|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#91
|
|||
|
|||
Did The Chinese Violate Any Treaties?
Brad Guth wrote:
"Rand Simberg" wrote in message What planet are you posting this from, and what color is the sky there? He's obviously not from your Old Testament thumping planet, where the sky is nearly always blood red from the ongoing collateral damage and carnage of the innocent. - Brad Guth Rand has a tendency to not read the actual numbers.. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...120401347.html "ANNISTON, Ala. -- Field upon field of more than 1,000 battered M1 tanks, howitzers and other armored vehicles sit amid weeds here at the 15,000-acre Anniston Army Depot -- the idle, hulking formations symbolic of an Army that is wearing out faster than it is being rebuilt. The Army and Marine Corps have sunk more than 40 percent of their ground combat equipment into the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, according to government data.... .... Partly as a result of the shortages, many U.S. units are rated "unready" to deploy, officials say, raising alarm in Congress and concern among military leaders at a time when Iraq strategy is under review by the White House and the bipartisan Iraq Study Group." "Equipment shipped back from Iraq is stacking up at all the Army depots: More than 530 M1 tanks, 220 M88 wreckers and 160 M113 armored personnel carriers are sitting at Anniston. The Red River Army Depot in Texas has 700 Bradley Fighting Vehicles and 450 heavy and medium-weight trucks, while more than 1,000 Humvees are awaiting repair at the Letterkenny Army Depot in Pennsylvania. Despite the work piling up, the Army's depots have been operating at about half their capacity because of a lack of funding for repairs. In the spring, a funding gap caused Anniston and other depots to lose about a month's worth of work, said Brig. Gen. Robert Radin, deputy chief of staff for operations at the Army Materiel Command at Fort Belvoir." ------------- http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13563055/ "The latest costs include the transfer of more than 1,200 2 1/2-ton trucks, nearly 1,100 Humvees and $8.8 million in other equipment from the U.S. Army to the Iraqi security forces. Army and Marine Corps leaders are expected to testify before Congress Tuesday and outline the growing costs of the war — with estimates that it will cost between $12 billion and $13 billion a year for equipment repairs, upgrades and replacements from now on. The Marine Corps has said in recent testimony before Congress that it would need nearly $12 billion to replace and repair all the equipment worn out or lost to combat in the past four years. So far, the Marines have received $1.6 billion toward those costs to replace and repair the equipment. According to the Army, the $17 billion includes: * $2.1 billion in equipment that must be replaced because of battle losses. * About $6.5 billion for repairs. * About $8.4 billion to rebuild or upgrade equipment. One of the growing costs is the replacement of Humvees, which are wearing out more quickly because of the added armor they are carrying to protect soldiers from roadside bombs. The added weight is causing them to wear out faster, decreasing the life of the vehicles." --------- By my count, that is a loss of 1800 humvees from the US inventory and 1600 trucks. 540 M-1 tanks is a significant fraction also. You also have to consider the deployable force remaining. It looks like most of the deployable equipment is already in theater. |
#92
|
|||
|
|||
Did The Chinese Violate Any Treaties?
On Jan 19, 2:07 pm, (Rand Simberg) wrote: On not making messes in space? My dim understanding is that this remains unsettled in the Liability Convention, due to an inability to agree on a definition of the word "debris." Any space lawyers out there more up to date? I'd think that, at a minimum, if any of the bits strike someone's satellite, or ISS, that the Chinese could be held liable under the OST. If it could be proven that it resulted from this event, that is (probably a difficult thing to do). Seems the Chinese members of the IADC(Inter-Agency Space Debris Coordination Committee) didn't know about it. http://www.iadc-online.org/ |
#93
|
|||
|
|||
Did The Chinese Violate Any Treaties?
On Jan 22, 8:49 pm, robert casey wrote: Okay.. what the **** is "Waziristan"? That reply is beneath you, Pat. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004-2006_Waziristan_conflict has some recent history. Well, it did sound like a flippant made up name, like "Butt-wipe-ah-stan". Yes, I mean I would have immediately known what "skirmishes between Pakistani and Taliban forces on the Afghan/Pakistan border" meant without the term 'Warziristan conflicts' thrown in. Warziristan almosts sounds like a forgotten former USSR country having come out of the woodwork. Send Sacha Baron Cohen, of BORAT fame, there for a sequel to his movie. Eric |
#94
|
|||
|
|||
Did The Chinese Violate Any Treaties?
