DebateGate
General Category => 3DHS => Topic started by: Christians4LessGvt on July 05, 2008, 12:55:10 PM
-
(http://www.blueshoeproject.org/press/logos/mcclatchy_logo.jpg)
U.S. military in Iraq celebrates the 4th with reenlistments
Mc Clatchy Newspapers , by Mike Tharp
BAGHDAD: The U.S. military in Iraq celebrated the Fourth of July with what it billed as "the largest reenlistment ceremony ever held," and 1,215 soldiers, Marines, sailors and airmen raised their hands and re-pledged allegiance to America.
Gen. David Petraeus, head of all Coalition forces in Iraq, administered the oath in Saddam Hussein's former al Faw Palace. John Phillip Sousa's marches blended with roars of "Freedom," "hooah" and "oorah" from the men and women, many of them carrying their weapons, as they re-upped in their service branches.
Money was an incentive for many, but so was a belief in what they're doing more than five years into a war far away from their homes. Hundreds were in their second and third tours in the combat zone.
"There's no place I'd rather be to celebrate America's birthday than here in Iraq," said Petraeus, who described the troops as "America's new 'Greatest Generation." The troops' commitment and sacrifice, he added, have given the Iraqi people "the most precious gift...freedom."
The general compared the re-enlistees' raising of their right hands to the language on most award citations: "In keeping with the finest traditions of our military services." He said the combined total of their additional service amounted to 5,500 years.
"The millions of dollars" they receive was certainly one motive, he said, "but no bonus no matter the size can compare with the sacrifices you make in Iraq or the sacrifices your loved ones make back home."
Army reenlistment bonuses top out at $40,000, Navy at $75,000, Air Force at $60,000 and the Marines at $45,000. A bonus's size also depends on rank, military specialty, years of extension, years of service and other factors. Reenlistment bonuses signed up for in a combat zone become tax-free.
Two Army master sergeants, Christine Frauendorfer, a dining hall inspector with the 76th Infantry Brigade Combat Team in Balad, and Debra Bradshaw, who manages a dining hall in Baghdad's International Zone, re-upped for two and three years, respectively. Frauendorfer, in the Army for 23 years, and Bradshaw, for 28, mentioned both financial and patriotic motives for their decision.
Frauendorfer said she raised her right hand "so I could do my part_I feel they are making progress here." Added Bradshaw, on her second tour in Iraq, "The money ain't bad, but I'd rather deal with the situation over here than at home." She'll retire in 2011, and said when she gets older, "I want to have so many irons in the fire that I don't have to decide whether I can buy my medicine or pay my electric bill."
At least two husband-and-wife teams were sworn in at the ceremony. Sgt. Ryan Lowe, a military policeman from the 18th MP Brigade, and his wife, Sgt. Erika Lowe, also a military police officer, said they reenlisted to go to Brussels, Belgium, and both intend to make the Army a career. Ryan is in his 23rd straight month in Iraq and said he extended his tour to stay with his wife.
Army Reservist Staff Sgt. Jessica Wilson is the noncommissioned officer in charge of the New Orleans-based 215th Mobile Public Affairs Detachment's broadcast section where she produces videos for soldiers and their families. Her husband, Sgt. Kirk Wilson, is also an Army broadcast journalist, and they've been deployed together three times, to Bosnia, Guantanamo Bay and Iraq.
After the ceremony, in one of the late dictator's 99 palaces, this one used to entertain loyal members of his Baathist party, the newly committed troops ate pizza and chocolate cake and drank Gatorade.
McClatchy Newspapers 2008
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/251/story/43189.html (http://www.mcclatchydc.com/251/story/43189.html)
(http://cache.boston.com/resize/bonzai-fba/Globe_Photo/2008/07/04/1215225691_4420/539w.jpg)
More than 1,200 members of the military took the oath of reenlistment
at a ceremony yesterday at the Al-Faw Palace in Iraq.
-
<<Money was an incentive for many, but so was a belief in what they're doing . . . >>
[chuckles knowingly]
Suuuure, it was. It couldn't possibly be for the money, since so many of the re-uppers were from the top 5%, socioeconomically, of the population.
-
Hmmm, article references $ as being a likely incentive for MANY, then Tee pipes in sarcastically as if the article claimed it wasn't.
Typical
-
yeah sure lol
they totally dont believe in the mission, but reenlist just for the money
they should be paid well for fighting the IslamoNazis over there so we dont have to fight them here
of course if they weren't reenlisting the left loons would be saying "see told ya".
-
Nothing wrong for maximizing bonuses when renewing contracts. My understanding is there is a waiting list for temporary duty assignments (usually six months) in theater (Iraq, Afghanistan and i think Dubai.)
-
As a propaganda move it is inspired.
The Insurgents and especially the Al Quieda hang all of their hope for victory on American exaustion , if it really seemed to them that they couldn't exaust us they would quit.
I think we can be exausted , fortunately they can be exausted a lot sooner.
-
Over half the troops are not in combat roles, so naturally the monetary incentive is great for them. The military attracts people who like danger as well.
The problem is not the troops being exhausted. The problem is the huge amount of money it takes when half of it is going to private corporations like Halliburton and Blackwater. The US is borrowing money from the Chinese, Japanese, Koreans and others to fight this endless war.
Eventually the taxpayers will say "enough awreddy!"
-
Over half the troops are not in combat roles, so naturally the monetary incentive is great for them. The military attracts people who like danger as well.
The problem is not the troops being exhausted. The problem is the huge amount of money it takes when half of it is going to private corporations like Halliburton and Blackwater. The US is borrowing money from the Chinese, Japanese, Koreans and others to fight this endless war.
Eventually the taxpayers will say "enough awreddy!"
How huge is this money?
I detect distortion every time this is answered anywhere.
-
Eventually the taxpayers will say "enough awreddy!"
Have taxes been increased that much in the last seven years?
-
touche', Plane 8)
-
Have taxes been increased that much in the last seven years?
===================================================
The war is being paid for by borrowing from the Chinese, Japanese, Koreans and others.
