SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: i-node who wrote (376742)4/6/2008 9:52:57 PM
From: tejek  Respond to of 1578105
 
Gross incompetence on the state and local level. The Bush administration performed reasonably well during the crisis.

Uh.....it was a perfect storm. Gross incompetence on the local, state and national levels. Bush's efforts stunk.



To: i-node who wrote (376742)4/6/2008 9:54:24 PM
From: tejek  Respond to of 1578105
 
First Basra, now Baghdad!

Iraqi Forces and Militia Clash in Baghdad

nytimes.com



To: i-node who wrote (376742)4/6/2008 10:13:45 PM
From: tejek  Respond to of 1578105
 
Army Worried by Rising Stress of Return Tours to Iraq

By THOM SHANKER

WASHINGTON — Army leaders are expressing increased alarm about the mental health of soldiers who would be sent back to the front again and again under plans that call for troop numbers to be sustained at high levels in Iraq for this year and beyond.

Among combat troops sent to Iraq for the third or fourth time, more than one in four show signs of anxiety, depression or acute stress, according to an official Army survey of soldiers’ mental health.

The stress of long and multiple deployments to Iraq is just one of the concerns being voiced by senior military officers in Washington as Gen. David H. Petraeus, the senior Iraq commander, prepares to tell Congress this week that he is not ready to endorse any drawdowns beyond those already scheduled through July.

President Bush has signaled that he will endorse General Petraeus’s recommendation, a decision that will leave close to 140,000 American troops in Iraq at least through the summer. But in a meeting with Mr. Bush late last month in advance of General Petraeus’s testimony, the Joint Chiefs of Staff expressed deep concern about stress on the force, senior Defense Department and military officials said.

Among the 513,000 active-duty soldiers who have served in Iraq since the invasion of 2003, more than 197,000 have deployed more than once, and more than 53,000 have deployed three or more times, according to a separate set of statistics provided this week by Army personnel officers. The percentage of troops sent back to Iraq for repeat deployments would have to increase in the months ahead.

The Army study of mental health showed that 27 percent of noncommissioned officers — a critically important group — on their third or fourth tour exhibited symptoms commonly referred to as post-traumatic stress disorders. That figure is far higher than the roughly 12 percent who exhibit those symptoms after one tour and the 18.5 percent who develop the disorders after a second deployment, according to the study, which was conducted by the Army surgeon general’s Mental Health Advisory Team.

The Army and the rest of the service chiefs have endorsed General Petraeus’s recommendations for continued high troop levels in Iraq. But Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs, and Gen. George W. Casey Jr., the Army chief of staff, and their top deputies also have warned that the war in Iraq should not be permitted to inflict an unacceptable toll on the military as a whole. “Our readiness is being consumed as fast as we build it,” Gen. Richard A. Cody, the Army vice chief of staff, said in stark comments delivered to Congress last week. “Lengthy and repeated deployments with insufficient recovery time have placed incredible stress on our soldiers and our families, testing the resolve of our all-volunteer force like never before.”

Beyond the Army, members of the Joint Chiefs have also told the president that the continued troop commitment to Iraq means that there is a significant level of risk should another crisis erupt elsewhere in the world. Any mission could be carried out successfully, the chiefs believe, but the operation would be slower, longer and costlier in lives and equipment than if the armed forces were not so strained.

Under the drawdown already planned, the departure of five combat brigades from Iraq by July should allow the Army to announce that tours will be shortened to 12 months from 15 by the end of summer.

Even so, senior officers warn that time at home must be increased from the current 12 months between combat tours. Otherwise, they say, the ground forces risk an unacceptable level of retirements of sergeants — the key leaders of the small-unit operations — and of experienced captains, who represent the future of the Army’s officer corps.

The mental health study conducted by the Army was carried out in Iraq last October and November, and does not represent a purely scientific sampling of deployed troops, because that is difficult to accomplish in a combat environment, the authors of the study have said. Instead, the study was based on 2,295 anonymous surveys and additional interviews from members of frontline units in combat brigades, and not from those assigned primarily to safer operating bases. Since the study was distributed last month, it has become a central topic of high-level internal discussions within the Army, and its findings have been accepted by Army leaders, senior Pentagon and military officials say.

