WT Forums

Home | WT Forums | Hogpedia | Warthog blog | Hosted sites
It is currently 19 Apr 2025, 01:33

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 23 Jun 2004, 08:17 
Senate Ok's Increasing Army
Associated Press
June 18, 2004


WASHINGTON - Defying the Bush administration, the Senate voted overwhelmingly Thursday to add 20,000 troops to an Army stretched thin by the war in Iraq and other commitments around the world.

The 93-4 vote in the Republican led Senate - following a similar action by the House, reflected the anxieties lawmakers have been hearing from families of service personnel whose tours in Iraq keep getting extended and whose return to civilian life is repeatedly postponed.

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said the lack of troops at the end of major combat in Iraq cost the military an opportunity to stop the violence that continues today.

"We didn't have enough people on the ground, and now we are paying a very, very heavy price for that incredible mistake on the part of the civilian leadership in the Pentagon of the United States of America," he said.

The increase was approved as an amendment to a $447 billion defense authorization bill. Under the proposal by Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I., the size of the Army would increase by about 4 percent, to 502,400. Congressional aides estimated the cost at $1.7 billion.

Armed Services Committee Chairman John Warner, R-Va., supported the amendment after it was modified to specify that the money would come from a $25 billion fund within the bill for Iraq and Afghanistan operations or from a future emergency spending bill.

"The Army needs this active duty strength. We are in agreement, I think, on this point," he said.

Army leaders oppose a permanent increase in troop strength, saying they can do the job with the current force once it is organized more efficiently.

The Army also had a higher cost estimate for the additional troops. Army Chief of Staff Gen. Peter J. Schoomaker told reporters this week it costs the Army $3.6 billion a year to keep 10,000 soldiers trained and equipped, and the Army would struggle if given thousands of extra troops without the money to pay for them.

"Congress can only fund us one year at a time," Schoomaker said Tuesday. "They can encumber us forever. We are very reluctant to be encumbered by more than is necessary."

Earlier this year, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld approved temporarily increasing in the Army's strength by 30,000 more than its congressionally authorized size of 482,400. Army officials have said that was necessary only so the Army could fight in Iraq and Afghanistan and reorganize at the same time.

As originally drafted, the Senate bill would have given the Army the flexibility to add 30,000 troops, but wouldn't have required it to do so.

The House version of the defense bill, approved last month, would add 30,000 Army soldiers and 9,000 Marines over three years.

The White House criticized the House provisions. "A mandatory increase would lack flexibility and could leave troop levels higher than needed, especially after several (Defense Department) initiatives to reduce demand on the force have had time to work," it said in a statement

Voting against the Reed amendment were Republicans Gordon Smith of Oregon, Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, Larry Craig of Idaho and Craig Thomas of Wyoming. Not voting were Sens. John Kerry, D-Mass., and Republicans Robert Bennett of Utah and James Inhofe of Oklahoma.

On another amendment, Senate Republicans defeated a proposal by Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del., to roll back some of President Bush's tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans to help pay for the Iraq war. A similar proposal by Biden was also rejected last year. The 53-44 vote was largely along party lines.

Biden said, "The idea that if we ask the wealthiest Americans among us to contribute to the war effort, the idea that they are unwilling to do that is preposterous."

But Finance Committee Chairman Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, said Biden's bill would hurt small businesses. "It's a tax increase during an economic recovery," he said.

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist said he hopes the overall bill will be ready for final approval Tuesday. The House and Senate language will have to be reconciled before the bill is sent to Bush.




"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction"

Ronald Reagan


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 23 Jun 2004, 09:13 
Offline
WT Game Warden
User avatar

Joined: 17 Mar 2003, 08:32
Posts: 1097
much as I know Snipe hates being proved right :)

You look as lost as a bastard child on Fathers day.

_________________
\"One of you is gonna fall and die, and I'm not cleaning it up\"
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 23 Jun 2004, 12:12 
I said from day 1 we didn't have enough troops.

"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction"

Ronald Reagan


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 23 Jun 2004, 12:40 
Offline
WT Game Warden
User avatar

Joined: 17 Jun 2002, 09:37
Posts: 1630
Location: Warner Robins, Ga
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
I said from day 1 we didn't have enough troops.

"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction"

Ronald Reagan
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

In my opinion...with the current OPSTEMPO all the branches of the military do not have enough troops....

<img src="http://img23.photobucket.com/albums/v70/prkiii/70th.jpg" border=0><img src="http://img23.photobucket.com/albums/v70/prkiii/Mav_shot.jpg" border=0><img src="http://img23.photobucket.com/albums/v70/prkiii/25.jpg" border=0>

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 23 Jun 2004, 13:59 
Offline
WT Game Warden
User avatar

Joined: 17 Mar 2003, 08:32
Posts: 1097
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=1 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
I said from day 1 we didn't have enough troops.

"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction"

Ronald Reagan
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>that was my point.... :D

You look as lost as a bastard child on Fathers day.

_________________
\"One of you is gonna fall and die, and I'm not cleaning it up\"
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 23 Jun 2004, 14:00 
Offline

Joined: 22 Jul 2003, 08:13
Posts: 454
More on budget:

The bill has $1.6 billion for one more Virginia-class submarine, the Navy's most advanced attack submarine, and $4.4 billion to continue developing the joint strike fighter, a next-generation aircraft being developed for the Navy, Air Force, Marines and U.S. allies.

The national missile defense program would get $9.7 billion, $458 million less than President Bush wanted. There is less money than Bush wanted for development of the Navy's DD(X) warship program and for the Army's future combat system aimed at linking soldiers by computer with unmanned drones and combat vehicles.

But the bill has more than Bush sought for an additional Arleigh Burke class guided-missile destroyer.

It also included $685 million for U.S. diplomats in Iraq and Afghanistan and $95 million to help victims of famine and war in Sudan and Chad that Bush did not want. In a letter, the White House budget office said the Iraq and Sudan money "is unnecessary at this time."

The measure also has money for the 3.5 percent military pay raise that Bush requested.

The day's major controversy occurred when Republicans used a party-line vote to add language that would let Congress raise the government's borrowing limit later this year.

The Senate Appropriations Committee approved a similar $416 billion defense spending measure with $25 billion for Iraq and Afghanistan that would give Bush slightly more leeway than the House did.

Bush would control $2.5 billion of that money, and the rest is generally assigned to broader spending categories than the House did.

The measure would finance 20,000 additional troops for the Army. It provides money to buy 24 F-22 Raptor fighters, a program the Air Force has been gradually scaling down amid criticism that the plane is too expensive and designed to fight sophisticated enemies who currently do not exist.

There is also money for 11 V-22 Osprey tilt-rotor aircraft, which have seen numerous fatal crashes; C-17 transport planes; UH-60 Black Hawk helicopters. The bill provides more than the House did for the Navy's DD(X) ships project and for national missile defense.

The House appropriated $3.6 billion for 24 Air Force F-22s, each of which is powered by two Pratt & Whitney F119-PW-100 engines, and approved 15 C-17 Globemaster cargo planes worth a total of $2.67 billion. Each C-17 uses four Pratt & Whitney F117-PW-100 engines.



Edited by - ViperTTB on Jun 23 2004 1:04 PM


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: 23 Jun 2004, 15:08 
Offline

Joined: 05 Oct 2002, 14:59
Posts: 2779
I like that fact that the vote was 93-4.

"Retreat, hell! We just got here!"-Captain Lloyd Williams, 2nd Marine Division, Belleau Wood, France, WWI


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group