The cost of the war is reflected in the fact that the dollar is worth about 30% less in Euros than when it started.
When you fill your tank with $4.25 per gallon gasoline, you are paying for the war.
There have been similar rises in the price of many things, notably food.
We will be paying interest on Juniorbush's loans for the next 50 years or so. Maybe longer.
-
Have taxes been increased that much in the last seven years?
===================================================
The war is being paid for by borrowing from the Chinese, Japanese, Koreans and others.
The cost of the war is reflected in the fact that the dollar is worth about 30% less in Euros than when it started.
When you fill your tank with $4.25 per gallon gasoline, you are paying for the war.
There have been similar rises in the price of many things, notably food.
We will be paying interest on Juniorbush's loans for the next 50 years or so. Maybe longer.
So the cost of Oil depends on the course of the war?
I don't think it is connected the way you seem to, the increase in price is mainly due to a greater demand and a customer base that is obvious (to every investor , speculator)that is expanding.
What was Clinton paying for when we were borrowing a lot from China during his administration?
-
<<Have taxes been increased that much in the last seven years?>>
XO gave the answer to that question - - the war is not financed by taxes but by borrowing. The future debt load in effect has devalued the dollar significantly, so that everything, oil included, that is imported will cost more.
The decision to finance this war by borrowing rather than paying directly through taxes was purely political and extremely short-sighted. In effect, it was a colossal gamble that has clearly been lost by now. Had the American public been asked to pay for this fiasco through taxes, the initial projected cost ($50 billion) would have been run through in the blink of an eye and successive tax increases would have followed in stunning, rapid succession. The opposition to the war, when its real costs were measured in dollars yanked out of the earnings of middle-class and working-class Americans, would have dwarfed the opposition generated to date by the deaths of a few thousand expendable ignoramuses mourned by no one but their idiot families who never should have let them sign up in the first place. So hiding the cost by borrowing seemed like a good idea.
It was a good idea, in the sense that the payroll clerk had a good idea when he figured he could "borrow" $20K from the company over the weekend and pay it all back with what he'd win with it at the track by the time Monday morning rolled around. Had the Iraqi people been the pushover the U.S. had been led to expect, they'd be sitting on a gusher of windfall oil profits funding the "repayments" that the Iraqis now "owed" to them for "reconstructing" the damage that they had themselves inflicted on the poor dumb bastards in the first place. What would a mere $50 billion be when compared with the income to be generated from the world's second largest proven oil reserves?
Well, the plan did not work out. Nothing worked out. Well, wait, the "surge" worked out beautifully - - only, well, as beautifully as it all worked out, not a single American soldier can be withdrawn just now. We have to wait until, uh, until . . . according to sirs, till the American commanders on the ground AND the Iraqi politicians (no, not Muqtada al Sadr, real politicians, you know, politicians who really want the U.S. to stay in Iraq. And stay, and stay and stay. But trust us, the surge has worked. Really. Honest. Anyway, as we can all see, we (the U.S. and Britain) do not really have their hands on an unending flow of cheap oil from their little misadventure, quite the contrary in fact, the U.S. is $3 trillion down with nothing to show for it, which as XO has pointed out, does not seem to work very well for the U.S. dollar or for the cost of your food and other imports like oil.
So, no, taxes did NOT go up due to the war. Probably would have been a thousand per cent better for you if taxes HAD gone up, because then an outraged public would have insisted that the plug be pulled a long time ago. Looks like what you got here was the worst of BOTH worlds. Even though, as everyone says, the surge worked.
-
<<So the cost of Oil depends on the course of the war?>>
The PRICE of oil, like the price of any import, depends on the value of the dollar in the
international money market.
Because you chose to finance a $3 trillion war by borrowing, at the same time as you were suffering a strongly negative balance of trade, the value of your dollar was caught in a squeeze between stable or declining reserves and exponentially increasing debts. The money market has legitimate concerns regarding the worth of a U.S. dollar issued by a Treasury which since the start of the war has incurred and will incur a total liability presently estimated at $3 trillion and rising with every hour the war continues. The dollar therefore continues to slide. Oil priced in dollars will inevitably see rises in dollar price as confidence in the U.S. dollar continues to diminish. Even if the pro-U.S. producers pricing their oil in dollars hold the line on price as a favour to their U.S. patrons (and there is no indication they would do so indefinitely) once the oil is sold and the dollar price is in the sellers' pockets, they themselves will tend to trade their dollars immediately for euros or other strong currencies to protect themselves against further declines in the value of the dollar which are almost certain to follow.
In the meantime, due to the decline that has already occurred, some oil producing countries have already begun to denominate their sales in euros or yen depending on the purchaser, further weakening demand for dollars and therefore lowering further the value of the dollar in foreign exchange.
But of course it is not only the price of oil that is affected by the declining value of the U.S. dollar - - all of your imports have to be similarly affected as well.
-
First of all, this is staged (which is obvious to everyone and Plane rightly called it "propaganda"). Secondly, you have to remember that a lot of these people have nothing else to go back and do. Despite the commercials - there aren't a lot of MOS's that translate directly to the private sector. Many of the ones that did are now KBR jobs (or some other private contractor). It is work being done by Indonesians, Indians, and some Americans for considerably more money than a soldier was paid to do the same work.
Also take into account that the standards are very low. There are soldiers with criminal records, terrible test scores, and other issues that would have precluded them from being in the American military at one point. This is the life they know and all in all it isn't a bad life. You get meals, room and board, most of the duties aren't too complicated for you. There's a structure to military life that some of these folks need and couldn't get in civilian life. Besides, it sure as hell beats working in a carpet factory in Dalton, GA or a telephone call center in Jackson, TN for $5.75/hour.
The patriotism "believe-in-the-mission" aspect is fluff. It is a job and a lifestyle.