On Jan 22, 7:21 am, (Rand Simberg) wrote: On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 01:56:04 -0700, in a place far, far away, Charles Buckley made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that: Now, if Bush's current hostile stance towards Iran What planet are you posting this from, and what color is the sky there? Rand, is or is not Iran on Bush's list of countries that form the "Axis of Evil"? The fact that Bush has a list and calls it the Axis of Evil and the term evildoers says quite a lot about his basic mentality, or should that be base mentality, instead? |
#95
|
|||
|
|||
Did The Chinese Violate Any Treaties?
On Jan 22, 9:29 pm, Herb Schaltegger wrote: On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 19:19:55 -0600, Terrell Miller wrote (in article Rodth.541$ch1.249@bigfe9): troops...cool it. You're two of the Good Guys around here Pat is; Rand has turned into a misanthropic troll. Amen... -- You can run on for a long time, Sooner or later, God'll cut you down. ~Johnny Cash |
#96
|
|||
|
|||
Did The Chinese Violate Any Treaties?
On Jan 22, 9:36 pm, (Rand Simberg) wrote: On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 20:29:27 -0600, in a place far, far away, Herb Schaltegger made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that: On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 19:19:55 -0600, Terrell Miller wrote (in article Rodth.541$ch1.249@bigfe9): troops...cool it. You're two of the Good Guys around here Pat is; Rand has turned into a misanthropic troll. An interesting opinion. But that's all it is. It's certainly unsubstantiated. And unsubstantiable... I read this and immediately realized something about the show 'American Idol' and how some contestants with absolutely zero singing ability can get on stage and try and perform anyway. Ego. Like Rand, their ego is bigger than they are and therefore, there they are. |
#97
|
|||
|
|||
Did The Chinese Violate Any Treaties?
"Charles Buckley" wrote in message
By my count, that is a loss of 1800 humvees from the US inventory and 1600 trucks. 540 M-1 tanks is a significant fraction also. You also have to consider the deployable force remaining. It looks like most of the deployable equipment is already in theater. I believe you're right, that we're walking upon as thin of theater ice as such perpetrated wars tend to get. I'm not sure we can even get out safely without falling through our own artificially made thin ice. I also believe the books are at best seriously cooked in order to minimize and/or divert the true cost of 911 and the ongoing war(s). We have our nuclear and chemical weapons (1000 fold worse off than anything we'd lied about Iraq having), and as long as our warm and fuzzy GW Bush is in charge, if push comes down to shove is where I do believe that we do intend to utilize them. - Brad Guth -- Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG |
#98
|
|||
|
|||
Unlimited objectives + Limited resources = Bankruptcy (was Did The Chinese Violate Any Treaties?)
"Demosthenes" wrote in message
... In article . com wrote: China wants to be close enough to military parity with the U.S. that the U.S. would not dare to interfere with it when it attacks Taiwan. That will not work. Of COURSE it will work. Don't be so sure, it is scary how they know us more than we know ourselves: Unrestricted Warfare Qiao Liang and Wang Xiangsui (Beijing: PLA Literature and Arts Publishing House, February 1999) http://www.cryptome.org/cuw.htm "World's number one," an ideology corresponding to "isolationism," always makes the Americans tend to pursue unlimited objectives as they expand their national power. But this is a tendency which in the end will lead to tragedy. A company which has limited resources but which is nevertheless keen to take on unlimited responsibilities is headed for only one possible outcome, and that is bankruptcy. |
#100
|
|||
|
|||
Did The Chinese Violate Any Treaties?
"Pat Flannery" wrote in message ... Rand Simberg wrote: Or we promptly invaded Tunis, in North Africa. Which is in fact what we did, since you seem historically ignorant. You don't really know almost anything about what happened in America's history, do you? His posts do seem to question that. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
US space weapons no threat, but 'treaties' may be | Jim Oberg | Policy | 1 | November 13th 06 04:52 PM |
European and Chinese space cooperation highlighted by visit of Chinese Prime Minister | Jacques van Oene | News | 0 | December 10th 04 04:29 PM |
Chinese Constellations | alt.clearing.O5 | Astronomy Misc | 1 | November 2nd 03 01:10 AM |
Chinese spacecraft | RDG | History | 83 | November 1st 03 09:46 PM |
Chinese do it! | Andrew Tubbiolo | Policy | 48 | October 28th 03 08:23 PM |