
![]() |
|
|
| [-] |

| [−] |
| [−] |
| [−] |
| [−] |
Prev | List | Random | Next |


Comes from John Hillen in the National Review Online
I went to a presentation by a young Marine infantry lieutenant last week about the platoon he led in the assault on the insurgents in Fallujah a few months ago. It was fascinating stuff for us military types ? acronyms were being slung with abandon. Some points were particularly worth noting and sharing:*The intensity of combat in Fallujah: Of the 46 Marines in this lieutenant's platoon, 20 were evacuated for wounds during the three days of fighting and only four emerged completely unscathed.
*Some 20-odd insurgents were captured by his company during the battle, but there was not a single Iraqi amongst them.
<...>
Incidentally, some sophisticate tried to prompt the young officer into musings on how he and his Marines felt about the mission in Iraq and our purpose there...
Rest at the link.
But this being Tuesday, in the best tradition of FM radio, you get a twofer from Hillen/NRO:
The Washington Post business section (rarely read in this one-industry town) had a piece yesterday on the extraordinary failure of the federal government to comply with a 1999 law requiring the government to award 3% of its contracts to firms owned by disabled veterans.As you might expect, not a single department has even come close to complying ? with two of the worst offenders (and biggest contract granters) being The Pentagon and The Veterans Administration! ? languishing at .18 and .41 percent respectively.
Women- and minority-owned businesses fare much better- their quotas are much more stricktly enforced than the disabled Vet?s.
Read all of both.