-
It was a good idea, in the sense that the payroll clerk had a good idea when he figured he could "borrow" $20K from the company over the weekend and pay it all back with what he'd win with it at the track by the time Monday morning rolled around. Had the Iraqi people been the pushover the U.S. had been led to expect, they'd be sitting on a gusher of windfall oil profits funding the "repayments" that the Iraqis now "owed" to them for "reconstructing" the damage that they had themselves inflicted on the poor dumb bastards in the first place. What would a mere $50 billion be when compared with the income to be generated from the world's second largest proven oil reserves?
Now that the price of Oil is up (even in Euros) and the USA is in firm controll , and the pumping of oil in Iraq is surpassing all records, we must be rolling in the windfall profits .
Or no , we arn't because it can't work like that.
-
First of all, this is staged (which is obvious to everyone and Plane rightly called it "propaganda").
The patriotism "believe-in-the-mission" aspect is fluff. It is a job and a lifestyle.
The stuff about army people being desprate for a job is propaganda too , but not the true kind.
-
First of all, this is staged (which is obvious to everyone and Plane rightly called it "propaganda").
The patriotism "believe-in-the-mission" aspect is fluff. It is a job and a lifestyle.
The stuff about army people being desprate for a job is propaganda too , but not the true kind.
I don't recall ever saying that anyone was "desperate for a job."
-
First of all, this is staged (which is obvious to everyone and Plane rightly called it "propaganda").
The patriotism "believe-in-the-mission" aspect is fluff. It is a job and a lifestyle.
The stuff about army people being desprate for a job is propaganda too , but not the true kind.
I don't recall ever saying that anyone was "desperate for a job."
I am sorry I misunderstood the "you have to remember that a lot of these people have nothing else to go back and do." part of your statement.
I must also have misundrestood the "Also take into account that the standards are very low. There are soldiers with criminal records, terrible test scores, and other issues that would have precluded them from being in the American military at one point. "
part as well.
There is nothing like the military I know , and I have been involved in the military all of my adulthood.
-
Now that the price of Oil is up (even in Euros) and the USA is in firm controll , and the pumping of oil in Iraq is surpassing all records, we must be rolling in the windfall profits .
Or no , we arn't because it can't work like that.
================================================================
Of course not. Your oil companies are teetering on the brink of bankruptcy. Halliburton and KBR are virtually charity cases.
The folks who were intended to benefit from this little fiasco have done pretty well so far.
The U.S.A. has a very tenuous grip on Iraq, it's riding the back of a tiger and there is no indication of any real lasting success other than this "The surge is working" total bullshit campaign, which is obviously a lie because nobody will still lay down any realistic deadline for the removal of all U.S. troops.
-
The surge was never tied to a timetable for withdrawal.
However the dems did campaign on bringing the troops home now.
The surge has delivered.
The dems haven't.
-
Now that the price of Oil is up (even in Euros) and the USA is in firm controll , and the pumping of oil in Iraq is surpassing all records, we must be rolling in the windfall profits .
Or no , we arn't because it can't work like that.
================================================================
Of course not. Your oil companies are teetering on the brink of bankruptcy. Halliburton and KBR are virtually charity cases.
The folks who were intended to benefit from this little fiasco have done pretty well so far.
The U.S.A. has a very tenuous grip on Iraq, it's riding the back of a tiger and there is no indication of any real lasting success other than this "The surge is working" total bullshit campaign, which is obviously a lie because nobody will still lay down any realistic deadline for the removal of all U.S. troops.
The way our oil companys have been makeing money lately has been driven by the oil itslf becomeing scarce, so our encouragement of Iriqui pumping is contra the oil company profit.
This might change , if American companys land the contacts that are gonna be awarded in the next few months , but much like drilling in ANWAR it will not be enough to cause price relief enough to kill the high oil profit.
-
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/07/05/bin-laden-144-oil/
-
"The surge has delivered. The dems haven't".
WOW BT
That is a very good line and very true.
President McCain should use it often.
-
The surge has delivered.
The dems haven't.
=================
What exactly has the surge delivered?
Fewer deaths of US troops and even higher expenses which Juniorbush has again borrowed from the Chinese et al. and which the America people, not Juniorbush and Cheney, will have to repay in money and inflation.
The Democrats have tried to pass bills to end the war, and every time the asshole Republicans have prevented the defunding. So the War continues because the Republicans want it to continue, preferably forever.
A surge would be a rise in the number of troops, followed by a decline. The number has barely declined.
The goal of the Republicans is that the US stay in Iraq, with the taxpayers paying all the bill's, forever. The profits, or course, will accrue to the profiteers: Halliburton, Blackwater and other exclusionary deals by which only the oligarchy benefits.
It is not so much a war as a device for looting the people of the US buy their unfriendly neighborhood oligarchy.
-
What exactly has the surge delivered?
You answer your own question.
Fewer deaths
The dems can't deliver even though they have a majority. Pity.
How embarrassing it must be to be out maneuvered by knuckle dragging republicans.
-
It is not so much as an embarassment to the Democrats as a disgrace to the entire country... engaging in imperialism in this modern age, and not even getting the resources they were planning to pillage.
Two words: incompetent imperialists.
-
The U.S. military in Iraq celebrated the Fourth of July with what it billed as "the largest reenlistment ceremony ever held," and 1,215 soldiers, Marines, sailors and airmen raised their hands and re-pledged allegiance to America.
Wow, that's almost a thousand!
They must have heard there's a good chance they'll finally have a Commander in Chief that actually gives a shit whether they live or die. Talk about a enlistment bonus.....
-
It is not so much as an embarassment to the Democrats as a disgrace to the entire country... engaging in imperialism in this modern age, and not even getting the resources they were planning to pillage.
The only thing certain in the above statement is that the dems campaigned to end the war. And they didn't deliver.
-
Whether the Dems can or will deliver on their promises is an entire issue unto itself.
Whether the surge has succeeded or not (and I say it has failed) is a whole nuther issue.
The re-enlistment of a bunch of brain-dead bozos all at the same time in the same place has about as much bearing on either issue as the mass marriage of one thousand couples by the Rev. Sun Myung Moon would have on the issue of marriage.
-
The re-enlistment of a bunch of brain-dead bozos all at the same time in the same place has about as much bearing on either issue as the mass marriage of one thousand couples by the Rev. Sun Myung Moon would have on the issue of marriage.
