Newsgroup: it.cultura.militare
Titolo: piu' soldati USA per rubare petrolio iracheno...

US Army Seeks to Boost Forces by 74,000
By LOLITA C. BALDOR, Associated Press Writer
Wednesday, December 19, 2007
Printable VersionEmail This Article 
del.icio.us
 Digg
 Technorati
 Reddit   Slashdot
 Fark
 Newsvine
 Google Bookmarks
  Georgia (default)
 Verdana
 Times New Roman
 Arial
(12-19) 14:27 PST WASHINGTON, (AP) --
The Pentagon will send six new combat brigades to bases in Texas,
Georgia, and Colorado in the coming years as part of an extensive plan
to increase the size of the Army.
As the Army moves to grow by 74,000 soldiers by 2010, officials
Wednesday mapped out decisions to add the combat brigades and eight
support units around the country, as well an agreement to delay moving
two brigades out of Germany until 2012-2013. The overall effort would
cost $66.4 billion in 743 military construction projects through 2013.
Fort Bliss in Texas, Fort Carson in Colorado and Fort Stewart in
Georgia will be big winners, each getting two new combat brigades. But
every Army installation across the country will see more soldiers --
anywhere from a few to thousands.
A brigade is generally about 3,500 soldiers, but their size can vary
depending on the type of unit. Fort Stewart will lose one of its
existing heavy brigades, but will have a net gain of nearly 4,000
troops.
Gen. Richard Cody, the Army vice chief of staff, said the Army took "a
hard look at where we could station this force ... and give them a
quality of life that is equal to their quality of service to the
nation."
Cody also echoed recent statements by Defense Secretary Robert Gates,
saying that as the size of the Army grows, the Pentagon will
eventually be able to shorten deployment times from the current 15
months back to 12 months. Gates has said it is not likely to happen
until late next year.
Reducing deployments, Cody said, will depend on how fast the Army can
grow and how quickly the number of troops deployed can be decreased.
There are currently 158,000 troops in Iraq, but that number is
expected to come down over the next six months as the five brigades
sent in early this year for the troop buildup leave, and are not
replaced.
Cody said the decision to keep two brigades in Germany for several
more years was based on requests from commanders in Europe to maintain
troop levels there, as well as the need to ensure that troops
returning to the U.S. had proper housing and other facilities at their
new base.
One of the brigades in Germany would move to Fort Bliss in 2012, and a
second brigade would move from Germany to White Sands Missile Range in
New Mexico in 2013.
Information about the plan began to trickle out early Wednesday as
Army officials spread out across Capitol Hill, talking to the members
of Congress who will see growth in their districts. And Cody was among
those spreading the holiday cheer.
"I spoke with General Cody this morning about the Army's future growth
plans and what that will mean for our Texas bases," said Sen. Kay
Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas. "I have worked and advocated strongly for
bringing troops home from overseas and today the Army has announced
they will bring 14,000 new troops to Texas."
Three of the support brigades will also go to Texas -- with an air
defense brigade and a logistics brigade going to Fort Hood, and
another unit going to Fort Bliss. The other support brigades would be
scattered around the U.S. -- with two going to Schofield Barracks in
Hawaii, one to Fort Leonard Wood in Missouri, one to Fort Lewis in
Washington and one to Fort Polk in Louisiana.
In addition, a support unit in Fort Irwin, Calif., will shift to Fort
Richardson in Alaska, and another will go from Hawaii to Fort Drum in
New York.
The massive plan will impact 304 Army installations, including 380,000
soldiers and family members. The construction projects include 69,000
barracks spaces, 4,100 family housing units and 66 child centers.
Plans are to increase the number of the active-duty Army, Army Guard
and Army Reserve by 74,000 overall, with the active-duty force growing
by 65,000 to a total of 547,000. In October, top Army leaders said
they planned to move faster to increase the size of the force -- adding
the full 74,000 soldiers by 2010, two years sooner than originally
planned.
Accelerating the increase is aimed to relieve the strain on forces
already stretched by the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Originally the
growth was to take place over five years, now it will be done in
three.
The active-duty troop increase -- which will boost the number of combat
brigades from the 2006 level of 42 to 48 -- will cost $2.63 billion.
Roughly half of the 65,000 increase has already been achieved.
___
Associated Press writer Suzanne Gamboa contributed to this story.

 Non e' questo il vero titolo?
no, è piu' soldati USA per rubare petrolio iracheno...
nazifesso britannico, leggiti l'articolo cosi' scopri per cosa
serviranno quei 74.000 .

 Gia' ma il titolo dell'artigulo e' diverso,
anche se sei notoriamente un microcefalo prova qualche volta a
ragionare dopo che hai letto l'articolo.

 cosicche' poi non ci crede nessuno.
coglioncello, questo aumento degli effettivi a cosa serve? hai letto?
e soprattutto hai capito? me sa de no.

 coglioncello, questo aumento degli effettivi a cosa serve? hai letto?
Sembra che vogliano rubare anche il petrolio afghano!
===========
Accelerating the increase is aimed to relieve the strain on forces
already stretched by the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Originally the
growth was to take place over five years, now it will be done in
three.
============
Tb
-- 
E' una grande mitzvah essere sempre felici (R. Nachman di Breslavia)

 grossolanamente i titoli, si leggerebbero i corpi degli articoli.
Secondo me la regola migliore è non leggere i copincolla del camerata, 
qualunque titolo abbiano.
O è fuffaglia che fa spessore oppure qualche stronzata  tipo 
regnum-europa nazione- viva putin - morte ai sionisti e ai georgiani.
Comunque irrilevante e poco credibile.


 Sembra che vogliano rubare anche il petrolio afghano!
li rubano la sovranità

 li rubano la sovranità
Allora il titolo giusto era:
"più soldati USA per rubare petrolio e sovranità all'Irak e sovranità 
semplice  all'afghanistan".
Così i crimini USA sarebbero risultati più completi.  Da un'attenta 
lettura dell'articolo ho notato anche che le nuove  forze andranno in 
basi USA e tedesche, secondo me bisognerebbe aggiungere qualcosa anche 
su quello. Anche la sovranità di quei due paesi mi sembra molto a rischio.


 semplice  all'afghanistan".
bravo.

 bravo.
Su Germania e USA niente?
Senti questo:
"Più soldati USA per rubare petrolio e sovranità all'Irak e sovranità
  semplice  all'afghanistan oltre che per limitare la sovranità tedesca 
e mattere in pericolo sia il petrolio che la democrazia americana".
