Just wondering what everyone else thought of this so called reformation "Plan."

It doesnt make me feel any safer knowing we are slashing our military..Why would the military brass go along with this coon?

Slashing???

We are adding several more combat brigades and trimming uneeded support elements, and making existing support elements lighter and more efficient. We are, in the end, adding a lot more trigger pullers.

Hmmm.

October 2005.

 out of five.

Quoted: Hmmm. October 2005.

Kinda what I was thnking

Quoted:  out of five.

+

Quoted: Just wondering what everyone else thought of this so called reformation "Plan." It doesnt make me feel any safer knowing we are slashing our military..Why would the military brass go along with this coon?

WTF is the word in red supposed to mean,  

Quoted: Quoted: Hmmm. October 2005. Kinda what I was thnking

Yep

Excellent!

Mods, please don't lock this thread. I love seeing the funny new .gifs and troll animations.

FOAD,


And take your stupid ass back to the DU while you're at it...


  - georgestrings

Quoted: Mods, please don't lock this thread. I love seeing the funny new .gifs and troll animations.

Please do not lock!!

I want this guy to come back with his witty, cut and paste arguement!!!

And explain the "coon" thing to me!!  


ETA:  I sent him a link so he does not forget where he posted!!!

Quoted: Mods, please don't lock this thread. I love seeing the funny new .gifs and troll animations.

I cannot take the credit for that one I posted, it's was one that someone else posted that I saved.

Yawn.......

Tag for later.

Shouldn't everybody stop bashing KeMiCaLs until there is more positive evidence that he is a troll?
He could have the potential to be a great poster, couldn't he Or maybe just a troll.

Everybody has to start out from zero posts, and I'm sure that some people who could have been great members have been pissed off by the welcome they received.

+1 to above.  We may just need to set him straight.

Quoted: Shouldn't everybody stop bashing KeMiCaLs until there is more positive evidence that he is a troll? He could have the potential to be a great poster, couldn't he Or maybe just a troll. Everybody has to start out from zero posts, and I'm sure that some people who could have been great members have been pissed off by the welcome they received.

We've got another one...................


j/k

Quoted: Shouldn't everybody stop bashing KeMiCaLs until there is more positive evidence that he is a troll? He could have the potential to be a great poster, couldn't he Or maybe just a troll. Everybody has to start out from zero posts, and I'm sure that some people who could have been great members have been pissed off by the welcome they received.

Fair enough.

Just wondering what everyone else thought of this so called reformation "Plan." It doesnt make me feel any safer knowing we are slashing our military..Why would the military brass go along with this coon?

How about this:

If there were to be strength reductions, even to absurd amounts the military brass would go along with the Honorable Mr. Rumsfeld because that's how things work in this country.  The military takes its orders from the civilian leadership.

Quoted: Quoted: Shouldn't everybody stop bashing KeMiCaLs until there is more positive evidence that he is a troll? He could have the potential to be a great poster, couldn't he Or maybe just a troll. Everybody has to start out from zero posts, and I'm sure that some people who could have been great members have been pissed off by the welcome they received. We've got another one................... img347.imageshack.us/img347/8281/dutroll3xd.gif

I love that new troll animation.  Is that one of the official ones now?  If not, it should be.

Quoted: I love that new troll animation.  Is that one of the official ones now?  If not, it should be.

Not an official one, just one that was posted here by someone else that I saved.

Rumsfeld's mantra has always been "go light" and downsize.  Nothing new here.
As Defense Secretary, I'd put him on a par with McNamara.
some definite genius, but also a lot of head in the sand action and some ideas that just didn't quite pan out.


On the lighter side,
here are some interesting Rumsfeld quotes:

