John Murtha: General Pace Can't Have It Both Ways

[marmar]

From HuffPost:


General Peter Pace testified on Tuesday to the Senate Appropriations Committee that my plan to restore military readiness in order to meet current and future threats and to require the Pentagon to uphold its own guidelines, standards and policies would somehow be damaging on the battlefield.

General Pace himself recently issued a report to Congress that said because of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, there is a significant risk that our military won't be able to quickly and fully respond to another crisis.

Two weeks ago, General Peter Schoomaker said the President's surge in combat troops will further erode the Army's ability to respond to other incidents around the world.

General Pace also indicated that if he was forced to adhere to established DoD readiness standards, one third of units currently programmed for Iraq could not be deployed. This statement is alarming. Is General Pace saying that he is willing to accept that in the near future, one third of the total military force in Iraq will not be fully manned, fully trained or fully equipped?

General Pace is trying to shift the blame, when in fact it is this Administration's polices that are hurting our military. ......(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rep-john-murtha/general-pace-cant-have-i_b_42321.html

[La_Fourmi_Rouge]

1. You tell 'em, Jack!

Pace has been talking out of both sides of his mouth for a long time. I am so glad that Murtha has called him out. I cannot wait to hear how Pace tries to spin this absolute contradiction.

[patrice]

2. So . . . and also . . . ?? Are our Troops SUPPOSED to be weaker?

Pace is saying one third of the total military force in Iraq will not be fully manned, fully trained, nor equipped AND Cheney and he don't want Murtha to do anything about that.

Pace also said before the Senate Appropriations Committee that a weak Iraqi government (Shia) results in stronger militias (Sunni). The "Redirection" documented by Seymour Hersh describes a process that is weakening Shia in the region and strengthening Sunnis. So, as the Sunni Iraqi militias get stronger they have to decide whether to kill more Americans or more Shia. Doesn't the fact that the Administration is resisting Murtha's plan, and thus leaving those forces weak in that situation, suggest that this is supposed to push the Sunni Iraqi militias in the direction of attacking the Shia instead?

[patrice]

3. It's the old bait and switch again . . . !

Only this time it is American Blood being waved under the noses of the Sunnis in the region to get them into what's going on, and then through the use of special Sunni operative$$$$$$$$, their efforts are turned on the Shia instead.