Political Crossfire Forums

[Richard Owl Mirror]

Lawmakers Criticize Training And Deployment of Iraqi Forces
November 27, 2006
Quote: Two senior members of the House Armed Services Committee and several former Defense Department officials yesterday criticized poor U.S. training and deployment of the Iraqi army and police as a major reason the Baghdad government cannot provide security to its people.

Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.), chairman of the panel, said that 33 trained Iraqi army battalions, now serving in provinces that are relatively peaceful, should be moved into Baghdad or other areas where there is fighting. "Saddle those guys up, move them into the fight," Hunter said on NBC's "Meet the Press." He added, "Nothing trains a combat unit better than actually being in military operations."

Rep. Ike Skelton (D-Mo.), who next year will take over as chairman of the Armed Services Committee, focused on the Army training of Iraqi units. He said that in many instances "the wrong types" of trainers were given the job.

"I would hope we could stand up their brigades, their battalions, and that they would be effective, and the way to do this is for us to train them better, to have advisers that understand them," Skelton said on NBC.

~snip~


Can you imagine that, Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.) and Rep. Ike Skelton (D-Mo.) on the same page!
Where was Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.) when he was chairman of the House Armed Services Committee ?

Rep. Duncan Hunter, the Republican CHAIRMAN of the House Armed Services Committee, introduced this astonishing resolution today:
Quote: Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Representatives that the deployment of United States forces in Iraq be terminated immediately.
Hunter's resolution orders U.S. troops to turn around 180 degrees and march out of Iraq - so insurgents can shoot them in the back.

Duncan Hunter's resolution makes him a traitor.

Ah, but Hunter says he opposes his own resolution.
So why did he introduce it? Simply for the political stunt of setting a trap for Democrats.
http://www.democrats.com/node/6913

House Armed Services chairman Duncan Hunter says military detainee policy has been too lenient

http://www.dccc.org/gopauctionhouse/members/DuncanHunterCA-52.html

Rep. Duncan Hunter Says Congress Irrelevant, Attack on Iran OK
http://www.house.gov/hasc/schedules/6-8-06HunterOpeningStatementpress.pdf

Oh Wait, now I see why He's had a change of heart !
Rep. Hunter launches 2008 presidential bid
WASHINGTON - Republican Rep. Duncan Hunter, known in the military's echelon for his congressional role but hardly a national name, said Monday he was taking the initial step in a 2008 presidential bid.

"This is going to be a long road, it's a challenging road, there's going to be some rough and tumble, but I think it's the right thing to do for our country," Hunter, the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, said at a waterfront news conference.

~@~

In my opinion, this guy is an opportunist and playing politics with American Servicemens lives.

[Dookiestix]

Alot of politicians in Washington have been, and still are, playing politics with the lives of our soldiers in Iraq.

[Moot]

Richard Owl Mirror wrote: ....
In my opinion, this guy is an opportunist and playing politics with American Servicemens lives.

The US military trainers they have been sending to Iraq are not qualified, have never seen battle and don't know the culture or people they were sent to train. There is also a major communication problem in that the US trainers don't speak the language.

There is also the problem of young inexperienced US military trainers who are fresh out of school and only just learned what they know from power point presentations. In other words, the US trainers are not respected by the already battle hardened Iraqi troops they were sent to train. If anything the Iraqi troops could teach the US trainers a thing or two.

So no, I don't think Rep. Duncan Hunter is being an opportunist. I think he is finally being a realist.

[Mr. Sunshine]

What was their joint bi-partisan solution? <crickets> :roll:

[sLiPpY]

Mr. Sunshine wrote: What was their joint bi-partisan solution? <crickets> :roll:

Oh, the Bush 41 EMT's?

[Moot]

Mr. Sunshine wrote: What was their joint bi-partisan solution? <crickets> :roll:

:lol: Who knows?

Right now Bush is on his way to Jordan to put the screws to PM Al Maliki to control the sectarian violence (civil war) all the while knowing that he can't do a thing about it as long as there is a US presence in Iraq and the US is ahem training and controling the Iraq military.

[sLiPpY]

Moot wrote: Mr. Sunshine wrote: What was their joint bi-partisan solution? <crickets> :roll:

:lol: Who knows?

Right now Bush is on his way to Jordan to put the screws to PM Al Maliki to control the sectarian violence (civil war) all the while knowing that he can't do a thing about it as long as there is a US presence in Iraq and the US is ahem training and controling the Iraq military.

