Perhaps in an attempt to balance out their criticisms of the war in Iraq and seem 'strong on defense,' Congressional Democrats have spoken a lot about military readiness. Two subcommittee chairs on the House Armed Services Committee recently introduced a resolution to address the impending 'national security crisis:'
"While the Congress has been unable to agree on policy related to Iraq in veto-proof numbers, we should all be able to agree on one thing: the U.S. military constitutes our first and last line of protection - and they are in a world of hurt," Ortiz said in a joint statement accompanying the resolution.
"Our military's ground forces are broken by the ongoing operations, particularly in Iraq, and we are watching the making of a full blown national security crisis," Ortiz added.
House Armed Services Committee Chairman Ike Skelton (D-MO)--who commands more respect among Republicans than perhaps any other Democrat--has made readiness his top priority. John Murtha talks frequently about 'readiness,' even if he's largely trying to use it as a political weapon against the president.
All this talk about readiness makes it ironic that Congressional Democrats are forcing the Pentagon to spend readiness funds to fight the war on terror:
DoD is using its readiness funding, or operations and maintenance accounts, which typically pay for training, supplies, and maintenance of weapons and equipment.
Earlier this month, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates requested to shift $3.7 billion from Navy and Air Force payrolls and an $800 million excess in the working capital fund to Army and Marine Corps operations...
"In mid-February, the Army will run out of all of their O&M funding for the entire year, because they will have spent it on operations in Afghanistan and Iraq. That will require some fairly significant and harsh actions by the department, specifically the Army. And the Marine Corps is only about a month behind them," Whitman said.
Military installations soon will have to shut down operations and furlough civilian employees, terminate contracts, and move into what Whitman called a "warm" status.
If you want to get out of a hole, the first rule is stop digging. Democrats claim that readiness is an impeding crisis, yet at the same time require that the Defense Department eat the seed corn. Worse still: they complain that the Pentagon could be spending even more of it than they intend to. Once again: if Congressional Democrats say that they fully intend the Pentagon to spend money to fight the war, why don't they give DoD the money it needs.
The Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Organization has also run out of funds:
"We're out of (funding) new stuff now; we're going to have trouble sustaining current contracts after the first of December," Meigs said...
"What I can't fund today will not go into the field next summer or next fall," Meigs said. "It'll be delayed by the amount of time we wait for funding..."
In Afghanistan, Meigs said, the Taliban are making a full-fledged effort to get back into the game. IED attacks are up, and the number of effective attacks is up as well, he said. The attacks are more lethal, he explained, because soldiers conduct more dismounted patrols in Afghanistan. "A suicide bomber with a vest is more lethal in Afghanistan. It's easier to get closer to the troops," he said.
Just remember though: Congressional Democrats may be telling the Pentagon to spend readiness funds to fight the war, and they may have cut off money to fight the number one killer of our troops in Iraq, but they really support the troops.
