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.

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.

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."?

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