of USA today has reported that
The Pentagon has asked Congress for $1.4 billion in emergency spending to combat a growing threat of sniper attacks in Iraq based on an overstated assessment of the extent of the attacks, its records show.
[photopress:Marine_sniper_ghillie_suit.JPG,thumb,alignleft]In last week’s spending request, the Pentagon said sniper attacks have quadrupled in the past year and, if unchecked, the attacks could eclipse roadside bombs as the top killer of U.S. troops. However, the rate of sniper attacks has dropped slightly in 2007 and fallen dramatically in the past four months, according to military records given to USA TODAY.
Pentagon officials acknowledged the mistake Monday after questions about the data were raised by USA TODAY.
“The term quadrupled will be removed from the justification because it is simply incorrect,” said Dave Patterson, deputy undersecretary of Defense. [photopress:Simo_Hayha.jpg,thumb,alignright]
In 2006, there were 386 sniper attacks on coalition forces, according to data from the Multi-National Force-Iraq headquarters in Iraq. Through Oct. 26 of this year, there were 269 sniper attacks, the figures show.
The Pentagon does not release the number of troops killed by snipers. Improvised explosive devices have killed about 1,600 U.S. troops, more than half of all combat deaths since the war began in 2003.
Snipers “have had an adverse psychological effect on both coalition forces and the Iraqi civilian populace,” the budget request stated.
The money requested to combat sniper attacks would buy equipment such as sensors to locate snipers and better body armor to protect troops from attacks, Patterson said.
Patterson said Pentagon officials were reviewing the entire $42 billion supplemental budget request sent to Congress last week to see if it includes other errors. “We don’t want to misrepresent anything,” he said.
Snipers remain a significant threat, Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell said. “Despite the erroneous characterization in the supplemental request, the threat is very real and needs to be combated.”
Morrell and Patterson said they couldn’t explain the source of the incorrect information.
Democratic Rep. John Murtha of Pennsylvania, who leads the House subcommittee that will review the budget request, said by e-mail that all Pentagon requests will be carefully reviewed.
Despite the inaccurate information, Congress will most likely approve the money, said Michael O’Hanlon, a military analyst at the Brookings Institution.
[photopress:800px_Marie_Ljalkov___with_SVT_40_rifle.jpg,thumb,alignleft]”You’d like to feel that the Pentagon is thorough in its methodology and honest in its assessment of the threat,” O’Hanlon said. “Nobody will begrudge them spending on a real threat — but we also need to avoid rubber-stamp syndrome where any expense is OK.”
The Pentagon has been deploying countersniper technology this year, including remotely fired weapons that allow troops to stay inside vehicles and avoid exposure to gunfire.
Kongsberg Defense and Aerospace, a Norwegian company with a major plant in Johnstown, Pa., is supplying the Army with as many as 6,500 of the systems, according to Jeffrey Child, a company spokesman.
“Pentagon misstates sniper data in $1.4B request,”
Tom Vanden Brook’s piece in USA Today.
What’s odd here – it’s hard to imagine that Congress would turn down any remotely legitimate request for funds for any force protection project, isn’t it? Does the Pentagon behave disingenuously in budget requests by force of habit?