Study: U.S. Unprepared For Homeland Attack

Equipment Shortages Stateside, Insufficient Training Mark "An Appalling Gap" For Military

(AP)  The U.S. military isn't ready for a catastrophic attack on the country, and National Guard forces don't have the equipment or training they need for the job, according to a report.

Even fewer Army National Guard units are combat-ready today than were nearly a year ago when the Commission on the National Guard and Reserves determined that 88 percent of the units were not prepared for the fight, the panel says in a new report released Thursday.

The independent commission is charged by Congress to recommend changes in law and policy concerning the Guard and Reserves.

The commission's 400-page report, "Transforming the National Guard and Reserves into a 21st-Century Operational Force," concludes that the nation "does not have sufficient trained, ready forces available" to respond to a chemical, biological or nuclear weapons incident, "an appalling gap that places the nation and its citizens at greater risk."

"Right now we don't have the forces we need, we don't have them trained, we don't have the equipment," commission Chairman Arnold Punaro said in an interview with The Associated Press.

"Even though there is a lot going on in this area, we need to do a lot more. ... There's a lot of things in the pipeline, but in the world we live in - you're either ready or you're not."

In response, Air Force Gen. Gene Renuart, chief of U.S. Northern command, said the Pentagon is putting together a specialized military team that would be designed to respond to such catastrophic events.

"The capability for the Defense Department to respond to a chemical, biological event exists now," Renuart told the AP. "It, today, is not as robust as we would like because of the demand on the forces that we've placed across the country. ... I can do it today. It would be harder on the (military) services, but I could respond."

Over the next year, Renuart said, specific active duty, Guard and Reserve units will be trained, equipped and assigned to a three-tiered response force totaling about 4,000 troops. There would be a few hundred first responders, who would be followed by a second wave of about 1,200 troops that would include medical and logistics forces.

The third wave, with the remainder of that initial 4,000 troops, would include aircraft units, engineers, and other support forces, depending on the type of incident.

Punaro, a retired Marine Corps major general, had sharp criticism for Northern Command, saying that commanders there have made little progress developing detailed response plans for attacks against the homeland.

"NorthCom has got to get religion in this area," said Punaro. He said the military needs to avoid "pickup game" type responses, such as the much-criticized federal reaction to Hurricane Katrina, and put in place the kind of detailed plans that exist for virtually any international crisis.

He also underscored the commission's main finding: the Pentagon must move toward making the National Guard and Reserves an integral part of the U.S. military.

The panel, in its No. 1 recommendation, said the Defense Department must use the nation's citizen soldiers to create an operational force that would be fully trained, equipped and ready to defend the nation, respond to crises and supplement the active duty troops in combat.

Pointing to the continued strain on the military, as it fights wars on two fronts, the panel said the U.S. has "no reasonable alternative" other than to continue to rely heavily on the reserves to supplement the active duty forces both at home and abroad.

Using reserves as a permanent, ready force, the commission argued, is a much more cost effective way to supplement the military since they are about 70 percent cheaper than active duty troops.

Asked how much it would cost to implement the panel's recommendations, Punaro said it will take billions to fully equip the Guard. The commission is going to ask the Congressional Budget Office to do a cost analysis, he said.

In perhaps its most controversial recommendation, the panel again said that the nation's governors should be given the authority to direct active-duty troops responding to an emergency in their states. That recommendation, when it first surfaced last year, was rebuffed by the military and quickly rejected by Defense Secretary Robert Gates.

"I believe we're going to wear him down," said Punaro.

Renuart, however, said he believes it is unlikely that Gates will reverse himself. Renuart said he's talked to a number of state leaders on the matter, and most don't want full command of active duty troops - to include their care, feeding, discipline and logistics demands. Instead, he said, governors want to know that in a crisis, their needs will be met.


For more information and to view or download the report, visit the Commission on the National Guard and Reserve's Web site at www.cngr.gov.

[inventagod]

Just another Bu$h failure.

