Target Centermass

Day: May 9, 2005

  • Panel Urges Slow Return of Troops

    And so the fight on the latest round of base closures slowly stirs to a simmer.

    A congressionally chartered panel of military experts said Monday the Pentagon should slow its withdrawal of troops from Europe and Asia and should keep in Germany one of the two heavy armored units currently scheduled to return to the United States.

    “We’re saying slow this down, step back, take a breath,” said Al Cornella, chairman of the Overseas Basing Commission, whose report includes findings the Pentagon strongly disputes. “Let’s look at it and determine how” to accommodate the troops who are brought home, he said.

    The commission also said it believes the Pentagon has underestimated the cost of repositioning U.S. forces abroad. It’s likely to cost closer to $20 billion than the $8 billion to $12 billion estimated by the Pentagon, the panel said in its report to Congress and President Bush.

    Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said arrangements are in place to build housing and other facilities required for the return of an estimated 70,000 troops and 100,000 family members. Most of those are returning from Germany, but some also will come home from South Korea.

    Whitman said that while the Pentagon appreciates the commission’s work, “the analysis has significant flaws and suffers from inaccuracies in its findings.”

    He said the commission was wrong to conclude that the Pentagon has not adequately coordinated with other government agencies and with members of Congress, and he disputed the panel’s finding that overseas changes should await decisions on domestic military base closures.

    Whitman said Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld’s recommendations on which domestic bases to close or realign – to be disclosed no later than May 16 and possibly later this week – have taken into account the need to accommodate the 70,000 troops returning from overseas.

    “We have plans, we know where they’re going to go” once they get to the United States, and the Pentagon has determined where additional facilities will be built to accommodate them, Whitman said.

    […]

    The Overseas Basing Commission did not focus on the specifics of domestic base closings, but addressed instead the Pentagon’s plan for repositioning U.S. forces overseas – to include the plan to bring home 70,000 troops from Asia and Europe.

    Cornella told a news conference Monday that the commission recommends keeping in Europe a 4,000-soldier heavy combat brigade that is scheduled for return to the United States. He and other commission members said this would provide a security hedge against unexpected threats in the European region, as well as enhance cooperation with NATO allies.

    Please tell me any situation in Europe that could currently feasibly be anticipated that would demand the constant presence of an American heavy brigade. I see nothing presently on the horizon in Europe or the Middle East that would not allow for the difference in build-up time of Europe- or U.S.-based units. We’re not guarding the Fulda Gap against the ever-threatening Red Horde anymore, folks.

    If I had to choose between leaving troops overseas in Germany or Korea, I would opt for Korea. That would leave us closer to expected hot spots where a heavy brigade would actually be needed on a must-be-there-yesterday basis. That said, bringing that brigade stateside from Europe would actually bring them to an easier Asian deployment.

    And then there’s Iran. Should that little powderkeg blow up into a ground war, a brigade in Germany buys us little or none. A major deployment would be needed, and troops quickly shuttled in from Eastern Europe and the states, along with a heaping helping of air power, could certainly buy the time the deployment would require.

    As an added plus to a withdrawal from Germany and its cohorts in Old Europe, maybe they would once again feel a need to contribute significantly to their own defense. Daddy can’t always be there for them every moment of the day — it’s time for them to face the full obligations of their current martial stability. Yeah, I feel a degree of ingratitude these days.

  • U.S.: 100 Insurgents Killed Near Iraq-Syria Border

    Perhaps the action is a reaction spurred by the recent rash of bombings. Perhaps it is a movement of opportunity based on only-recently acquired data. Probably it’s both — some new information that allowed a movement against a porous border region at a time when the insurgents are greatly in need of another beating. Either way, the coalition forces are back on the offensive, this time pressing the issue and bloodying the enemy near the Syrian border.

    American forces have killed at least 100 insurgents and foreign fighters in an offensive near Iraq’s border with Syria, U.S. military officials said Monday.

    The offensive, which began Saturday, involves more than 1,000 U.S. troops in an attempt to crack down on the network headed by terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the military said.

    Three Marines from the 2nd Marine Division have died in the fighting, two on Sunday and one Monday, the military said.

    Officials said much of the fighting has been in the Al Jazirah Desert north of Qaim, a city along the Euphrates River in Anbar province on the Syrian border.

    The area has “basically [been] a sanctuary” for insurgents, said Col. Bob Chase, a Marine operations officer based at Camp Blue Diamond in Ramadi.

    A military press release said the region was known as a smuggling route. Insurgents have been using “known points of entry and ‘rat lines,’ as we call them, to bring in weapons illegally,” Chase said.

    Based on their “equipment and dress,” Chase said most of the insurgents are believed to be foreign fighters, not Iraqis.

    The offensive involves forces from the U.S. Army, Navy and Marines, the military said. Aircraft include Marine Corps jets, Chase said.

    Casualties have been “extremely light on the coalition side,” Chase said, “and conversely there have been a lot of enemy casualties.”

    Many of the fighters “are starting to flee, and we are continuing to press the attack.”

    Chase said the operation began after Iraqis provided information on the whereabouts of the insurgents.

    “The people are starting to be frustrated with these insurgents and with these foreign fighters,” he told CNN.

    “The offensive started based on some significant intelligence received from some very brave folks who live in that part of the country.”

    Meanwhile, Zarqawi’s group calls the report of devastating casualties lies.

    The Al-Qaeda group of Iraq’s most-wanted militant Abu Musab al-Zarqawi denied a US report on Monday that 75 insurgents had been killed in a sweep near the Syrian border.

    ‘The adorers of the cross claim to have killed 75 Muslims at Al-Qaim. Once more, they are lying, because lying is their religion,’ said the statement on an Islamist website, the authenticity of which could not be verified.

    Of course they’re lies, Mr. Terrorist. Oh, and by the way, how’s that inpenetrable defense of Fallujah treating y’all these days?

  • Marines Recall Some Body Armor

    The Marines have issued a recall on over 5,000 armored vests which have had mixed results during testing.

    When the U.S. Marines stormed into Fallujah last November — in the deadliest urban combat of the war — many may have been wearing body armor that may be flawed. But it wasn’t until last week the Marines ordered more than 5,000 of the potentially defective vests recalled.

    The so-called Interceptor bulletproof vests are manufactured by Point Blank Armor of Pompano Beach, Fla., and are supposed to stop a 9mm bullet. But government tests showed that bullets fully penetrated some vests.

    A Marine Corps memo dated July 19, 2004, warned that Army tests on one lot of vests “yielded failing results.”

    But with the war heating up in Iraq, there was such a demand for more body armor the Marines ordered a separate, independent test. The Marine Corps says the armor passed that test, so nearly 5,300 from the suspected defective lot were passed out to Marines.

    The story was first reported by the independent paper Marine Corps Times after an eight-month investigation.

    “There are still vests that are rejected by contractors out there in the field,” says Marine Corps Times reporter Christian Lowe.

    Monday, a company spokesman for Point Blank told NBC News, “We stand by our product” and “We do not know of any casualties or injuries related to the vest.”

    The Marine Corps said Monday the vests are capable of stopping a 9mm bullet, but nevertheless ordered the extended recall last week.

    The problem is that after extended wear and tear, serial numbers on each vest may be blurred and difficult to trace — making it impossible to tell which Marines are wearing what government experts claim are potentially defective vests.

    Without adequate alternatives at the time, it certainly seems prudent to have additional testing. After all, some armor is certainly more protective than no armor.