The Problem With Understanding The Costs Of Iraq... Continued
Army National Guard Outlines $24 Billion Equipment Wish List
A day or so ago I was posting about the $11 billion wish list for the Army and the $3.2 billion wish list for "Uncle Sam's Misguided Children" (USMC-the Marines). Now comes a report that the Army National Guard is seeking a $24 billion wish list. We have to understand that these requests for funds are on top of those we are expending to conduct combat and security operations in Iraq (excluding Afghanistan), as well as being on top of the costs for contracts supplying food services to our troops, infrastructure projects for rebuilding Iraq, and the millions that have been wasted, diverted or stolen outright.
The cost reports we are getting through the mainstream media are estimates coming from the White House and/or the Pentagon. These estimates are not inclusive of everything because the government--especially this particular administration--does not release a totally comprehensive set of data. There is a lot of hidden stuff that goes unreported because of the blanket of national security, covert operation or top secret activities. Then there is the deliberate process of releasing data in bits and pieces, often in ways that are under-reported, overlooked or ignored because of more pressing issues being covered.
This entire way of releasing information is a lot like the earmarks and pork barrel processes used in both houses of Congress: What the people do not see will not hurt the politicians. In other words, the entire process is deliberately designed so that those in control can hide their corruption and pork barrel efforts.
But then again, we have to ask a few questions that might, in and of themselves, raise some red flags. First, we must ask why the National Guard is asking for a wish list that is more than double the request for the active duty army? Second, we must ask why the Army breaks down the reporting of these wish lists in terms of the Regular Active Duty needs, the Reserve force needs and the National Guard needs instead of combining all these requests in a single process? Third, we must ask why the National Guard troops were called up if the need for equipment and weaponry was so great? Fourth, why was the needs of the National Guard so far behind in the first place? Fifth, how much hidden, under-reported or otherwise not in focus costs are there involved in our invasion and occupation of Iraq? Sixth, how much is Afghanistan really costing us?
We could add questions regarding the health care cuts for military hospitals and health care, as well as cuts to the VA that even affect those injured in combat. But I do not think we will get any straight answers regarding those questions either.
The bottom line, so to speak, is that we will never get a straight answer on the exact amounts being expending on our combat efforts, or on our national security fiascos, but we will end up paying for it not only in our time, but over the next four or five generations of taxpayers. Currently in consideration is the reinstating the $3 per month telecommunications tax that was original put in place to pay for the Spanish-American War that took place at the end of the 19th century and continued to be collected for 50 years after the costs of the war were covered. Yesterday, in an effort to prepare us for the bad news, President Bush announced that he would consider increasing taxes. Of course, being a staunch Republican, he is not considering taxes on the rich, famous, industrial magnates, multinational conglomerates or those profiteering from our current situation, but on the middle class workers and families. Indeed, the Bush administration and the vast majority of GOP congress critters have raised opposition to the proposal to repeal the tax cuts put into place for the wealthiest top 10% among us, big corporations and others that have been posting huge profits while screwing the general public to the wall.
The argument from the GOP side of the political spectrum is that these tax cuts will produce jobs. Yet, despite almost seven years of playing to these corporations and wealthy members of our society, there are literally thousands of cuts in the job market. In fact, those serving in the military are being hit with numerous economic penalties for being called up from reserve and NG units without any real support from the Bush administration. The DOJ has failed to force the hand of employers that have denied those returning from combat the jobs they held before being activated and rotated out to Iraq and Afghanistan. The VA has made efforts to close the few resources available to injured vets with brain injuries.
Then there is the human costs about which we are not getting the full report in the news. While we receive death tolls in the news, we cannot be sure of the accuracy of such reports. Johns Hopkins used a CDC and epidemiological method of counting the number of Iraqis killed and found almost three and a half times the rate reported by official US sources. We do not hear much about the number of casualties that are not killed, but are only injured. We do not receive a breakdown of those injured and able to return to duty versus those that are injured and permanently disabled. Nor do we receive an economic impact statement on how much it is going to cost us to treat and support those severely injured and/or disabled in Iraq or Afghanistan. Nor are we getting any info on how much we are expending in Somalia, Palestine, Kosovo and elsewhere.
The entirety of the Bush Doctrine is costing us a lot more than we know... a lot more than we imagine... and certainly a lot more than the Bush gang is letting on. The human costs are far more tragic than we are being told and the reality of the Bush administration's efforts will not be fully felt for quite some time from now.
A day or so ago I was posting about the $11 billion wish list for the Army and the $3.2 billion wish list for "Uncle Sam's Misguided Children" (USMC-the Marines). Now comes a report that the Army National Guard is seeking a $24 billion wish list. We have to understand that these requests for funds are on top of those we are expending to conduct combat and security operations in Iraq (excluding Afghanistan), as well as being on top of the costs for contracts supplying food services to our troops, infrastructure projects for rebuilding Iraq, and the millions that have been wasted, diverted or stolen outright.
