Alarming News: Not enough troops, eh?

September 04, 2005

Not enough troops, eh?

Plenty of Troops One of the myths the Angry Left has been peddling in the wake of Katrina is that there aren't enough National Guardsmen to deal with the disaster because they're all off in Iraq. National Review Online's James Robbins offers a dose of reality:
Take the Army for example. There are 1,012,000 soldiers on active duty, in the Reserves, or in the National Guard. Of them, 261,000 are deployed overseas in 120 countries. Iraq accounts for 103,000 soldiers, or 10.2 percent of the Army.

That's all? Yes, 10.2 percent. That datum is significant in itself, a good one to keep handy the next time someone talks about how our forces are stretched too thin, our troops are at the breaking point, and so forth. If you add in Afghanistan (15,000) and the support troops in Kuwait (10,000) you still only have 12.6 percent.

So where are the rest? 751,000 (74.2 percent) are in the U.S. About half are active duty, and half Guard and Reserve. The Guard is the real issue of course--the Left wants you to believe that the country has been denuded of its citizen soldiers, and that Louisiana has suffered inordinately because Guardsmen and women who would have been available to be mobilized by the state to stop looting and aid in reconstruction are instead risking their lives in Iraq.

Recall, too, that many of the same people who are now say the National Guard is too important to waste on American security overseas a year ago were insisting that George W. Bush was a bum for serving in the Texas Air National Guard while "war hero" John Kerry was in Vietnam.

Comments

Then why was the National Guard or Reserve on call.

If you belive having the NG and Reserves in Iraq have not impacted our safety then you might want to look at the photos again.

Interesting to me that people belive Bush was doing all he could flying jets around during Vienam rather than risking his life fighting for his country. And then to wage a war without having the stones to go himself is interesting also, same goes for all of his cabinet.....

Posted by: Duane at September 4, 2005 09:05 PM

Duane--

Get real.

The president served in the armed forces, whether you like it or not. You might not respect the branch of the armed forces in which he served, but that doesn't change the fact that he served.

Posted by: Dorian Davis at September 5, 2005 01:58 AM

Doesn't that make it even more shamefull that the neccessary resources weren't there on time?

Posted by: Vincent at September 5, 2005 07:38 AM