It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Army battalion activates at Fort Story

page: 3
18
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 07:49 PM
link   
reply to post by JBA2848
 

You know, if corporations would take some personal responsibility and international governments would get some common sense and intelligence, a military force of the size currently afloat in the Gulf of Aden and surrounding waters would never be necessary.

The ships that have bucked the tide and used common sense in arming a portion of the deck and either training crew or hiring private mercs to work security have been successful in repelling those r0dents on the high sea. The major who haven't, cry for help and rarely get it in time.

I know.. some will instantly say it would start an arms race or some crazy thing to explain why it shouldn't happen....but the same would be valid against the Navies hunting them now if they could raise the stakes...and they haven't. Private ships could sink this modern day version of the Barbary Coast thieves if they just had some guts and/or weren't outlawed from taking care of business. Just my two cents...
edit on 9-1-2012 by Wrabbit2000 because: typo




posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 08:34 PM
link   
Like Jerico said (sarcastically), a Civil Affairs Battalion would never spearhead an invasion; they are too few in number. And with nearly 90% of them being Reservists, you wouldn't even want them too (many of them are older and a little hefty). They would also most likely not be used for Martial Law either, since a lot of them still have their original, biological, thinking brain in their heads unlike many Infantry who are robots.

Now that's cleared up, I must clean up the name of CA that you all nearly tarnished. Civil Affairs is one of the few jobs in the military that we as American's can be proud of. They are true enforcers of peace in that, they assist in reconstruction efforts in the countries we have ransacked. In that capacity, they also provide employment opportunities to local citizens in the aforementioned reconstruction efforts.

Simply put, they are an armed, uniform-wearing version of the Red Cross or USAID.

Hey Jerico65, what's your experience with CA?



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 09:07 PM
link   
reply to post by ltdan08
 


USAID has become a joint venture of the Pentagon since money was transfered from the Pentagon budget to USAID.

thecable.foreignpolicy.com...



Meanwhile, State will immediately begin work on the 60 percent of the initiatives in the QDDR that can be implemented without new resources.

What can't be funded in the State Department's budget could come from Pentagon coffers. What State and DOD have been doing in the warzones is to use money from the Pentagon or pooled State-DoD accounts to support missions abroad.

"It is very unlikely that we are going to see a huge shift in resources from DOD to State and USAID, but it is likely that we are going to find ways to be able to spend these resources together, with State and USAID in the lead," she said. "It's the military that understands better than anyone that is has to be civilians in the lead."

Slaughter doubled down on the QDDR's call for a unified national security budget -- which she hoped would encompass not only the State Department, USAID, and the Pentagon, but also the Department of Homeland Security and parts of the Department of Justice -- but warned it isn't coming soon.


USAID is creating a joint office to encompass State Department, USAID, and the Pentagon, but also the Department of Homeland Security and parts of the Department of Justice. Seems the State Departmment has nothing to do with diplomacy any more. Just a non kinetic military force. The 347th U.S. Army Civil Affairs & Psychological Operations Command (Airborne) fit right in with that. They don't drop bombs just propaganda and occasionally hack them with cyber warfare.

costsofwar.org...



What is the money used for? The popular notion of international assistance programs is that these programs deliver immediate needed disaster relief, or enhance the well-being of people through economic development. That does happen.

But, more than half of the international assistance spending related to Afghanistan, Iraq, and Pakistan is for military uses, and thus, the nature of many State Department and USAID programs is inherently military or war-related. For example, some of the international assistance funds sent to Pakistan have been used to train their Frontier Corp in counterinsurgency. Of the $18.4 billion appropriated for the Iraq Relief and Reconstruction Fund in fiscal year 2004, more than $10 billion was administered by the Pentagon.


State Departments new counterterrorism board.
publicintelligence.net...
State Departments new International Security Advisory board.
www.state.gov...
edit on 9-1-2012 by JBA2848 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 10:30 PM
link   
reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL
 

I was thinking the same thing when they announced the troops were being pulled out. I'm glad you put this up!
It helps with the awareness and then some...



posted on Jan, 9 2012 @ 10:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Char-Lee

Originally posted by TDawgRex
reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL
 


USACAPOC deploys Soldiers pretty much non-stop at a much higher rate than your average Infantry Division, it's a regular revolving door.

Most of their Soldiers also hold multiple MOS's, hence are usually older and more mature and experianced.

Also, the majority of the Command are Reservists, not Active Duty, so they know how the world works from both sides of the coin.

I'd rather talk to a Soldier who runs a business in his real life, than a Grunt who knows nothing about community infrastructure, other than how to destroy said infrastructure.

I'm not saying that they are the greatest, I served years with that Command and they have their share of idiots, just like every Corperation or Organization.


Is that the ones the article is about? Why did they say ""For us to activate is truly a momentous occasion," said LTC Heston."?


LTC Heston is just probably proud that he was chosen to stand up a new Battalion. For a new Battalion being deployed is a historical moment for that Battalions Command element. It looks good on the Officers evaluation reports.

The troops usually think otherwise though.



posted on Jan, 10 2012 @ 01:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dbriefed
When a hot zone cools down, and you want presence but it's time to give combat troops a break, send in the pencil pushers.

Pencil pushers, a.k.a. REMFs (Rear Echelon Mother F).


Right. You do know that a high percentage of guys in a Civil Affairs unit are former ODA guys, right? Hardly pencil pushers.



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 05:22 PM
link   
I guess the OP had absolutely no intention on responding to posts of his thread.. awesome



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 06:38 PM
link   
Jesus H. Christ,

It's apparent that there are FAR too many people on ATS with no military experience that talk out their ass. Before posting nonsense, try asking military vets here on ATS. They can tell you all about the different units within the armed forces and what their purpose is.

We're seeing far too many of these posts lately.

"OMG! My local reserve unit just activated! We're all going to concentration camps!"

or

"OMG! This other unit near me just activated and I think they are going to attack China!"



posted on Jan, 11 2012 @ 11:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Darkrunner
 


Welcome to ATS, Home of the Kneejerk reaction to anything involving the military.

Ask a vet about what's going on? You're crazy, they're all just warcriminals, liars, and brainwashed murderers.

"Typical Guard drill weekend activities" is no way as cool as, "It's a Bush clone led Army out to hustle us off to FEMA camps!"



posted on Jan, 12 2012 @ 09:06 PM
link   

edit on 12-1-2012 by 31Bravo because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 14 2012 @ 10:13 AM
link   
SF Gate



The Pentagon has quietly shifted combat troops and warships to the Middle East after the top American commander in the region warned that he needed additional forces to deal with Iran and other potential threats, U.S. officials said. Marine Corps Gen. James Mattis, who heads U.S. Central Command, won White House approval for the deployments late last year after talks with the government in Baghdad broke down over keeping U.S. troops in Iraq, but the extent of the Pentagon moves is only now becoming clear. Read more: www.sfgate.com.../c/a/2012/01/12/MNR11MOPB2.DTL#ixzz1jRwoaCAW


More troops going that way, it is slowly building up, this is it!
edit on 14-1-2012 by THE_PROFESSIONAL because: Fixed link



posted on Jan, 14 2012 @ 10:41 AM
link   
reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL
 


Dead link



new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join