"Secretary Powell and I agree on every single issue that has ever been before this administration except for those instances where Colin's still learning (laughter)" "Oh my goodness gracious, what you can buy off the Internet in terms of overhead photography. A trained ape can know an awful lot of what is going on in this world, just by punching on his mouse, for a relatively modest cost." "Arguments of convenience lack integrity and inevitably trip you up." "Learn to say "I don't know." If used when appropriate, it will be often." "Don't do or say things you would not like to see on the front page of The Washington Post." "Don't divide the world into "them" and "us." Avoid infatuation with or resentment of the press, the Congress, rivals, or opponents. Accept them as facts. They have their jobs and you have yours." "Congress, the press, and the bureaucracy too often focus on how much money or effort is spent, rather than whether the money or effort actually achieves the announced goal." . Donald Rumsfeld "If you are not criticized, you may not be doing much." "If you try to please everybody, somebody's not going to like it." "Too often management recommends plans that look like Bob Hope’s nose or a hockey stick.The numbers go down the first year or so and then up in the later years. If you accept hockeystick plans, you will find they will be proposed year after year." "Beware when any idea is promoted primarily because it is "bold, exciting, innovative, and new." There are many ideas that are "bold, exciting, innovative and new," but also foolish." "(Cluster bombs are) being used on frontline al Qaeda and Taliban troops to try to kill them is why we're using them, to be perfectly blunt." "We aren't running out of targets; Afghanistan is." "The only way to defend against terrorists is to go after the terrorists." "Have you killed anyone yet?" to General Charles Holland Q: Do you expect it to be a total rout (in Afghanistan) -- the end of this will be..." A: "I'm hopeful that some will surrender. I suspect some won't, and I suspect the result of that will be that the opposition forces will kill them." Q: "Sir, there's a widespread perception in this town that when it comes to the Iraqis and the Palestinians, you are a hard-liner. Are you comfortable with that? (Laughter.) And --" A: "Look at me! I'm sweet and lovable." Q: "Secretary Rumsfeld, do you want to catch (Bin Laden) dead or alive or either way?" A: "Well, the president's policy is dead or alive. And, you know, I have my preference..." Q: "Secretary Rumsfeld, can you give us -- or maybe even General Pace -- can you give us any idea of what's happening..." A: "What do you mean 'even General Pace'? (Laughter.) (To the general) You don't have to take that from him!" Q: Mr. Secretary, at the White House last night, a senior White House official after the president spoke said that the decision to make the strike was made some time between 6:30 and 7:00 Eastern time. It's apparent that that decision to strike was not in line with what we have been led to believe about the war plan. Was the intelligence you got fragile enough where you felt you had to go at that moment and not start with, say, shock and awe or some other phase of the war? A: "Well, Dick, calibrate me, but the first thing I'd say is I don't believe you have the war plan -- (laughter) -- a fact which does not make me unhappy. (Laughter)" "We take the world like you find it; and Israel is a small state with a small population. It’s a democracy and it exists in a neighborhood that in many -- over a period of time has opined from time to time that they’d prefer it not be there and they’d like it to be put in the sea. And Israel has opined that it would prefer not to get put in the sea, and as a result, over a period of decades, it has arranged itself so it hasn’t been put in the sea." "There are many people in that part of the world who'd love to shove Israel into the sea, and not have it be there, and until people are willing to accept the presence of Israel, Israel obviously is not going to be able to make a deal." "I'm not into this detail stuff. I'm more concepty." "We do know, of certain knowledge, that (Bin Laden) is either in Afghanistan or in some other country or dead." "It is pretty clear that the coalition can win in Afghanistan and Iraq in one way or another, but it will be a long, hard slog." "I don't do quagmires." "Our task, your task... is to try to connect the dots before something happens. People say, 'Well, where's the smoking gun?' Well, we don't want to see a smoking gun from a weapon of mass destruction." "Reports that say that something hasn't happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns -- the ones we don't know we don't know. And if one looks throughout the history of our country and other free countries, it is the latter category that tend to be the difficult ones." "I can't think of anything funnier than a handful of congressmen walking around (Iraq). They'd have to be there for the next 50 years trying to find something. It's a joke." "The worst thing you can do is allow a coalition to determine what your mission is."

Quoted: Shouldn't everybody stop bashing KeMiCaLs until there is more positive evidence that he is a troll? He could have the potential to be a great poster, couldn't he Or maybe just a troll. Everybody has to start out from zero posts, and I'm sure that some people who could have been great members have been pissed off by the welcome they received.

In theory...

But in practice, legit new members usually post gun questions and a few replies. Trolls usually start new threads in GD with stuff that sounds like it was copied straight from DU.

Quoted: Quoted: Everybody has to start out from zero posts, and I'm sure that some people who could have been great members have been pissed off by the welcome they received. In theory... But in practice, legit new members usually post gun questions and a few replies. Trolls usually start new threads in GD with stuff that sounds like it was copied straight from DU.

