136 Comments Add a Comment
linkicon reporticon emailicon
bm6005 says:
The article failed to mention that most of the Guard and Reservists are ex- military.
Posted by bb19631

Proof please. I don''t buy this for one minute. Perhaps some are, no doubt, but most? BS
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
frif1981 says:
The bottom line is that we are not making headway in the war against terror. We went into Afghanistan after Bin Laden, didn''t get him there but stayed there. I don''t even know why we went into Iraq (not after Al Qaeda they weren''t active there before we went in) and we are still there. The war on terror is a different type of war. We will never beat a VERY mobile enemy when we go in like a bull and have to lumber behind and fix our messes. We require more precision like what went on in Pakistan reported today. Ron Paul is the only candidate that seems to understand this. He voted to go after Bin Laden in Afghanistan but not to "build democracy" there. That is not our job. Not to mention that we would have all the trained personnel we need here if we had listened to him in the first place and not gone into Iraq when they did not aggress against us.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
frif1981 says:
The bottom line is that we are not making headway in the war against terror. We went into Afghanistan after Bin Laden, didn''t get him there but stayed there. I don''t even know why we went into Iraq (not after Al Qaeda they weren''t active there before we went in) and we are still there. The war on terror is a different type of war. We will never beat a VERY mobile enemy when we go in like a bull and have to lumber behind and fix our messes. We require more precision like what went on in Pakistan reported today. We would have all the trained personnel we need here if we had not gone into Iraq when they did not aggress against us.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
bb19631 says:
The government would have to spend millions to update the weapons that the National Guard uses ,this is true. 70% cost efficient to use these troops instead of active duty troops is bogus bulllshit. The article failed to mention that most of the Guard and Reservists are ex- military. When these troops get deployed they get paid the same as active duty troops so where is the cost efficientcy? 90 % of the Guard and Reservists have been deployed over seas more than once to Iraq and Afganistan. They do an awesome job and do their jobs well. So the only parts in this study I agree with is for the government to buy them better equiptment to use.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
frif1981 says:
The bottom line is that we are not making headway in the war against terror. We went into Afghanistan after Bin Laden, didn''t get him there but stayed there. I don''t even know why we went into Iraq (not after Al Qaeda they weren''t active there before we went in) and we are still there. The war on terror is a different type of war. We will never beat a VERY mobile enemy when we go in like a bull and have to lumber behind and fix our messes. We require more precision like what went on in Pakistan reported today. We would have all the trained personnel we need here if we had not gone into Iraq when they did not aggress against us.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
nyckate says:
and yet another serious bush failure -- his failures are harming this nation badly.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
frif1981 says:
The bottom line is that we are not making headway in the war against terror. We went into Afghanistan after Bin Laden, didn''t get him there but stayed there. I don''t even know why we went into Iraq (not after Al Qaeda they weren''t active there before we went in) and we are still there. The war on terror is a different type of war. We will never beat a VERY mobile enemy when we go in like a bull and have to lumber behind and fix our messes. We require more precision like what went on in Pakistan reported today. Ron Paul is the only candidate that seems to understand this. He voted to go after Bin Laden in Afghanistan but not to "build democracy" there. That is not our job. Not to mention that we would have all the trained personnel we need here if we had listened to him in the first place and not gone into Iraq when they did not aggress against us.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
frif1981 says:
The bottom line is that we are not making headway in the war against terror. We went into Afghanistan after Bin Laden, didn''t get him there but stayed there. I don''t even know why we went into Iraq (not after Al Qaeda they weren''t active there before we went in) and we are still there. The war on terror is a different type of war. We will never beat a VERY mobile enemy when we go in like a bull and have to lumber behind and fix our messes. We require more precision like what went on in Pakistan reported today. Ron Paul is the only candidate that seems to understand this. He voted to go after Bin Laden in Afghanistan but not to "build democracy" there. That is not our job. Not to mention that we would have all the trained personnel we need here if we had listened to him in the first place and not gone into Iraq when they did not aggress against us.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
frif1981 says:
The bottom line is that we are not making headway in the war against terror. We went into Afghanistan after Bin Laden, didn''t get him there but stayed there. I don''t even know why we went into Iraq (not after Al Qaeda they weren''t active there before we went in) and we are still there. The war on terror is a different type of war. We will never beat a VERY mobile enemy when we go in like a bull and have to lumber behind and fix our messes. We require more precision like what went on in Pakistan reported today. Ron Paul is the only candidate that seems to understand this. He voted to go after Bin Laden in Afghanistan but not to "build democracy" there. That is not our job. Not to mention that we would have all the trained personnel we need here if we had listened to him in the first place and not gone into Iraq when they did not aggress against us.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
frif1981 says:
The bottom line is that we are not making headway in the war against terror. We went into Afghanistan after Bin Laden, didn''t get him there but stayed there. I don''t even know why we went into Iraq (not after Al Qaeda they weren''t active there before we went in) and we are still there. The war on terror is a different type of war. We will never beat a VERY mobile enemy when we go in like a bull and have to lumber behind and fix our messes. We require more precision like what went on in Pakistan reported today. Ron Paul is the only candidate that seems to understand this. He voted to go after Bin Laden in Afghanistan but not to "build democracy" there. That is not our job. Not to mention that we would have all the trained personnel we need here if we had listened to him in the first place and not gone into Iraq when they did not aggress against us.
reply
3/14