The survey found that the proportion of soldiers serving in Iraq who had encountered mental health problems was about the same as found in previous studies — about 18 percent of deployed soldiers. But in analyzing the effect of the war on those with previous duty in Iraq, the study found that “soldiers on multiple deployments report low morale, more mental health problems and more stress-related work problems.”

By the time they are on their third or fourth deployments, soldiers “are at particular risk of reporting mental health problems,” the study found.

The range of symptoms reported by soldiers varies widely, from sleeplessness and anxiety to more severe depression and stress. To assist soldiers facing problems, the Army has begun to hire more civilian mental health professionals while directing Army counselors to spend more time with frontline units.

Senior officers at the Pentagon have tried to avoid shrill warnings about the health of the force, cognizant that such comments might embolden potential adversaries, and they continue to hope that troop levels in Iraq can be reduced next year. Still, none deny the level of stress on the force from current deployments.

Admiral Mullen spoke broadly to those concerns last week, saying at a Pentagon news conference that the military would have already assigned forces to missions elsewhere in the world were it not for what he called “the pressure that’s on our forces right now.”

He added that the military would “continue to be there until, should conditions allow, we start to be able to reduce our force levels in Iraq.”

One example of the pressure has come in Afghanistan, where the Pentagon has been unable to meet all of the commanders’ requests for more forces, in particular for several thousand military trainers.

Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates told reporters on Friday that he expected that the United States would be able to add significantly to its deployments in Afghanistan in 2009. But to do that — and to increase time at home for soldiers between deployments — probably would require further reductions in troop levels in Iraq, Pentagon planners said.

Members of the Joint Chiefs also acknowledge that the deployments to Iraq, with the emphasis on counterinsurgency warfare, have left the ground forces no time to train for the full range of missions required to defend American interests.



To: i-node who wrote (376742)4/6/2008 10:39:44 PM
From: combjelly  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1578105
 
"Everyone, EVERYONE knew that a C5 storm hitting NOLA could well cause one or more levee breaks."

Well, duh. Which is why, in the past, when a hurricane of any strength got anywhere near New Orleans, everybody went into high gear. Not sit around twiddling their thumbs. Or go on vacation.

The various investigations that happened after Katrina all concluded that the fault lay with the Corp. of Engineers.



To: i-node who wrote (376742)4/7/2008 8:45:50 PM
From: tejek  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 1578105
 
So the stadium was a great solution to finding safety during the hurricane. If the levees had held, they would have been back to their homes in a day or two.

Showing your [substantial] stupidity again.

Everyone, EVERYONE knew that a C5 storm hitting NOLA could well cause one or more levee breaks. This isn't some accident that just happened out of the blue. It had been researched, brought to the local AND the Fed's attention, and researched some more. And the federal government had allocated the money to fix, or at least improve, the problem. But no. Locals blew it.


If everyone knew, as you say, why did the GOP Congress deny them funding to improve their levees....it was three months before the hurricane. And just to get the background straight, at the time, the GOP Congress was spending like there was no tomorrow:

"For the first time in 37 years, federal budget cuts have all but stopped major work on the New Orleans area's east bank hurricane levees, a complex network of concrete walls, metal gates and giant earthen berms that won't be finished for at least another decade.

"I guess people look around and think there's a complete system in place, that we're just out here trying to put icing on the cake," said Mervin Morehiser, who manages the "Lake Pontchartrain and vicinity" levee project for the Army Corps of Engineers. "And we aren't saying that the sky is falling, but people should know that this is a work in progress, and there's more important work yet to do before there is a complete system in place."


mediamatters.org

And apparently, Bush still doesn't get what "everyone" else knows:

Bush shifts $1.3 billion away from levee funding

nola.com;

Bush's levee budget upsets Vitter. He says it undermines pledge of protection

Friday, February 02, 2007
By Bill Walsh
Washington bureau
WASHINGTON -- President Bush is expected to shift $1.3 billion away from raising and armoring levees, installing floodgates and building permanent pumping in Southeast Louisiana in order to plug long-anticipated financial shortfalls in other hurricane-protection projects, a move Sen. David Vitter describes as a retreat from the president's commitment to protect the whole New Orleans area.

src="http://ads.nola.com/RealMedia/ads/adstream_nx.ads/www.nola.com/xml/story/N/NP1/@StoryAd?x"></A> Vitter, R-La., who unveiled Bush's plans Thursday, condemned the move in a strongly worded letter to the president and called on him to ask Congress for more money to complete work that he promised would be done -- and Congress financed -- in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.

