40 percent of Army reservists fail to report

Originally posted by taibunsuu
Um... yeah, Saddam allowed inspectors to go anywhere they want eventually. Two inspectors said there were no WMDs and when the US invaded the UN inspectors still hadn't gone to the same places they'd been before where the US said there were WMDs.

it was widely reported that the inspectors were constantly harassed with flat tires and other hindrance techniques�.if they were doing such a great job and things were going so swimmingly what was the need and the prompting for resolution 1441. if they could just do their jobs with harassment and problems why did the gutless security council agree to r 1441�.and if you think the funding for the war is expensive just what impact would leaving our troops staged around Iraq for an indefinite amount of time have cost?

Originally posted by taibunsuu
And what aggression did Iraq have? Their entire conventional force was obliterated and former CentCom commander A. Zinni said that Iraq couldn't threaten even Syria or Jordan. Hell, Colin Powell said the same thing in 2001.

there are other forms of aggression which are much more potent than the Iraqi military ever was��.as we learned on 9/11 try a google on �salman pak� look at my signature regarding the Russian president warning us of planned terrorist actions in America. And if your so fond of Zinni then look for some of his quotes were he said that there is no doubt that Iraq would have to be dealt with�..as with most generals he wants things run his way and when they are not they become very pissy.

Originally posted by taibunsuu
Iraq was not invaded because it represented a threat. Fine, given that, the invasion itself was not thought out. Piss Poor Planning leads to Piss Poor Performance. That's what we have now as 67% of the country is unemployed, using US troops as live fire targets and cutting off the heads of everyone they get their hands on.

and if it is true that the invasion was so bungled how do you explain the very low casualty rate for the war itself.

Before the war in Iraq, the Vice President of the United States made a very candid and truthful case regarding Saddam Hussein, stating "The suffering inside Iraq can come to an end when Saddam Hussein's regime is replaced, and I hope -- and most of the world community hopes -- that this regime based on terrorism and atrocities against his own people will be replaced. Over time, we hope to achieve that result."

also found this as you like quotes from administration figures as to the veracity of authentication

atrocities against his own people

although i do not condone acts of violence. i will say that these points have been over emphasized. this was an isolated ocurance taking place years ago. there is so much violence everywhere in the world, it just seems unfair to single out saddam. there is tyrany in every corner of the globe. if we were so concerned with bringing these atrocities to justice then why didnt we invade when these acts were first realized?

I guess this answers my original question.....

Former soldiers slow to report

By Tom Squitieri, USA TODAY
WASHINGTON � Fewer than two-thirds of the former soldiers being reactivated for duty in Iraq and elsewhere have reported on time, prompting the Army to threaten some with punishment for desertion.
The former soldiers, part of what is known as the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR), are being recalled to fill shortages in skills needed for the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Of the 1,662 ready reservists ordered to report to Fort Jackson, S.C., by Sept. 22, only 1,038 had done so, the Army said Monday. About 500 of those who failed to report have requested exemptions on health or personal grounds.

"The numbers did not look good," said Lt. Col. Burton Masters, a spokesman for the Army's Human Resources Command. "We are tightening the system, reaching the people and bringing them in."


www.usatoday.com...