Glad you killed that strawman.
-
<<Glad you killed that strawman. >>
You lost me there, BT.
-
Sorry. I'll speak slowly.
They didn't reenlist because of the surge. They reenlisted because they felt what they did was meaningful.
Probably the same reason you go to work everyday.
-
<<They didn't reenlist because of the surge. They reenlisted because they felt what they did was meaningful.>>
Got it now, thanks. You are correct.
For the record, the article made it clear that money was also a significant factor in the decision. These guys are anything but the brightest bulbs in the marquee, so whether or not they believe in the mission is not of much assistance in assessing its vaule anyway.
<<Probably the same reason you go to work everyday. >>
Then they'd be going in for a mixed bag of reasons, in which the money plays a major but not necessarily dominant role.
-
For the record, the article made it clear that money was also a significant factor in the decision. These guys are anything but the brightest bulbs in the marquee, so whether or not they believe in the mission is not of much assistance in assessing its vaule anyway.
Parlaying training received on the bosses dime into a 75K tax free signing bonus doesn't seem so stupid to me.
-
" These guys are anything but the brightest bulbs in the marquee, ...."
I wish I could test them against a randomly chosen group of Canadians , to prove you wrong.
But of course I can't.
I don't suppose you tested anything at all to come to this opinion , so I don't need to prove anything either.
But I wonder indeed how many of the advradge persons could operate modern weapon systems ?
-
<<Parlaying training received on the bosses dime into a 75K tax free signing bonus doesn't seem so stupid to me.>>
I guess it depends on the final outcome. Let's see them spend it from inside a body bag.
-
<<But I wonder indeed how many of the advradge persons could operate modern weapon systems ?>>
Give them the right training and how hard can it be?
-
"I guess it depends on the final outcome. Let's see them spend it from inside a body bag"
What percent of US Military personnel that serve in Iraq return in a body bag?
Car crashes killed 44,000 Americans in 2006.
-
I guess it depends on the final outcome. Let's see them spend it from inside a body bag.
I'm pretty sure inheritance works the same as for civilians.
-
<<But I wonder indeed how many of the advradge persons could operate modern weapon systems ?>>
Give them the right training and how hard can it be?
http://afvdb.50megs.com/usa/m1abrams.html (http://afvdb.50megs.com/usa/m1abrams.html)
http://afvdb.50megs.com/usa/m1abrams.html#M1A2 (http://afvdb.50megs.com/usa/m1abrams.html#M1A2)
(http://afvdb.50megs.com/usa/pics/m1a1gunner1.jpg)
As hard as any other very tecnical equipment management , while being shot at.
-
Nice picture. So how long is the training period altogether? a week? a month? Let's not get carried away with the so-called complexities of it all. If those guys had any real smarts, let's face it, they wouldn't be learning how to drive an Abrams tank anyway. They'd be on to bigger and better things.
-
Nice picture. So how long is the training period altogether? a week? a month? Let's not get carried away with the so-called complexities of it all. If those guys had any real smarts, let's face it, they wouldn't be learning how to drive an Abrams tank anyway. They'd be on to bigger and better things.
Woah ....you are so severely off base I can hardly know where to start.
In the US Navy you can learn Nuclear Phisics which is a good idea if you are working on a nuclear submarine. In the Army you can learn ballistics which you are gonna need to understand to aim a cannon. In the Airforce you can learn the latest electronic communication techniques .
Also anything else, there isn't a skill that the military doesn't have some version of and training for .Soldiers and sailors get a lot of encouragement to study and save up for education.
-
<<Woah ....you are so severely off base I can hardly know where to start.>>
A good place to start would be by answering my question, which was very simple. You attempted to prove how hard it was to operate an Abrams tank by showing a photo of some of the controls, and I asked you how long it took to learn to operate the thing. So: how long does it take?
<<In the US Navy you can learn Nuclear Phisics which is a good idea if you are working on a nuclear submarine.>>
Yeah, that's complex alright. We learned nuclear physics in Grade 13 high school, starting with e = mc2 but I don't consider any of us Einsteins for having learned it.
<< In the Army you can learn ballistics which you are gonna need to understand to aim a cannon. In the Airforce you can learn the latest electronic communication techniques >>
Well, we should just quit sparring around here. I'm sure some of that stuff and the degree of knowledge required, IS pretty complex and not for everyone. There would be some pretty smart guys who learned that stuff and I have to show appropriate respect. (I better, cuz I think hnumpah is one of those guys.) But I wouldn't think the techies are the typical GI's, most of whom are low-grade morons who can probably operate an assault rifle and a K-bar knife with some basic torture routines thrown in and know enough military law to realize that the best witness is a dead witness.
-
No one disputes that one CAN learn useful stuff at some military jobs.
But the question is one of numbers. How many actually do learn a skill more useful outside the military?
Would Plane, for example, earn more if he worked for Southwest Airlines?
If so, why doesn't he work there?
-
http://handle.dtic.mil/100.2/ADA295241 (http://handle.dtic.mil/100.2/ADA295241)
Title : Matching Military Skills to Civilian Jobs: Does Military Training Enhance Veteran's Civilian Wage Rates?
Descriptive Note : Master's thesis,
Corporate Author : NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL MONTEREY CA
Personal Author(s) : Olsen, Karl R.
Handle / proxy Url : http://handle.dtic.mil/100.2/ADA295241 (http://handle.dtic.mil/100.2/ADA295241) Check NTIS Availability...
Report Date : MAR 1995
Pagination or Media Count : 82
Abstract : This thesis statistically analyzes the transferability of military skills to civilian job markets and the relationship between acquired military training and civilian wages. It also assesses the extent to which military training is utilized by veterans currently employed in the civilian labor force and analyzes the process by which veterans assimilate into the civilian work force, including the role geographic migration plays in this process. The relationship between veteran status and post-service civilian wages is examined using linear regression methods. The models test the existence of either a veterans premium or penalty with respect to civilian earnings as a function of various military training, occupation, background, and other variables. Results show that veterans receive a significant wage premium over their civilian counterparts. Additionally, veterans who use their military training in their current civilian job receive higher wages than either non-veterans or veterans who do not use their military skills in civilian occupations.
