A two front Army at $194,841.27 per pair of boots

This is not about over-priced shoes...

An article in the Los Angeles Times last week discussed the US Army's lack of sustainable funding at current levels of expenditure, due to our two-front decade, in Afghanistan and Iraq. Gen. Peter J. Schoomaker, the Army's chief of staff, is seeking a 41 per cent increase in funding, from $98.2 billion to $138.8 billion for fiscal year 2008. The "Active Duty force" now contains 504,000 men and women in boots, so the above cited number of $194,841.27 is the equivalent value per fighting soldier to maintain the Department of the Army.

The General can be seen, perhaps, as trying to shift back onto the regular Defense budget, some of the off-budget expenditures that have been approved by both Houses of Congress to fund the War FOR Terrorism. Will he (Gen'l Schoomaker) accomplish this?

The Ripoffublicans have no experience in analysing and investigating their own Party or misAdministration... and amazingly they've forgotten what a huge, well-financed Ripoffublican investigation could dredge up, if unleashed and funded to the tune of a hundred million or more dollars... (and no memory, otherwise one wouldn't expect to hear about how 'Clinton did nothing against terrorism', à la Chris Wallace in a twisted FOX interview).

So if the Army can attack Rumsfeld through Congressional approval of an on-budget funding submission, which may have ramifications towards the inordinant amount of wastage and corruption, while the Army's former leaders attack the same misanthropic Secretary through repeated submissions to the press, and the NIE offers evidence that the misAdministration should seek professional psychiatric help prior to nuclear meltdown, the Homeland may survive Bush the Lesser.

ZENmud