Yep.

He's a DU troll.  It's plain as the L on his forehead.

Quoted: Slashing??? We are adding several more combat brigades and trimming uneeded support elements, and making existing support elements lighter and more efficient. We are, in the end, adding a lot more trigger pullers.

So Rumsfeld's plan is more thrusts per squeeze?

He's probably talking about this article. It's being debated over on TankNet, and we have concluded that we don't understand it. We can't see how they can possibly justify dropping combat brigades. (Dropping a few HQs wouldn't hurt though)

____________

Pentagon Weighs Cutting Troops
Reduction Would Provide More Money For New Weapons Systems And Other Equipment
December 21, 2005
By TOM BOWMAN, Baltimore Sun

WASHINGTON -- Pentagon officials are considering cutting as many as 34,000 soldiers - the bulk of them from the National Guard - at a time when U.S. ground forces are stretched in Iraq, according to defense officials.

The proposed cuts are part of a reduction in the growth of defense spending over the next five years ordered by the White House.

The manpower cuts stem from a decision by Army leaders to sacrifice troop strength to provide more money for new weapons systems and other equipment, said defense officials, who requested anonymity.

The plan, which has not yet been approved by Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, is likely to spur criticism from members of Congress, who have pressed for a larger Army, and prompt even greater opposition from the nation's governors, who command the part-time Guard soldiers unless they are called to federal duty. State officials rely heavily on the 334,000-soldier Army Guard for natural disasters, such as Hurricane Katrina.

The plan calls for the reduction of some 26,000 Army Guard soldiers. It would eliminate as many as six brigades - each with about 3,500 soldiers - as well as two division headquarters, officials said.

One aviation brigade would likely be targeted, along with five ground brigades, including as many as four armored and mechanized units, officials said.

No specific states have been singled out for cuts, but those types of ground units are in Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Washington, Tennessee, Mississippi, Louisiana, Minnesota and Idaho.

The rest of the proposed cuts would come from the 189,000-soldier Army Reserve, which would lose 4,000 soldiers, and the 492,000-soldier active-duty Army, which would be cut by one brigade, officials said.

Asked about the plan, Paul Boyce, an Army spokesman, said: "The U.S. Army is looking at a great number of options. Nothing has been decided at this time."

Lt. Gen. Steven Blum, chief of the National Guard Bureau, said Army officials have not told him about any decisions on troop reductions.

"Nobody's talked to me about having significant cuts in the National Guard," Blum said. Still, he said, eliminating six Guard brigades would amount to a "significant loss" of capability for the Guard, both for its domestic responsibilities and in its support for overseas missions, such as Iraq, where the Guard has provided nearly 50 percent of U.S. combat units.

"It would reduce the number of citizen soldiers available to the governors and to the president at a time when no one has a sure picture of what we face in the future," Blum said in an interview. "It would be unwise and risky in today's uncertain threat environment."

One Pentagon official, who requested anonymity, said the decision to reduce troop levels was spurred by the need to cut $32 billion in Pentagon spending between 2007 and 2011. The Army's share of that cut over five years is $11.6 billion or 36 percent, said the official, though the Army's share of the total Pentagon budget is about 24 percent.

"The Defense Department does not have enough money to pay for all the bills it has to pay," the official said. "The Army leadership knows it's a tough call."

The official said much of the Army's budget - 40 cents of each dollar - goes for personnel costs, compared with 16 cents of each dollar for hardware, everything from radios and night-vision goggles to Humvees and tanks. In the 1990s, the Army reduced the amount of money it devoted to such hardware and now finds itself with equipment shortages, which have been exacerbated by war losses and damage from ongoing missions in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Quoted: He's a DU troll.  It's plain as the L on his forehead post he made in the other thread.

Quoted: Murtha has alot more merit then bushster will ever have. His comments are pretty Shamefull,But i will always listen to someone who has combat experience.. over someone who doesnt. Ie: bush..cheney..rumsfeld.  I may not agree with Mr.Murtha but he still holds somthing that our current leaders dont... COMBAT EXPERIENCE.

link



Rating:

Have you noticed that SHE started all this and then has not come back?

[Rick]Who are you really, and what were you before? [/Rick]

Quoted: Rating:

Quoted: Have you noticed that SHE started all this and then has not come back?

yep