-
No one disputes that one CAN learn useful stuff at some military jobs.
But the question is one of numbers. How many actually do learn a skill more useful outside the military?
Would Plane, for example, earn more if he worked for Southwest Airlines?
If so, why doesn't he work there?
I am a civillian.
I am not useing the skill I learned in the Navy (welding , pipefitting , firefighting).
I am makeing a liveing with a skill I learned on the "new" GI bill - electronics.
I like avation , but the airlines have little job security compared to my civil service job.
True that this same job might make me much more in an airline , I just can't stand layoffs.
In any case many avation workers learned the craft on military aircraft then moved to the airlines or civil employment by the military as they might wont.
As far as I know there isn't a bigger or better trainer for aircraft work than the US Military , I picked it up in tech school though , I was burned out on welding.
-
A good place to start would be by answering my question, which was very simple. You attempted to prove how hard it was to operate an Abrams tank by showing a photo of some of the controls, and I asked you how long it took to learn to operate the thing. So: how long does it take?
Well, the gunner's school for the Abrams is 3 months, once you've met all the prerequisites. How long it takes to meet the prerequisites depends on whether or not you attended a college before enrolling - you must be a mid-grade NCO, minimum, before signing up for gunner's school. A friend of mine is in his 15th or so month of training after enlisting. The US military does a lot of training before sending anyone out.
-
Interesting. Obviously even a gunner in a tank represents a significant investment in time and training. When one of these guys is killed or majorly fucked up, a lot of money goes down the drain with him starting with the cost of training all the way through to lifetime attendant care and medical/hospital/drug expenses. And every year a new generation of Iraqis steps up to the plate.
-
Interesting. Obviously even a gunner in a tank represents a significant investment in time and training.
Of course; it's because they're starting with the low hanging fruit.
::)
-
Interesting. Obviously even a gunner in a tank represents a significant investment in time and training. When one of these guys is killed or majorly fucked up, a lot of money goes down the drain with him starting with the cost of training all the way through to lifetime attendant care and medical/hospital/drug expenses. And every year a new generation of Iraqis steps up to the plate.
Of course , we love our guys , we don't think of them as disposable .
If your point is that our opposition sell them selves cheap, I am not gonna argue that.
But you really get what you pay for.
-
http://www.goarmy.com/JobDetail.do?id=48 (http://www.goarmy.com/JobDetail.do?id=48)
-
<<But you really get what you pay for.>>
In a war you want a guy who's not afraid to lay down his life for the cause. They got a better product than you have and at a fraction of the cost. In a war of attrition they win and you lose.
It reminds me of a discussion I just had with a friend about the Bren gun, a Canadian-made submachine gun of the Second World War. The Nazi sub-machine guns were brilliantly polished, precision-made instruments, Schmeissers, IIRC, and the Brens were cheap, mass-produced, often jamming, rough-edged pieces of shit. But the economics of production meant that the Nazis were producing relatively few of these exquisitely made weapons, and Bren guns were mass-produced in the millions. If one of them malfunctioned, the Canadian could just toss it and grab another, plenty more where THAT one came from, they were cheap and lightweight and easy to pack.
Sometimes you can overpay for quality.
-
In a war you want a guy who's not afraid to lay down his life for the cause.
In a war, you want someone who's willing to kill the enemy, and preferably one that will come home to tell the tale. Highly trained will kill more of the enemy than poorly trained and willing to die.
It reminds me of a discussion I just had with a friend about the Bren gun, a Canadian-made submachine gun of the Second World War. The Nazi sub-machine guns were brilliantly polished, precision-made instruments, Schmeissers, IIRC, and the Brens were cheap, mass-produced, often jamming, rough-edged pieces of shit. But the economics of production meant that the Nazis were producing relatively few of these exquisitely made weapons, and Bren guns were mass-produced in the millions. If one of them malfunctioned, the Canadian could just toss it and grab another, plenty more where THAT one came from, they were cheap and lightweight and easy to pack.
Nazis used more than Schmeissers (actually the MP-40, and Hugh Schmeisser was not involved in their design, so that's a nisnomer), and they out-produced the British and Canadians in the field of machine guns to boot.
Most people associate the MP-40 and the Luger 9mm Parabellum with the Nazis, when in reality, both of those were based on older designs and were in the process of being phased out early in the war. The MP-42 (nearly as cheap to mass produce as the Sten and the PPSh-41) and the Walther P-38 were already replacing those as standard issue. I happened to run across a Walther P-38 prototype (the guy didn't know what he had) and it's now a part of my collection. It's serial number 535 - the first 800 were delivered to the Wehrmacht for field testing before mass production. I think about 300 were subjected to "destructive tests" so apparently only about 500 remain.
-
I happened to run across a Walther P-38 prototype (the guy didn't know what he had) and it's now a part of my collection. It's serial number 535 - the first 800 were delivered to the Wehrmacht for field testing before mass production. I think about 300 were subjected to "destructive tests" so apparently only about 500 remain.
Lucky bastard!! That's quite a find.
-
Lucky bastard!! That's quite a find.
You're gonna hate me even more when I tell you that I only paid $450 for it. ;-) All serial numbers match, including the magazine.
Note: Actually went back and checked my records; it was $525, not $450. But a steal either way.
-
You're right. I do hate you more now. ;)
-
:o
WOW.....that's incredible Ami. Congrats on the needle in the haystack find
-
<<In a war, you want someone who's willing to kill the enemy, and preferably one that will come home to tell the tale. Highly trained will kill more of the enemy than poorly trained and willing to die.>>
"More" and "less" killed don't mean all that much in a war of attrition, where both sides can draw enough new blood to replace what's been lost, unless there is some huge exponential gap in the kill rates; the loss of untrained, three-for-a-dollar warriors on the one side won't matter as long as they are inflicting unsustainable (over the long term) losses on an enemy where the lives lost times the dollar value of those lives constitutes an exponentially larger loss for the rich man's side of the board.