"I believe your fiscal 2008 budget proposal would be a step back from that commitment, however unintended," Vitter wrote. "I am deathly afraid that this vital emergency post-Katrina work is now being treated like typical (Army Corps of Engineers) projects that take decades to complete. We will not recover if this happens."

John Paul Woodley Jr., assistant secretary of the Army for Public Works, said the money will go toward critically needed hurricane protection on the West Bank that has left residents vulnerable. Without it, he said, work would have to stop in a matter of months when financing dries up.

"We will come to a point later in the spring when we will have to stop issuing contracts unless the additional funding is made available by some other means," Woodley said. "There is no question, as the senator says, of our commitment. It should not be seen as a step back from that commitment."

It has been anticipated for months that there would not be enough money to finish long-planned hurricane-protection work on the West Bank, including raising levees to withstand a 100-year storm and building floodwalls on the east side of the Harvey Canal. Bush's budget appears to be an attempt to finally complete those projects without asking Congress for additional hurricane-protection money.

Instead, his fiscal 2008 budget is expected to "reallocate" $1.3 billion from what Congress appropriated last year to fix the failings of the region's hurricane-protection system exposed by Hurricane Katrina.

In two emergency supplemental spending bills, Congress earmarked money for armoring levees that crumbled in Katrina's storm surge, installing permanent pumping stations at Lake Pontchartrain to reduce the pressure on outfall canals and raising levees throughout the area.

Old concerns resurface

Tom Jackson, president of the Southeast Louisiana Flood Protection Authority (East), said what Bush is proposing amounts to "playing checkers with the money" while doing little to address clearly identified vulnerabilities.

"This is a system," Jackson said. "Moving money from one project to another doesn't increase your level of protection. A hole in a levee in one place lets water in."

Among those who stand to benefit from Bush's plan are residents of the West Bank who, if the corps' estimates are correct, could finally see the completion of hurricane protection they have been waiting on for years.

But Jerry Spohrer, executive director of the West Jefferson Levee District, was not enthused by the proposal, saying it could pit different parts of the metropolitan area against each other.

"That is what happened to us for so many years prior to Rita and Katrina. Money would be appropriated and they would throw us in a sack like a bunch of cats and fight for what we can get," Spohrer said. "We certainly concur with Sen. Vitter's concerns that federal assistance we need and has been promised shouldn't be given to one area at expense of another."

Moves defended

The reason the West Bank projects are running short of money is that Congress asked the corps last year to hastily pull together estimates. What are normally months-long calculations were reduced in some cases to days. Subsequent increases in the cost of materials and labor further ballooned the price of the projects.

But Vitter's point is that if the shortfalls are now clear, why not ask Congress for more money?

Woodley said it was a strategic decision and didn't rule out coming back to Congress later in the year to ask for additional money.

"We believe that it will be a quicker and easier process for congressional committees to reallocate money that is already appropriated rather than appropriate new money," Woodley said. "If Sen. Vitter can demonstrate that is not the case, it seems to me we would be very interested in hearing that."

Woodley denied suggestions that "reallocating" the money would put residents at risk. He said designs have to be completed -- -- a process that can take many months -- before pumping stations can be built, levees raised or floodgates erected.

'Sense of urgency'

But Vitter charged that the design work should already be under way. "The Corps bureaucracy is as flawed and bogged down as ever," he wrote to the president. "As a result, the Corps is not acting with the appropriate sense of urgency for many vital projects."

Woodley took issue with Vitter's charge.

"We share his urgency and to some degree his frustration," Woodley said. "We are working very, very hard. Everyone should remember that our people themselves are sheltering behind those levees. Corps employees suffered when Katrina struck and levees broke. We have every bit of the urgency that should be on everyone's minds."

qwstnevrythg.blog-city.com