I had the privilege of practicing law some 20 years, of helping debate definitions in court, and I can read a proposed statute. "Ground elements" is all inclusive. It disallows preparation, it disallows hot pursuit, it disallows so many things other than just ground forces. If we are talking about ground forces, why does the bill not say that? Why does it not limit it to ground troops or ground forces? It does not do that.
Discussing the implications of a proposed statute related to military operations.
Share
More from Charles Skelton
The Department of Defense spends nearly $1 billion a year moving freight and cargo around the United States of America. Much of that moved on truck. Many shippers these days, or brokers, are charging shippers, including the Department of…
Let me add, if I may, an additional 30 seconds, Mr. Chairman. The gentleman spoke about the need to study strategy. After we passed the Goldwater-Nichols Act in 1986, I chaired a panel on professional military education that did a great…
I strongly support H.R. 556, and I voted for it when it first came through House, passing by a vote of 423-0. I support the bill because it will protect the critical technologies and the critical infrastructure of this country by ensuring…
the people of rural Missouri and those who live throughout the United States are eager for Congress to enact energy policies that help alleviate record high oil prices, reduce America's dependency on foreign oil, promote homegrown energy…
Other voices in this conversation
