From: "Robert G Lewis" 


"Mark"  wrote in message
news:41ba5712$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>
> "Robert G Lewis"  wrote in message
> news:41ba47d4$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>> When I read the transcript I thought that was simply a smart ass remark.
>> Not a big deal, the differences in equipment, benefits and length of
>> service otoh. I recall more than one story last year about reservists
>> staying in Iraq longer than the regular army troops they were assigned
>> to.
>
> While that may be possible, it's more likely that much of what you saw in
> the MSM prior to the election that reflected badly on the current
> administration, was written to refect things worse than they were, both by
> design and by ommission.
>
Nah I read this before the silly season got going. Around the time the
first units were being rotated. of course if things had been going good I
would expect the entire units active and reserve would have rotated.......


> Frankly, I'd like to see the use of reservists toned down, at first blush
> with a couple million in the various services, it would seem they could
> be. But I think, rather I'm sure, that there is an incredible amount of
> work going on world-wide and the regular troops are being used (or being
> prepared) in ways we'll never see or hear about - which also applies to
> the stop-loss orders for regular troops with various specialties as well.

Gee that could indicate we don't have enough troops doesn't it.

>
> I believe that Rumsfeld understands what needs to be done and is doing it.
> Which is not to say that mistakes haven't been made - had they not, it'd
> have been the first war in the history of mankind that could boast such a
> record.
>

I think Rumsfield has his view and damn if anyone can change it. Some of
what he wants to do is good . Some well I think he should listen very
closely to those who have been there rather than those who have not.

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5