If this had been important, it would have been addressed. To me, this study uncovers the probability that the administration did pull off 9/11 in their coup. They know full well terrorists from abroad are not the threat, only those terrorists within our own government...

[dan9111]

Boogeyman #1: Global warming
Boogeyman #2: Terrorism

Neither affects most of us in America. Plainly these are transparent efforts for the government to take more freedoms away, while ignoring obvious violence in our society.

[georgiagrl1]

Think the US is unprepared? Then vote for a Democrat!

[inventagod]

As I recall, 9/11 happened on the Republicon watch...

[wogerwabbit]

Another Bush legacy. How can anybody defend that man?

[jimfinster]

Boogeyman #1: Global warming
Boogeyman #2: Terrorism

Neither affects most of us in America. Plainly these are transparent efforts for the government to take more freedoms away, while ignoring obvious violence in our society.
Posted by Dan9111


A double barrel load of denial.

[cbs_oliver]

Well, if we spent our resources defending the our nation where we live instead of our colonies where the people we have conquered live then we would be better prepared.

[cbs_oliver]

The US is also completely unprepared for a take over of the country by right wing nut jobs in the government or military or both.

That fight needs a Congress that is prepared to stand up rather than bend over.

Low cost.

Just replace Republicans with Democrats and Democrats like that Quizling RockyFellow that Boeing Rep Harding with real Democrats.

[navyretired2]

"Well, if we spent our resources defending the our nation where we live instead of our colonies where the people we have conquered live then we would be better prepared.

Posted by CBS_Oliver at 12:45 PM : Jan 31, 2008"

I completely agree that we should be spending money here instead of abroad; however, if that money weren''t speant overseas, it still wouldn''t find its way to the places most needed in the military...politicians would NEVER let that happen. Along those same lines, that money wouldn''t find its way to infrastructure.

We need baseline, elemntary level change in our government, the kind of which we won''t see because there''s too many crooks buried deep in the system that won''t remove their talons. Its the system...and its broken...

[theusa1st]

Think the US is unprepared? Then vote for a Democrat!

Posted by GeorgiaGrl1 at 12:07 PM : Jan 31, 2008

I hope you are kidding...the previous Democratic Administration gutted the military and intelligance agencies...

[theusa1st]

We need baseline, elemntary level change in our government, the kind of which we won''''t see because there''''s too many crooks buried deep in the system that won''''t remove their talons. Its the system...and its broken...

Posted by NavyRetired2 at 01:04 PM : Jan 31, 2008

I agree...not just the federal gov''t but local gov''t also.

[navyretired2]

"Think the US is unprepared? Then vote for a Democrat!

Posted by GeorgiaGrl1 at 12:07 PM : Jan 31, 2008"

Replace "vote for a Democrat" with "shoot a politician" and I may follow along.

[ov442]

So this is the ''shield of protection'' that some mentally ill GOP supporters keep saying Bush has given us?
nice.
Oddly, I also heard he REFUSED to follow any of the 9-11 commission''s recommendations to secure the USA, nor has he provided for appropriate security for chemical plants, nuclear plants, energy facilities, Ports of entry, borders in general, coast guard, national guard, first reponders have lost valuable employees and lost revenue from the feds.

Its as if Bush only wanted to spy on americans illegally and didnt want to secure our nation from attacks. And thats all. Like he really wants us to get attacked but no one is trying right now, so hes disappointed but takes credit for it even though hes done nothing to avert anything. Amazing.

[ov442]

And specifically actually made our security worse, with the diversion of 40% of our entire national guard forces and equipment from every state in the union to Iraq, where Al Quaida filled their recruiting goals faster and by far more than our own military is filling their goals. nice.
Its really reassuring to American families'' safety to keep doing things as a president to p1ss off hundreds of millions of foreigners with virtually nothing to lose that now want to kill all americans and bomb our nation.

