Gates: National Guard equipment levels lowest since 9/11; UNITS HAVE ONLY 56% OF REQUIRED EQUIPMENT

[DeepModem Mom]

LAT: National guard equipment levels lowest since Sept. 11
By Peter Spiegel, Times Staff Writer
May 9, 2007

WASHINGTON -- The Pentagon, bearing the brunt of criticism for shortfalls in National Guard supplies in the wake of last week's devastating tornado in Kansas, acknowledged Wednesday that Army National Guard units currently had only 56 percent of their required equipment.

Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates told a Senate hearing that current equipment levels are the lowest since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. He said that the Bush administration's current defense budget request, which asks for $22 billion for the Army National Guard over the next five years, would take guard units up to 76 percent of their authorized equipment levels....

Gates faced pointed questions on Guard readiness at a Capitol Hill hearing from a bipartisan group of senators, who argued that repeated deployments to Iraq were causing shortages in equipment needed for homeland security and national disaster response.

The issue moved back into the spotlight after Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius, a Democrat, pointed to the shortfalls after a tornado flattened the farming town of Greensburg, Kan. Guard shortfalls delayed the state's emergency response, she said....

***

White House and Pentagon officials have insisted that sharing agreements between the states would ensure that any shortfalls faced by one state during a disaster could be filled by neighboring states. But some experts have challenged that claim, noting that nearly every state is running short of equipment because of overseas deployments.

"These compacts are practically nullified now because all states have people in the sand box; I am talking about Iraq," said Melvyn Montano, former head of the New Mexico National Guard. "If you have four or five states around you, where are they going go get their equipment from? Because they all have been deployed."...

The Army National Guard has told members of Congress that it had $23.6 billion in unfunded requirements that it would need to get back to 100 percent readiness. Sen. Patrick J. Leahy, D-Vt., said failure to fill those requirements means that some states only had 35 percent of their guard equipment....

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-guard10may10,0,986825.story?coll=la-home-nation

[ninkasi]

1. Anybody who clings to the delusion

that Bushco gives a shit about the citizens of this country, or of having a well prepared National Guard to step in when a disaster strikes, is mainlining the Kool-Aid. As far as the Chimp is concerned, all things are supposed to enter a state of suspended animation when competing with his lunatic ideas about what he is determined to accomplish.

Not only is he the worst president ever, but the worst POSSIBLE president ever. He doesn't care about me, or you, or our relatives, or friends. He is determined to build himself a great legacy, even though those of us who are in touch with reality know that that possibility died years ago.

His policies mean that more of our troops will be killed or maimed, and that more and more citizens who are affected by floods, tornadoes, hurricanes, and wildfires, will suffer, as well .Letting a sociopath become president is a recipe for disaster.

[Fire Walk With Me]

2. If you can destroy it, you can replace it with your own design.

That answers to you. Privatization through purposeful neglect? Worst possible case, yes.

See: FEMA, the free election process, etc.

[Toots]

4. Exactly, Snows first reponse was that Bush* would give money to hire Private Contracters & their equ

Leave it to the Republicans to Profit from disaster.

[DeepModem Mom]

6. One suspects that that is always the prime motivator. nt

[liam_laddie]

3. Ironic use of term "supertanker"

Gates said that short-term funding would result in the DoD being unable to plan ahead (huh? as if the appointed officials there ever planned for more than their future jobs in the M-I complex) and changing budget-based policies would be akin to turning around a supertanker. What COULD have he been thinking about? Operation Iraqi Liberation? Oh, those Freudian slips...

[hatrack]

5. So, do you suppose Tony Snow will attack him a la Sebelius for "politicizing" things?

Nah, I didn't think so either . . .

[Bluebear]

7. NOT READY FOR DUTY, SIR!

Campaign 2000, our brave hero chimp declares the military unfit under Clinton:

At the Republican convention in Philadelphia, George W. Bush declared: "Our military is low on parts, pay and morale! If called on by the commander-in-chief today, two entire divisions of the Army would have to report, 'Not ready for duty, sir.'" Bush says he is the candidate who can "rebuild our military and prepare our armed forces for the future."