Witty!Quote:
Originally Posted by Rockntractor
Printable View
Witty!Quote:
Originally Posted by Rockntractor
Thank you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Novaheart
Still doesn't change the fact that the article doesn't contain anything to suggest that President Obama had anything to do with the decision to cut back on hot food service.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rockntractor
Just looking at his and his wife's history should give you some idea how far they stick their noses into peoples eating habits.Quote:
Originally Posted by Novaheart
That's about what I expected of you. Its your typical response when you don't know what the hell you're talking about and get called on it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Novaheart
Sent from my BlackBerry 9800 using Tapatalk
Where do you think directives like that come from? No one in theater wakes up one morning and drafts an order like this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Novaheart
Seriously...you should really STFU on things like this. You don't have a clue about what you're saying.
Sent from my BlackBerry 9800 using Tapatalk
What he not telling us is that he ate at the food court at those places. If he was ever really there at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zathras
Sent from my BlackBerry 9800 using Tapatalk
Hardly. Privatizing military functions leads to decreased costs in peacetime, but increased costs in wartime. For example, most units had cooks assigned at the company level, so that field feeding was done at a relatively small cost, but the bean counters in the 90's decided that they could eliminate those positions as part of the total drawdown of the force, and make it up with consolidated DFACs throughout CONUS. It did save money, but when we ramped up for Iraq, those positions didn't come back, and we had to establish the same kind of DFACs throughout theater, with combat pay for the civilians who run them. The various contractors managed to find Third Country Nationals (TCNs) to run them at lower cost, but the overall cost was still higher than paying Soldiers to do it, expecially when the cooks ended up being needed to oversee the operaions.Quote:
Originally Posted by Novaheart
Uh, no. From the article:Quote:
Originally Posted by Novaheart
Officials stressed other comforts at the forward operating bases may also soon be reduced, such as laundry and recreation, as officials look for other ways to reduce the American footprint in advance of departing the country.The decision to withdraw precipitously was Obama's, therefore the effects are his.
“In order to set the conditions for each base closure or a base transfer, non-tactical logistics and support services (i.e. any non-mission essential services) must decline. Typically the complete cessation of non-tactical logistics and services, such as laundry services or morale, welfare and recreation services, occurs 2-3 months prior to a base closure or transfer,” Lt. Col. Paul Haverstick said.
Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...#ixzz2JwMwxW3H
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
If they want to cut costs...they need to start at places like Kandahar and Kabul where you have 6-7 DFACS in addition to fast food vendors...before they start cutting services at the forward areas.
Except that the FOBs are the first to shut down in this kind of drawdown and it costs more to run food service out there. The economy of scale for having multiple DFACs in one location is significant, especially when you factor in the way that drawn down units will go through those big bases when they redeploy. This isn't about saving money. Democrats don't care about that. It's about demonstrating that we are subordinate to them and punishing the troops.Quote:
Originally Posted by txradioguy
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2