Afghanistan war readiness forces tradeoffs

[unhappycamper]

Afghanistan war readiness forces tradeoffs
By Rick Maze - Staff writer
Posted : Wednesday Apr 14, 2010 17:07:11 EDT

Equipment and supplies for the 30,000 U.S. ground troops surging into Afghanistan is there waiting for them as a result of an all-out logistics effort, senior military officials said Wednesday.

But one of the costs of being prepared is that the replacement of wartime stockpiles must be pushed further into the future.

Testifying before a Senate subcommittee about current and future readiness, Assistant Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James Amos said about 40 percent of the equipment items being transferred from Iraq to Afghanistan in preparation for the surge was destined to be returned to U.S. stockpiles for future contingencies.

That is a good thing, Amos said, although it is an example of “the kind of strain on the forces.”

Amos and Army Vice Chief of Staff Gen. Peter Chiarelli were asked about equipment by Sen. Richard Burr of North Carolina, ranking Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee’s readiness and management support panel. Burr was trying to determine how much money and time would be needed to fully restore the readiness of U.S. combat forces after years of conflict.



unhappycamper comment: Another way of saying this is that the US government has decided to put more of the cost of the occupation on the 'back side' of accounting so we don't get upset.

It's a win-win for the M-I-C. Once you start running low on ______, you can order some more. A concrete example was my first time in Vietnam I was eating C rations from the 1950s and the second time I had Super Cs.

[Solly Mack]

1. k/r

lather, rinse, repeat