There's also the small matter of the civil war in Pakistan too. :lol:

[Moot]

sLiPpY wrote: Moot wrote: Mr. Sunshine wrote: What was their joint bi-partisan solution? <crickets> :roll:

:lol: Who knows?

Right now Bush is on his way to Jordan to put the screws to PM Al Maliki to control the sectarian violence (civil war) all the while knowing that he can't do a thing about it as long as there is a US presence in Iraq and the US is ahem training and controling the Iraq military.

There's also the small matter of the civil war in Pakistan too. :lol:

And an increasingly possible civil war in Lebanon which could then spread to Syria, Turkey (Kurdistan), Jordan (growing population of Iraqi refugees), Saudi Arabia (on verge of loosing power over its people) and Egypt (can't control its militant factions) with Israel caught in the middle. Oops, there goes the neighborhood.

[The American]

Moot wrote: sLiPpY wrote: Moot wrote: Mr. Sunshine wrote: What was their joint bi-partisan solution? <crickets> :roll:

:lol: Who knows?

Right now Bush is on his way to Jordan to put the screws to PM Al Maliki to control the sectarian violence (civil war) all the while knowing that he can't do a thing about it as long as there is a US presence in Iraq and the US is ahem training and controling the Iraq military.

There's also the small matter of the civil war in Pakistan too. :lol:

And an increasingly possible civil war in Lebanon which could then spread to Syria, Turkey (Kurdistan), Jordan (growing population of Iraqi refugees), Saudi Arabia (on verge of loosing power over its people) and Egypt (can't control its militant factions) with Israel caught in the middle. Oops, there goes the neighborhood.

Ethinic cleansing of the Middle East. A face change is due.

:wink:

[Kane]

The American wrote: Moot wrote: sLiPpY wrote: Moot wrote: Mr. Sunshine wrote: What was their joint bi-partisan solution? <crickets> :roll:

:lol: Who knows?

Right now Bush is on his way to Jordan to put the screws to PM Al Maliki to control the sectarian violence (civil war) all the while knowing that he can't do a thing about it as long as there is a US presence in Iraq and the US is ahem training and controling the Iraq military.

There's also the small matter of the civil war in Pakistan too. :lol:

And an increasingly possible civil war in Lebanon which could then spread to Syria, Turkey (Kurdistan), Jordan (growing population of Iraqi refugees), Saudi Arabia (on verge of loosing power over its people) and Egypt (can't control its militant factions) with Israel caught in the middle. Oops, there goes the neighborhood.

Ethinic cleansing of the Middle East. A face change is due.

:wink:

Watch the effect it has on the rest of the world...

[Trajan]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061128/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_training_the_army

Iraqi army not ready to defend Fallujah.

Iraqi commanders acknowledge they can't handle a city as large and volatile as Fallujah without American support — especially with the country teetering on the edge of civil war between the Shiite majority and Sunni minority.

"It's something we keep in mind, that one day coalition forces are going to leave. But it can't be now," said 1st Lt. Hamazah Adman, head of intelligence for the 3rd Battalion, 2nd Brigade, 1st Iraqi Army Division.

"We can say that two years may be enough," he said. (They've had two years already, as the city was cleaned out two years ago.)

Lt. Col. James Teeples, a senior adviser to U.S. military training teams in Fallujah, said many problems stem from corruption at the Iraqi Defense Ministry. While the average soldier makes less than $700 monthly, officials pay bribes of $15,000 to become brigade commanders, anxious to pocket kickbacks from the lower ranks. (so what is the gov't going to do about it?)


Teeples said there are close links between many top Iraqi army officials and Shiite militias. Soldiers in the mostly Shiite army also have reached out to militias for protection, fearing civil war if American forces begin withdrawing, he said. (So the gov't can't protect its own people. Then it isn't a legitimate one. When its own soldiers don't feel safe in their own army....)

Shiite soldiers insist they are sensitive to all civilians — even in Fallujah where most residents are Sunni. But there was some visible tension during the night raid when an Iraqi captain told a man who had fled Baghdad for fear of Shiite militias that it would never be safe to return.

Ahmed Sallah, 28, shot back: "I should be able to live anywhere." (So where is this much bally-hooed freedom they're supposed to have? All that wasted blue ink, and the man can't even live in the capital.)