I'm just guessing that a WWII vintage Luger Parabellum would probably fetch about $2500 to $7500 depending on condition and a prototype Walther PPK about $2000 to $5,000.
-
"More" and "less" killed don't mean all that much in a war of attrition, where both sides can draw enough new blood to replace what's been lost, unless there is some huge exponential gap in the kill rates; the loss of untrained, three-for-a-dollar warriors on the one side won't matter as long as they are inflicting unsustainable (over the long term) losses on an enemy where the lives lost times the dollar value of those lives constitutes an exponentially larger loss for the rich man's side of the board.
American losses in Iraq are about 0.44 per division per day. Compared to Vietnam and Korea (around 3.2/div/day) and WWII (20/div/day), it's trivial. There are frequent reports of battles where the kill ratios are 1:10 or 1:20 Americas to Iraqis.
I'm just guessing that a WWII vintage Luger Parabellum would probably fetch about $2500 to $7500 depending on condition and a prototype Walther PPK about $2000 to $5,000.
The P-38 is not a PPK. It is the direct ancestor of the P-1 and P-4.
-
<<In a war, you want someone who's willing to kill the enemy, and preferably one that will come home to tell the tale. Highly trained will kill more of the enemy than poorly trained and willing to die.>>
"More" and "less" killed don't mean all that much in a war of attrition, where both sides can draw enough new blood to replace what's been lost, unless there is some huge exponential gap in the kill rates; the loss of untrained, three-for-a-dollar warriors on the one side won't matter as long as they are inflicting unsustainable (over the long term) losses on an enemy where the lives lost times the dollar value of those lives constitutes an exponentially larger loss for the rich man's side of the board.
I'm just guessing that a WWII vintage Luger Parabellum would probably fetch about $2500 to $7500 depending on condition and a prototype Walther PPK about $2000 to $5,000.
No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country.
George S. Patton
(http://www.pattonhq.com/posters/pissing.gif)
Al Queda is welcome to die off at any rate they think appropriate. Or they could stop anytime.
[][][][][][][][]
http://www.militaryfactory.com/smallarms/detail.asp?smallarms_id=56 (http://www.militaryfactory.com/smallarms/detail.asp?smallarms_id=56)
http://www.militaryfactory.com/smallarms/detail.asp?smallarms_id=55 (http://www.militaryfactory.com/smallarms/detail.asp?smallarms_id=55)
The Soviet design burp gun...
http://www.gunslot.com/guns/ppsh-41 (http://www.gunslot.com/guns/ppsh-41)
-
No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country.
George S. Patton
=====================
It has always seemed to me that Patton was suggesting that he thought of all the soldiers he commanded, as well as those he fought, as "dumb bastards".
I wonder if he thought of himself as a "dumb bastard", and whether this implies that by refusing to enlist or bucking the draft, one was a less dumb bastard, or perhaps not a bastard at all.
-
I wonder if he thought of himself as a "dumb bastard", and whether this implies that by refusing to enlist or bucking the draft, one was a less dumb bastard, or perhaps not a bastard at all.
He referred to himself as a "bastard" and a "son of a bitch" often enough.
And no, it does not imply that.
-
No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country.
George S. Patton
=====================
It has always seemed to me that Patton was suggesting that he thought of all the soldiers he commanded, as well as those he fought, as "dumb bastards".
I wonder if he thought of himself as a "dumb bastard", and whether this implies that by refusing to enlist or bucking the draft, one was a less dumb bastard, or perhaps not a bastard at all.
I don't beleive you have captured Pattons attitude . Being the Bastard would not have bothered him , but he did not do dumb.
If everyone is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking.
George S. Patton
If we take the generally accepted definition of bravery as a quality which knows no fear, I have never seen a brave man. All men are frightened. The more intelligent they are, the more they are frightened.
George S. Patton
It is foolish and wrong to mourn the men who died. Rather we should thank God that such men lived.
George S. Patton
Wars may be fought with weapons, but they are won by men. It is the spirit of men who follow and of the man who leads that gains the victory.
George S. Patton
Watch what people are cynical about, and one can often discover what they lack.
George S. Patton
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/g/george_s_patton.html (http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/g/george_s_patton.html)
-
I don't beleive you have captured Pattons attitude . Being the Bastard would not have bothered him , but he did not do dumb.
==================
No one ever seems to accept the theory that one is dumb.
Patton was a demonstrably a strategic genius, and he also had superior resources to the Germans, at least in North Africa.
I was referring to the phrase "the other dumb bastard".
This implies a duplicity of dumb bastards: the enemy bastard and our dumb bastard.
It suggests that Patton regarded both as "dumb bastards". Perhaps the intelligence was to be supplied by their leadership.
If he included all soldiers in the category of "dumb bastards", then that suggests that he felt he was also a "dumb bastard", as he certainly would have included himself in the category of "soldier".
The other possibility is that he considered there to be two categories: (a) the category of "dumb bastards", which would include the soldiers, or at least the enlisted men, and (b) a second category, which would include officers, or perhaps just George Patton.
I do not think that the issue of parantage is of importance here, as bastards are generally the equals to those of legitimate parentage, once allowances for socio-economic status are made.
-
plane seems to know quite a bit about Patton, so I was wondering what he made of his slap in the face to a shell-shocked soldier in a hospital tent? Does it indicate a basic respect for all his men or a basic contempt for such of them as broke under fire? And if the latter, does plane know (I certainly don't) what was the longest period of time that the general had ever personally served on the front lines under enemy fire?
I don't want to take away anything from Patton's tactical and strategic skills (I loved the scene in the movie where he arrives at the head of the traffic jam, takes a quick look around, shoots the donkey, gets the dead animal and its cart pushed off the road and calls the sergeant stuck with the problem a "jackass," all in a few seconds) however it seems to me this is a whole nuther issue.
