Murtha Says Army Is 'Broken, Worn Out'
 

LATROBE, Pa. Dec 1, 2005 — Most U.S. troops will leave Iraq within a year because the Army is "broken, worn out" and "living hand to mouth," Rep. John Murtha told a civic group.

Two weeks ago, Murtha created a storm of comment when he called for U.S. troops to leave Iraq now. The Democratic congressman spoke to a group of community and business leaders in Latrobe on Wednesday, the same day President Bush said troops would be withdrawn when they've achieved victory, not under an artificial deadline set by politicians.

Murtha predicted most troops will be out of Iraq within a year.

"I predict he'll make it look like we're staying the course," Murtha said, referring to Bush. "Staying the course is not a policy."

Murtha, 73, the ranking Democrat on the House Appropriations defense subcommittee, expressed pessimism about Iraq's stability and said the Iraqis know who the insurgents are, but don't always share that information with U.S. troops. He said a civil war is likely because of ongoing factionalism among Sunni Arabs, and Kurds and Shiites.

He also said he was wrong to vote to support the war.

"I admit I made a mistake when I voted for war," Murtha said. "I'm looking at the future of the United States military."

Murtha, a decorated Vietnam war veteran, said the Pennsylvania National Guard is "stretched so thin" that it won't be able to send fully equipped units to Iraq next year. Murtha predicted it will cost $50 billion to upgrade military equipment nationwide, but says the federal government is already reducing future purchases to save money.

Murtha, who represents a western Pennsylvania district that includes Latrobe, was first elected to Congress in 1974.

Lt. Col. Chris Cleaver, spokesman for the Pennsylvania National Guard at Fort Indiantown Gap, said "there are some deployment concerns."

Cleaver said some guard units had to leave equipment in Iraq when they returned to the United States, which could cause training problems here.

But Cleaver also said most of the 2,100 Guard troops now deployed with the 2nd Brigade Combat Team can't be sent back to Iraq for a second tour of duty anyway, because of regulations that limit redeployment.

source

Re: Murtha Says Army Is 'Broken, Worn Out'
 

Alzheimer's disease comes to some people rapidly and Murtha is slipping fast. At least he is making the most of his 15 minutes of fame...

Joe A

Since it's well-known that Murtha speaks for the Military, clearly he's taking the fall for some heavy-lifting only a politician can do. brave man.

"Murtha, a decorated Vietnam war veteran, said the Pennsylvania National Guard is "stretched so thin" that it won't be able to send fully equipped units to Iraq next year. Murtha predicted it will cost $50 billion to upgrade military equipment nationwide, but says the federal government is already reducing future purchases to save money."

that's all we need to read. His friends in the Military say they need more money to properly equip our troops; Murtha's doing what needs to be done to get that $.

Good man serving his Country, serving his Brothers.

I was going to go quite that far, but you may have a point. His remarks fly in the face of a democrat I would trust: Joe Liebermann.

Lieberman is a DINO.

Lieberman will say anything to get a few votes, score a few points. My grandfather has been old guard Democrat for over 65 years, has seen many come and go, and dislikes Liebermann for just this reason. He isn't to be trusted. He's never demonstrated why he should be.

Re: Re: Murtha Says Army Is 'Broken, Worn Out'
 

"I admit I made a mistake when I voted for war," Murtha said. "I'm looking at the future of the United States military."

The ability to admit making a mistake is Alzheimer's? I always heard it takes guts to admit when you are wrong. How many politicians have that ability? Certainly not the current resident of the White House.

The last sentence is the most telling. Where will troops come from in 2006/2007?

Shaun, please stop smoking that stuff! Its going to cause you to go blind.

Its not well known because many of the military do not like Murtha. I am here "in theatre" and the guys I talk with are really pissed that Murtha is being pushed as their rep, because he is not!

He is a good man because he is saying what you want to hear, nothing more, nothing less!

JoeA

Joe, I've got a girlfriend now and my vision is remarkably improving.

Seriously, WTF are you talking about? Well known to who and how?

Fox News.

Murtha speaks for the military? I don't think so. Gen. Pace and Sec. Rumsfeld do that in an official and real capacity. No House member, especially in the minority party, no matter how well-credentialed, speaks for the military.....unless, of course, he says things that liberals think makes Bush look bad.

You guys are going to have to give Brit Hume a call on this one.

Why? Did Brit say Murtha speaks for the military too?

Notice Lieberman is getting a fraction of the media attention. Martha is politicizing the war and the military. Martha is, typical to leftist form, demoralizing the country and troops, moralizing the enemy, in order to do damage to Bush. The dishonesty of this traitor's recent grandstanding is obvious...the Clinton administration and the democrat platform has always focused on either slowly weakening or dismantling the military...where was Murtha then?

Martha is deceptive tool of leftism...He is clueless at the least of what our military needs or thinks.

Bush is not micromanaging this operation, he is allowing the best and brightest brass in the field to call the shots. The democrats are trying to vietnamise Iraq by destroying it at home and from D.C.

Murtha is working against us, not for us. He is a figment of the activist media mind.

Mulhollanddose, I couldn't agree with you more. Some people truly think a weaker USA would be better for the world. I can live with that misguided bs. But the folks who want us to cut and run (aka lose) just because they hate Bush so much are dispicable. Almost every day there are posts on Craigslist praising each American death in Iraq.

