As for the condition of our troops, they're armed but they haven't been issued ammo yet.
The gist of the article is front line & permimeter troops have plenty of ammo, while everyone else is carrying empty wepons. The theory is that the less ammo, the less accidental/negligent discharges. They aren't overly worried about the grunts but the support personnel are viewed as less than safe.
Course this is what happens after a few generations of demonizing weapons & discouraging participation in the shooting sports: you get an army that is not competent enough to have ammo until the last minute. From what I recall every marine is suppossed to be trained as a Rifleman. Even the women. It'd be too much to hope that their philosophy of arms catches on with the other branches of service, I just hope they don't start immitating the more PC branches.
Of course now would be a good time to insert an M-16/M-4 joke, such as, "If they don't have any ammo for them, wouldn't that make them more effective?" Or perhaps "They don't have ammo for them yet because they cannot verify the existence of animals smaller than coyotes." But I won't engage in such cheap shots at military intelligence.