The cost reports we are getting through the mainstream media are estimates coming from the White House and/or the Pentagon. These estimates are not inclusive of everything because the government--especially this particular administration--does not release a totally comprehensive set of data. There is a lot of hidden stuff that goes unreported because of the blanket of national security, covert operation or top secret activities. Then there is the deliberate process of releasing data in bits and pieces, often in ways that are under-reported, overlooked or ignored because of more pressing issues being covered.
This entire way of releasing information is a lot like the earmarks and pork barrel processes used in both houses of Congress: What the people do not see will not hurt the politicians. In other words, the entire process is deliberately designed so that those in control can hide their corruption and pork barrel efforts.
But then again, we have to ask a few questions that might, in and of themselves, raise some red flags. First, we must ask why the National Guard is asking for a wish list that is more than double the request for the active duty army? Second, we must ask why the Army breaks down the reporting of these wish lists in terms of the Regular Active Duty needs, the Reserve force needs and the National Guard needs instead of combining all these requests in a single process? Third, we must ask why the National Guard troops were called up if the need for equipment and weaponry was so great? Fourth, why was the needs of the National Guard so far behind in the first place? Fifth, how much hidden, under-reported or otherwise not in focus costs are there involved in our invasion and occupation of Iraq? Sixth, how much is Afghanistan really costing us?
We could add questions regarding the health care cuts for military hospitals and health care, as well as cuts to the VA that even affect those injured in combat. But I do not think we will get any straight answers regarding those questions either.
The bottom line, so to speak, is that we will never get a straight answer on the exact amounts being expending on our combat efforts, or on our national security fiascos, but we will end up paying for it not only in our time, but over the next four or five generations of taxpayers. Currently in consideration is the reinstating the $3 per month telecommunications tax that was original put in place to pay for the Spanish-American War that took place at the end of the 19th century and continued to be collected for 50 years after the costs of the war were covered. Yesterday, in an effort to prepare us for the bad news, President Bush announced that he would consider increasing taxes. Of course, being a staunch Republican, he is not considering taxes on the rich, famous, industrial magnates, multinational conglomerates or those profiteering from our current situation, but on the middle class workers and families. Indeed, the Bush administration and the vast majority of GOP congress critters have raised opposition to the proposal to repeal the tax cuts put into place for the wealthiest top 10% among us, big corporations and others that have been posting huge profits while screwing the general public to the wall.
The argument from the GOP side of the political spectrum is that these tax cuts will produce jobs. Yet, despite almost seven years of playing to these corporations and wealthy members of our society, there are literally thousands of cuts in the job market. In fact, those serving in the military are being hit with numerous economic penalties for being called up from reserve and NG units without any real support from the Bush administration. The DOJ has failed to force the hand of employers that have denied those returning from combat the jobs they held before being activated and rotated out to Iraq and Afghanistan. The VA has made efforts to close the few resources available to injured vets with brain injuries.
Then there is the human costs about which we are not getting the full report in the news. While we receive death tolls in the news, we cannot be sure of the accuracy of such reports. Johns Hopkins used a CDC and epidemiological method of counting the number of Iraqis killed and found almost three and a half times the rate reported by official US sources. We do not hear much about the number of casualties that are not killed, but are only injured. We do not receive a breakdown of those injured and able to return to duty versus those that are injured and permanently disabled. Nor do we receive an economic impact statement on how much it is going to cost us to treat and support those severely injured and/or disabled in Iraq or Afghanistan. Nor are we getting any info on how much we are expending in Somalia, Palestine, Kosovo and elsewhere.
The entirety of the Bush Doctrine is costing us a lot more than we know... a lot more than we imagine... and certainly a lot more than the Bush gang is letting on. The human costs are far more tragic than we are being told and the reality of the Bush administration's efforts will not be fully felt for quite some time from now.
The Army National Guard has sent a $24 billion budgetary wish list to Capitol Hill, detailing thousands of vehicles, radios and other gear it needs over the next six years to fully outfit its units with updated equipment.
The "equipment modernization shortfall list" details 25 types of equipment ranging from helicopters to night-vision devices that did not make the cut for the Pentagon's six-year budget projections.
National Guard leaders, who have said repeatedly their stateside equipment stocks have been substantially reduced due to operations overseas, said they would need to buy nearly 50,000 new Humvees and trucks, upgrade 159 CH-47 Chinook helicopters and purchase communications and other gear to re-equip their force.
To simply get all of its units to C-1 baseline readiness standards -- meaning they have 90 percent of their needed equipment on hand to respond to homeland missions and overseas contingencies -- the Army Guard still would need $13.1 billion by fiscal 2013, according to another National Guard Bureau document.
posted by Jim Downey at 2:18 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home