[sgtrds]

Bush ignored warnings about terrorist attacks from the Clinton administration and those co0ntianed in his own daily briefings ("Bin Laden determined to attack in US" Condi Rice) and only woke up on 9-11. Then, instead of spending money to secure America, he threw away nearly $1 trillion and 4,000 soldiers lives on a wasted war with a country that had nothing to do with the attack in the first place and was no threat to the US. The arrogance, ignorance and greed of this "thing" (he''s not a man) will go down in history to America''s shame.

[walt1944-2009]

The Great Emperor Bush II is upset about an independant commissions findings that the military is not prepared in the event of another "terrrrrorist" attack. This revelation runs counter to what the Great Emperor Bush said in his State of the Union According to the Great Emperor Bush II speech on Monday, which led everyone to believe that the country has never been "safer" under the Great Emperor''s "protection"!

The Great Emperor, therefore, believes that the findings are flawed and in error, possibly influenced by the cowardly, evil Whimpo-crats, and has decided to disregard the report in total.

SIG HEIL, BUSH!!!

[aaabee-2009]

Posted by SgtRDS at 01:19 PM : Jan 31, 2008

There you go again, speaking rationally and using large words.

That is a mating call to the But Clinton! crowd. :)

[tomanyt]

Study: U.S. Unprepared For Homeland Attack.
Wow, someone had to do a "study" to figure that out.

[bfenerty]

Just what has the Department of Homeland Security been doing for the last 6 1/2 years? It''s not like we''re taking the fight to the enemy. This *** in Iraq certainly isn''t providing security for the continental U.S.. We better stop electing idiots to run this country and elect someone with a brain real quickly, or we just might live to see this attack against our country. God help us and thanks to GWB for totally *** up our country. Whatever happens goes on his conscience.

[tomanyt]

theUSA1st...And exactly what did the Republicans do for us that was so stellar?

[aaabee-2009]

Only one word seems appropriate for this article which so beautifully states the obvious:

Duh.

[mrconservatv]

Key 9/11 Commission Staffer Held Secret Meetings With Rove, Scaled Back Criticisms of White House

Think Progress
Thursday January 31, 2008

A forthcoming book by NYT reporter Philip Shenon %u2014 %u201CThe Commission: The Uncensored History of the 9/11 Investigation%u201D %u2014 asserts that former 9/11 Commission executive director Philip Zelikow interfered with the 9/11 report.

According to the book, Zelikow had failed to inform the commission at the time he was hired that he was instrumental in helping Condoleezza Rice set up Bush%u2019s National Security Council in 2001. Some panel staffers believe Zelikow stopped them from submitting a report depicting Rice%u2019s performance prior to 9/11 as %u201Camount[ing] to incompetence.%u201D

Zelikow flatly denied discussing the commission%u2019s work with Rove. %u201CI never discussed the 9/11 Commission with him, not at all. Period.%u201D

After completing his work with the 9/11 Commission, Zelikow was hired by Condoleezza Rice as Counselor at the State Department. He resigned from that position in late 2006. In 1995, Rice and Zelikow co-authored a book entitled, %u201CGermany Unified and Europe Transformed.%u201D

[mrconservatv]

Let''s spy on everyone Bush Administrations answer

Since the facts are obvious the only terror attack coming will be a covert operation so there%u2019s no reason to prepare for one that won''t happen otherwise.

[inventagod]

...and *** is all this ''HOMELAND'' ***?

I thought that went out with Hitler....

[theusa1st]

theUSA1st...And exactly what did the Republicans do for us that was so stellar?

Posted by tomanyt at 01:31 PM : Jan 31, 2008

tomayt - I am not particularly happy with either party...they lie every time they open their mouths...hypocrits...all of them.

[fiteit1]

Whatever happens goes on his conscience.

He''s got no conscience, his beliefs are filled with ego, his pockets filled with oil, and his head filled with shi*. You go Mr. %u201Cmission accomplished%u201D!

