War on the cheap

The Bush administration is shortchanging American soldiers by not providing the resources they need to effectively wage war

The old saying that all the military needs to fight a war are bullets, beans and bandages is true as far as it goes. Missing from that shopping list, however, are the bucks to pay for them.

Bush administration efforts to fight the war in Iraq on a shoestring have put a serious crimp in military budgets. The military says it lacks money for even bare-bones necessities such as fuel and ammunition to adequately train units heading to combat. The Army alone says it is $500 million short in stateside operating funds.

Army bases have closed mess halls. Non-deployed units have been stripped of weapons and equipment so the gear can be sent overseas. Family support activities -- schools programs, child care and counseling -- have been reduced or eliminated at some bases. Even spare parts are in short supply.

Today's soldier is a far different trooper than in the days of the draft. He or she is a highly trained professional who, if lured away to contract security work, for instance, can earn $750 a day. Many have advanced technical training. People of that caliber who willingly stay in uniform, with the hardships and danger that can entail, have every right to expect that they and their families will be well-treated. That means such costly basics as good schools, more-than-adequate housing and superb medical care on military bases.

Yes, there are harmless economies that can be squeezed out of almost any government budget. The military is no exception. But budgets too small to pay for real-life training and fundamental quality of life issues end up costing more in the long run.

War is terribly wasteful and frightfully expensive. A million-dollar piece of equipment can be turned into scrap metal with a $10 homemade bomb. Yet the Bush administration appears determined to mask the true cost of the war in Iraq by not asking Congress for enough money to get the job done.

The New York Times reports that senior officers in Washington are handing out cards explaining it will take $17 billion in extra spending over the next year merely to repair and replace tanks, trucks, radios and other gear wrecked or destroyed in the Iraq fighting. Then, the officers say, it will take $13 billion each year for the next five years to keep up with equipment needs.

And that is just for the full- time Army. Reserve and National Guard units returning home from active duty have been forced to leave much of their equipment behind.

The result of this financial and logistical sleight of hand is an under-equipped and under-staffed military asked to do too much, with too little, for too long. One report says today's active Army has less than 10,000 non-deployed and combat-ready soldiers trained and equipped to meet an unexpected crisis.

That is a deeply troubling scenario that should keep Washington planners awake at night.