Is it better to cut and run from Iraq or cut and run from the hunt for OBL?

for the record, I'm not for leaving Iraq. I am for taking the US democracy training wheels off and setting a hard date for 50 Iraqi battalions to be fully battle-ready with no US support on missions.

When that happens, only then can we begin to discuss leaving Iraq.

Do you really, I mean really, really think we have "cut and run" from the hunt for OBL?:confused:

Virtually everything, and I mean everything, I have read and heard indicates that Murtha is a long time friend of the military, well liked, well-respected, and is likely passing along a message that the ground commanders can not get to the White House. That's precisely why he is being taken so seriously. Do you think a Peolsi call for withdrawal would generate this kind of discussion? Hardly.

That you guys want to fight on an uncontested issue is just more demonstration that you can't or don't want to address the real issues.

And Joe, once again, if you want to be taken as a credible source for what is happening over there, saying that Murtha has a mental defect (which he quite clearly does not) is not the way to be taken seriously.

Finally, I just laughed out loud at the lendaddy response, so typical:

"Seriously, WTF are you talking about? Well known to who and how?"

This is what the daddy does -- asks questions intended to mock a poster he disagrees with. Unfortunately that's all he does. Just once I wish he'd actually bring something to the party.

How long did it take you to train your first battalion? Speak from ass much?:)

Thanks for the confirmation daddy

Happy to serve:)

Think of my method with you and Shaun as an alternative to smashing my head into a wall or attempting to reason with a stump or large rock. It's medicinal you know.

I trained my first battalion at age 8. It took me 4 months. ;)

now, if you want to enter into a serious discussion, with little or no mention of my ass (Lubemaster seems to be on that one), we'll give it a go.

No one has ever accused Murtha of not being pro-military or not having close ties to them. But that does even come close to meaning Murtha speaks for the military. James Hoffa doesn't even speak for the millions of Teamsters who voted for Bush, despite the Hoffa's having endorsed Kerry.

This is a tough one. If you have a better explanation for why we don't have the guy's head on a pike on the White House, I'd like to hear it.

Easy explanation. When Sudan offered bin Laden on a platter to Clinton, Clinton turned him down, fearing we wouldn't be able to successfully prosecute him in fed. court.

Doe Murtha speak for each and every man and women in uniform? No.

Does he speak for the commanders on the ground in Iraq? I believe that he does. I don't think he would be doing this without their tacit approval. He never has before in 30 years in Congress, I don't think he would start now.

I believe he doesn't.




That was easy.

Rick, that's a good explanation for why we didn't get him after the Cole.

But why don't we have him after killing 3000+ Americans on 9/11?

I've seen you post a few times that you are close to/work with the military. Is that right? What do you hear? Does anyone even talk about OBL?

I don't see how he could believe it, as the argument is totally dishonest. Bin laden is either dead or effectively neutered, and the war on terror is obvious except to the most blind of lemmings in Iraq.

So Len, do you think the Military needs the $50 billion in upgrades or not?

He didn't fear Clinton so he didn't hide. He is VERY VERY afraid of Bush and is deep deep in hiding. One day he'll pop his melon out and get prairie dogged.

So much for rational discussion ... You and Mul and Fint should just talk to each other :(

It does seem to be getting more difficult.

off to NY.

You said you believe he speaks for the commanders and I said he doesn't, so what's the problem? ........wait.......were we backing up assertions today?

It is not a matter of "belief", it is a matter of fact...Bush speaks as the voice of the military brass, which is predominantly shared by the boots...Murtha, Kerry and Pelosi, the democrat party and media do not.

Shaun, I'll tell you what I do hear that you rarely see in the media and it's not about UBL. I go to a lot of events at the Nat. Press Club and listen to people who have been there, done that - Tommy Franks, Gen. Hagee, Rumsfeld, Paul Bremer, etc. Their words usually only get carried on the CSPAN replays late at night. All those guys tell a very different story of what's been accomplished in Iraq, other than hyping the number of US dead. They talk about what's been repaired, how the new gov't. is coming along and they usually throw it into some kind of perspective by citing how long it took in other places like postwar Germany, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, etc.

When I saw Gen. Hagee there a few weeks ago, there were probably 100 wounded Marines in the audience from Walter Reed Hospital. Most were a lot younger than me (I'm 34). I remember hearing the loudest applause from a guy sitting right behind me who had a 180 deg. scar from ear to ear, going over his head, wearing sunglasses and sitting on his folded up walking cane. My guess is he was severely wounded and blinded in Iraq. But I got the sense that the only thing these guy felt bad about was that they were here instead back in the field killing the bad guys.

It would be militarily and politically foolish for Bush to assign too much importance on getting UBL. His capture tomorrow would not prevent the next attack. I think plenty of soldiers now in Afghan. joined after 9/11 and there's probably no one in the world with more of a hard-on for UBL than those guys. Maybe, if the media gets tired of reporting US war dead numbers, they'll get back to nagging Bush about UBL still on the loose.

Before I gave my opinion, I said Murtha has a 30 year history in Congress of NOT hanging his military buddies out to dry. I said he is respected up and down the ranks, he has been nothing but loyal to the military, and has the ear of the militray commanders. I said that both sides of the aisle have praised his integrity and knowledge. I said I don't think he suddenly changed overnight and became all these things the Bush defenders are now calling him.

You said I'm wrong.

Edit: my blackberry reposts against my wishes.