[micma-2009]

The commission''s 400-page report, "Transforming the National Guard and Reserves into a 21st-Century Operational Force," concludes that the nation "does not have sufficient trained, ready forces available" to respond to a chemical, biological or nuclear weapons incident, "an appalling gap that places the nation and its citizens at greater risk."


What the helll are we doing in Iraq?

[dan9111]

Boogeyman #1: Global warming
Boogeyman #2: Terrorism

Neither affects most of us in America. Plainly these are transparent efforts for the government to take more freedoms away, while ignoring obvious violence in our society.
Posted by Dan9111


A double barrel load of denial.

Posted by jimfinster

Really. Then why do we not have freedom to disagree and not pay for these wild theories of doomsday-politics? Surely if either threat were "real", the free-market would conjure up enough cash.

[frankson2]

THE REPUBLICANS BOAST THAT WE HAVE NOT BEEN ATTACKED SINCE 9/11 BECAUSE OF THEIR EFFORTS....OBVIOUS BS! WE HAVE NOT BEEN ATTACKED BECAUSE THE ENEMY HAS NOT CHOSEN TO DO SO, AND HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH REPUBLICAN PREPAREDNESS.

[liberalme]

Awww come on--is this another secret "message from Bush" scare tactic?
If so, we already know our country isn''t prepared--just look at how many illegals have "snuck" (in plain site)in.
Our boarders aren''t secure, our military is either exhausted, depleted or overseas--
We need Bush and Cheney to protect us???

OHHHHH thank GOD, I just woke up from that nightmare!

[anonbene]

and this news is a surprise to who? the bushies can''t one the one hand say he is protecting us and say 20 million illegals are in the US. thats an example of how detached from reality these republican lap dogs are. they contradict themselves and still think they make sense. I''ll be glad when they are gone and REMEMBER Bush FAILED us on 9/11

[tylenol6]

With our borders WIDE OPEN and Bush cutting back on giving terrorism funds to the states, it sure seems to
me Bush is HOPING for another attack. This way he can put FEAR, FEAR AND MORE FEAR to the american people.

[dan9111]

With our borders WIDE OPEN and Bush cutting back on giving terrorism funds to the states, it sure seems to
me Bush is HOPING for another attack. This way he can put FEAR, FEAR AND MORE FEAR to the american people.

Posted by tylenol6

You are right on target with many premises, but your conclusions are off. Bush is not "cutting back on giving terrorism funds". He never gave any to begin with. Did you see any personal checks he wrote? Not one. If he "gave" money, it was money that was never his. It was ours. I am sick to death of these people who say politicians "fund" things, when in actually they don''t. They simply use threats to get us all to pay their bills.

[robert_orme]

I will open up the door for alot of you the military is so poorly trained because of the cry who go in and their cry baby parents crying to congress so they feel they need to control the military training and as for operations that on going all around the world the public does not know about the entire country would be up in arms if they knew.Welcome to the USofA and new world order they will the government will terrorize you and you will take it.

[slim1h2o]

I am not particularly happy with either party...they lie every time they open their mouths...hypocrits...all of them.

Posted by theUSA1st at 02:03 PM : Jan 31, 2008

Yes they are!! And with this latest news, I think it''s time to go out and buy a couple firearms.

If they can''t seem to protect our borders, which is the only job (The government) they have, or supposed to do, any better than what they''re doing. Then it''s time to pick up arms.

And you anti-gun advocates, don''t waste your breath. After all, it will people like me, The pro-gun crowd, that will be keeping you safe.

[trillion1]

The creten in charge of DHS has lost billions of dollars and spends all his time making excuses for why he can''t do his job. I''m amazed we haven''t been attacked yet.

[slim1h2o]

Let me fix this sentence, so it reads better.

If they can''''t seem to protect our borders, which is the only job (The government) has, or supposed to do, any better than what they''''re doing. Then it''''s time to pick up arms.

[crater7]

BUSH SAY''S WE ARE SAFE. DON''T YOU BELIEVE HIM?
OUR BORDERS ARE SAFE AND SECURE. RIGHT?
OUR BORDERS ARE SAFE AND SECURE. RIGHT?

