army, according to The Los Angeles Times, officials are now predicting an even worse shortfall of recruits in 2006 than in 2005. The Leo Burnett advertising agency has been handed $350 million for a recruitment campaign that avoids any mention of Iraq.

"The marketing campaign will crescendo in two weeks, on the anniversary of 9/11, when a Defense Department "Freedom Walk" will trek from the site of the Pentagon attack through Arlington National Cemetery to a country music concert on the Mall. There the false linkage of Iraq to 9/11 will be hammered in once more, this time with a beat: Clint Black will sing "I Raq and Roll," a ditty whose lyrics focus on Saddam, not the Islamic radicals who actually attacked America. Lest any propaganda opportunity be missed, Arlington's gravestones are being branded with the Pentagon's slogans for military campaigns, like Operation Iraqi Freedom, The Associated Press reported last week - a historic first."

for the bulk of the essay, see:


http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/28/opinion/...ml?pagewanted=2

Good grief, just saw Dubya talking about how the Iraqi constitution is something the world can be proud of!! Is he for real? Was an Islamic republic really the goal of the war? I think your troops are going to be there for a long long time not only dealing with insurgency but most likely a civil war.

This thread is so similar to another I thought I was reading double. Just like reading MiaMatt39, and BTMuscle posts.

[ August 28, 2005, 12:12 PM: Message edited by: wade n atlanta ]