-
plane seems to know quite a bit about Patton, so I was wondering what he made of his slap in the face to a shell-shocked soldier in a hospital tent? Does it indicate a basic respect for all his men or a basic contempt for such of them as broke under fire? And if the latter, does plane know (I certainly don't) what was the longest period of time that the general had ever personally served on the front lines under enemy fire?
I don't want to take away anything from Patton's tactical and strategic skills (I loved the scene in the movie where he arrives at the head of the traffic jam, takes a quick look around, shoots the donkey, gets the dead animal and its cart pushed off the road and calls the sergeant stuck with the problem a "jackass," all in a few seconds) however it seems to me this is a whole nuther issue.
In the conduct of WWII there was one thing that Patton made public apology for and one thing he admitted genuinely regretting .
He apologised for the slap on the shell shocked soldier , I think he did not really regret it, but he seriously needed to make the apology for the sake of public opinion . I dont think the public agreed with Patton that the soldier would possibly have benefited from the treatment.
Slapping that guy was a last straw sort of event , it contributed to Eisenhours decision to put Patton in command of a phantom army , a ruse to misdirect German intelligence , also a weay to make Patton eat crow for months.
Patton did well as a decoy thus reestablishing trust and Eisenhour put Patton in command again on the push thru France.
Patton sent a large raiding party twards a POW camp where an In law of his was being held, this raid did not go well and Patton priviately expressed regret for it.
Patton was outspoken on the subject of Communism at an inoppurtune time this has fueled conspiracy theroys concerning hid death ever since.
-
And if the latter, does plane know (I certainly don't) what was the longest period of time that the general had ever personally served on the front lines under enemy fire?
Patton was shot by machine gun fire at the Battle of Saint-Mihiel during wwi and received a purple heart.
-
OK long enough to have been shot, which gives him some credibility, but how long in the line altogether? Just curious, because I was thinking of Farley Mowat's memoir And No Birds Sang, which indicated that the men serving at the front seem to get through their baptism of fire alright for the most part, but the real test of their courage comes in the second battle and each one thereafter, once the first one has shown them how badly they can get fucked up.
-
He was also involved in the Pershing Expeditions into Mexico. He killed Villa's second in command.
-
'Los Crimenes De Los Buenos' by Joaquin Bochaca Published January 1, 2001
An excerpt...
(Note: The translation of the passage below from Joaquin Bochaca's book, "Los Crimenes De Los 'Buenos' " was prepared by a participant on Liberty Forum who writes under the name of "Mugwort." The Book by Bochaca, an Argentinian, appears to be a major writing. I hope it soon becomes available in english translation. The short passage below addresses the assassination of General Patton.)
The abuses committed by the Forces of the Occupation in Germany reached such bestial extremes that various people in the Allied command structure opposed it--or tried to. ... Lindbergh mentioned how the American soldiers burned the leftovers of their meals to keep them from being scavenged by the [starving] Germans who hung around the garbage barrels.
He also wrote: "In our homeland the public press publishes articles on how we 'liberated' the oppressed peoples. Here, our soldiers use the word 'liberate' to describe how they get their hands on loot. Everything they grab from from a German house, everything they take off a German is 'liberated' in the lingo of our troops. Leica cameras are liberated, food, works of art, clothes are liberated. A soldier who rapes a German girl is "liberating " her.
"There are German children who gaze at us as we eat ... our cursed regulations forbid us to give tham anything to eat. I remember the soldier Barnes, who was arrested for having given a chocolate bar to a tattered little girl. It's hard to look these children in the face. I feel ashamed. Ashamed of myself, my people, as I eat and look at those children. How can we have gotten so inhumane?" So wrote Colonel Lindbergh, national hero of the United States, who was proposed as a candidate for the presidency of his country, who fought in the air force of his country, who was not a nazi. Many decent American and British citizens can see that.
General Patton, perhaps the most popular of the American generals, immediately opposed the total or partial application of the Morgenthau Plan in his sector of occupation. Soon, he had a run-in with another general of higher rank: General Eisenhower. It's well-known what extremely violent debates they had about how the civilian population of Germany was to be treated. Patton was SENTENCED TO DEATH by the directors of the scenario.
One day Patton's car was run into by a military truck in what seemed like a very strange accident. The General was taken by ambulance to a hospital, where he was observed to have serious, but not life-threatening injuries. But some days later he died of a heart attack.
Patton's death, in any event, was extremely opportune. The General had annnounced that he was thinking of moving to the United States, where he was going to denounce publicly what was taking place in Germany. But he didn't have time. He had fought with too many important people. General Eisenhower had had to pick up the telephone and order that he be halted before he reached Berlin. At Yalta the new "masters of the world" had agreed that the Soviets would be the first to enter the German capital. Patton wanted to prevent the Vandal-like entrance of the Red Army into the capital of the Reich, and made an enemy of Eisenhower. A month before, he could have entered Prague, but was also detained by Eisenhower, leaving him nailed to the ground by an order.
Patton's difficulties with the WAR POWERS over the occupation of Germany were so great that Eisenhower stripped him of his position as Commander of the Third Army, and stuck him with the command of a secondary unit. Patton knew he was in danger of death, and confided as much to his family and close friends. He was feared because of his prestige-he was the most renowned American General, while Eisenhower was nothing more than a political soldier-and his words could alert the public to the reality of what was happening in Germany.
Thus the accident was set up, which was not by any means the first. On the 21st of April 1945, his airplane on which he was being transported to General Headquarters of the Third Army in Feldfield (England) was attacked by what was assumed to be a German fighter-bomber, but it turned out to be a "Spitfire" piloted by an inexpert Polish pilot. Patton's plane was shot up, but was miraculously able to land. On the 3rd of May, some days before the end of the war, the General's jeep was charged by an ox-drawn cart, leaving Patton with light injuries.
October 13, 1945 was when the collision with the truck occurred. When Patton appeared to be getting better from the accident, the "heart attack" occurred. The fact is that after October 13 only the doctors saw Patton, forbidding any other visitors.