DON''T WORRY, THE GREAT PEACEMAKER SAY''S WE ARE SAFE.

I BELIEVE, I BELIEVE, I BELIEVE..........

[libsluvsuvs]

well i know the liberals are prepared..

they are so prepared that for them an attack WILL NEVER HAPPEN...and if does..JUST BLAME Bush..

[libsluvsuvs]

how can you prepare for an attack from an enemy WHO HAS A LARGE LIBERAL support??..the type of people who wants to prefer to REACT to an attack

[libsluvsuvs]

Posted by lastdance7 at 04:19 PM : Jan 31, 2008
+ report abuse


***********

do you think you can pen a plan that does not offend the terrorists??

[denn034]

The Democrats have blocked Bush at every turn. Okay, they were right about opposing torture but, their opposition for everything else is why we''re unprepared.

[bm6005]

Tell you what MORON, I''m an armed and dangerous Lib by your definition. Anyone tries anything and I''ll be there. You self serving Neo-Cons think you''re the only ones who believe in being prepared. WRONG. I''m ready for terrorists from outside OR inside America.

[bm6005]

well i know the liberals are prepared..
Posted by libsluvsuvs

Sorry this was the lead in for my last post.

[bm6005]

The Democrats have blocked Bush at every turn. Okay, they were right about opposing torture but, their opposition for everything else is why we''''re unprepared.

Posted by denn034

OK a sshole give specifics!

[bm6005]

You neo-con p ussy''s think you''re so frickin'' brave. You''re all scared to death by the BS the fear meisters haver spread. Our ports are open, the borders are open. The gov''t has basically been given a blank check and squandered time and money on giving it all away. Why the hell does Billings Montana need much in the way of terror mitigation as opposed to NYC? No but we''ve spread out the money to unlikely targets. This c rap was done by the admin. The DHS is run by a frickin'' lawyer for christs sake. *** does Chertoff know about security, but he''s in charge of it. This admin has given our security issues to cronies not professionals. What about Brownie and FEMA? What about Kerik almost getting the job of DHS head? Your partisan politics show your stupidity. Instead of demanding competent individuals you jerks want cronies with no experience. You deserve to be caught up in an attack fool!!

[libsluvsuvs]

Posted by bm6005 at 04:30 PM : Jan 31, 2008
+ report abuse
************

here is one specific...name ANY...a liberal would oppose it..the best way to prepare for an attack IS TO BE PRO-ACTIVE..if we need to ''spy'' on these people..if we need to ''crack some skulls'' then let it be..

be honest with yourself..you can be armed to the teeth but if you dont know what or how your enemy would attack you..then there is an element of "what the fu ck" in the equation (not to mention your fellow liberals insisting on publishing and exposing our secret tactics)

[libsluvsuvs]

Posted by lastdance7 at 04:37 PM : Jan 31, 2008
+ report abuse

************

the republicans created terrorism????????????
i thought it was your car and millions of other americans who wants that oil that started it.

does this mean all you knwo is how to bi tch and not how to plan against an attack?

[libsluvsuvs]

Posted by bm6005 at 04:38 PM : Jan 31, 2008
+ report abuse


************

i read a lot of whinning and bit ching but i dont think i ever saw a plan under all that bullsh*t..

let me ask you..what is your plan?

[bm6005]

libsluvsuvs

Your partisans were given a frickin'' blank check for security 6+ years ago. Spying on US citizens does nothing. The only pending attack we know of was turned in by an alert store clerk in New Jersey. Spare me the We don''t know c rap as I''ve heard it before. I''m not against cracking heads but I am against turning the dogs of torture loose. Waterboarding is torture, all of the Pros tell you torture gives jack for info. How about the Canadian who was held for several years for nothing. If your a ss was detained you''d think better of it! Again, specifically what did the liberals hold back in money or support to your partisans?