Until recently, it was only speculation that Patton had been assassinated. Now it is known for a fact. And it is know for a very simple reason. Because an agent of the well-known OSS (Office of Strategic Services) or American military spy, a certain Douglas Bazata, a Jew of Lebanese origin, announced it in front of 450 invited guests; high ranking, ex-members of the OSS, in the Hilton Hotel in Washington, the 25th of September, 1979. Bazata said, word-for-word:
"For divers political reasons, many extremely high-ranking persons hated Patton. I know who killed him. Because I am the one who was hired to do it. Ten thousand dollars. General William Donovan himself, director of the O.S.S, entrusted me with the mission. I set up the accident. Since he didn't die in the accident, he was kept in isolation in the hospital, where he was killed with an injection."
The tragic fate of Patton convinced other colleagues and their honorable compatriots of the uselessness of fighting against the WAR POWERS. And if any doubts remained, the "Morgan case" was enough to dissipate them. (To be continued .)
http://www.vho.org/aaargh/fran/livres4/Bochaca-Crimines.pdf (http://www.vho.org/aaargh/fran/livres4/Bochaca-Crimines.pdf)
Disclaimer
Email This Article
MainPage
http://www.rense.com (http://www.rense.com)
-
what was the longest period of time that the general had ever personally served on the front lines under enemy fire?
Can't find that , Patton was known to keep close to the point , but I don't know how to find a quantity for it.
-
You believe that shit? (that Ike had Patton killed)
<<So wrote Colonel Lindbergh, national hero of the United States . . . >>
The "national hero" was a Nazi-loving racist, decorated by Hermann Goering "on behalf of Adolf Hitler." (see Wikipedia article) married to Anne Morrow Lindbergh, author of "The Wave of the Future," a book in praise of fascism, which Mrs. Lindbergh considered in the book to be "the wave of the future."
<< who was proposed as a candidate for the presidency of his country . . . "
Yeah, but only by Nazi-loving anti-Semites who loved him for his racism and pro-fascist attitudes.
<< . . . who fought in the air force of his country . . . >>
as George Lincoln Rockwell, the late leader of the American Nazi Party, fought in the army of his country; too bad that military service is no guarantor of anti-fascist, anti-racist attitudes.
<< . . . who was not a nazi. >>
Sure coulda fooled me. If he wasn't, he came as close as any man can come to being a Nazi without being a Nazi.
<<Many decent American and British citizens can see that.>>
Depends on how ya define "decent" I guess. If "decent" means Jew-hating, racist, nazi-loving fascist apologist, then I guess I'd hafta agree with the author.
-
You believe that shit? (that Ike had Patton killed)
Not for a nanosecond.
I too noticed that the article whitewashed Lindberg's pro-German stance, and while he was an American hero up to the war, he wasn't really relevant after the war. The nation had its own "Wave of the Future" then, the heroes that came back from the European and Pacific theaters.
-
No, I don't personally believe that Ike had Patton killed. I suppose it is conceivable. I am not prepared to believe it at the moment.
Charles Lindbergh was a brave and intelligent aviator who seems to have taken a wrong turn with regard to Herr Hitler. He thought of Hitler as a political genius who pulled Germany out of the Depression and a rather deep national malaise by draining swamps, fostering the Volkswagen, and building Autobahns. Lindbergh impressed the Nazis by being brave, intelligent, Nordic and tall. Lindy failed to impress the Republicans, probably because they did not like his internationalist and second-generation immigrant view of the world. Alf Landon was more to their liking.
Lindbergh's father-in-law was the ambassador to Mexico who was instrumental in the US not invading or doing other warlike acts when Lazaro Cárdenas nationalized the oil industry in Mexico in 1938. The Mexican Pro-Nazi Sinarquista party was hoping that they could become the new pro-American government. They had a movement going called the Cristeros, who burned Mexican schoolhouses where indios were learning how to read, and built a huge statue of Jesus on a hill called Cubilete (which resembles an upside-down bucket) in central Mexico. It is quite impressive. I have not visited the Jesus in Rio harbor or the Cristo de los Andes. I would recommend the Valle de los Caidos monument in Spain, built by Franco's forced labor brigades for the most impressive I have personally seen, though. Fascism really seems to enjoy large cement Jesi.
Anyway, the Sinarquistas built a private pro-Catholic University in Guadalajara, the Universidad Autonoma de Guadalajara, to counter the national University, the UNAM. In the 1960's, the Rockefeller Foundation gave the UAG a large amount of money to build a Medical school. The tuition schedule was that Mexicans paid the least, Central Americans double, and Americans got to pay seven times what Mexicans paid.
When I was attending a different university in Guadalajara in the 1970's, I met a number of American med students from the UAG. They were nearly all Jewish doctor's and dentist's kids who had failed the entrance exams in the US. I thought it was somewhat amusing that Jewish Americans were the biggest benefactors of a Fascist Mexican Nazi university. Of course, the Jewish students were unaware of the Sinarquista connection, and only wanted a medical degree and the ability to pass the state board exams.
The Sinarquistas that I met were the children and grandchildren of rich ultracatholic Mexicans. Nearly all believed that Roosevelt was Jewish, as was Harry Solomon Truman and I have heard that Rockefeller was also Jewish. They could not figure out why a Jew like Rockefeller would contribute millions to the UAG, though.
The basic Sinarquista belief was that the Masons, the Communists, the Jews and the American Banking community were all out to conquer the world. They disagreed whether the sign that they had achieved this end would involve the Masonic takeover of Mexico or perhaps the kidnapping or assassination of the Pope.
At the moment, the Sinarquistas are the ultra right wing of the PAN (Partido de Accion Nacional). The main wing is composed of Monterrey industrialists, and the Sinarquistas have their base among Jalisco and Michoacan landowners.
The main sinarquista books used to be displayed in the window of nearly every bookstore.
Salvador Borrego's ¡America Peligro!, and ¡America Despierta! (America Danger! and America, Awake Up!) by America Borrego meant the Americas, not the USA. These are conspiratorial in tone, and each book features many many exclamation points, which are always used in pairs in Spanish (¡ at the beginning and ! at the end).