Know what pisses me off??

[Seismic Anamoly]

As a veteran who commanded many a good young brave soldiers.....



"30 million expenditure planned for Bush inauguration."



"Grunts in Iraq loot junkyards to Up-Armor vehicles."



"Rumsfield gets "testy" when asked about it."



WHAT????????!!!!!!!!!!



FU*K that.



May be time to talk a little Treason down at the Pub.



Somewhere priorities got screwed.



Colin Powell should have been President from DAY ONE.

[Rev9Volts]

not that i am sticking up one way or other for rummy, but here is an interesting article that sheds some light...



i shot video for reuters during bill clinton's first inauguration in 92 and it lasted a week... put up tents all over the mall...



it is all paid by donations, no tax dollars except some for secutity. bill clinton spent about 25 million on each of his "events".



it is ashame they don't raise twice that and give half to dead wounded soldiers...





however... 30 million is a lot... but all those people who helped him get elected want to party and they are paying for it. i know a local dentist and his wife are going to one. what is the limit? I think $1000? he and she prolly gave that every year plus to the republican party cause it is tax deductable... they don't have kids. anywho... prolly tens of thousands of dollars...



the soldier who asked the question was told to ask that question by a reporter to make rummy look bad. not that i am sticking up for rummy cause personally i think since we dropped leaflets etc. on places like falujah for the regular people to leave before we sent troups in i would have nuked falujah instead of sending any troups in...



then let the u.n. and red cross build them brand new homes and stores...





Rummy's bum rap





By Frank J. Gaffney Jr.





Donald Rumsfeld is one of the most experienced men in Washington. So he is presumably not surprised at the fickleness of the chattering classes. Not so long ago, he got nothing but fabulous press and fawning treatment from Congress and the public. Now, the "smart people" have formed up for a political lynch mob demanding his head, with even Republicans insisting that he lose his job once the votes are counted in Iraq.

Even a veteran of decades of inside-the-Beltway and corporate bloodletting like "Rummy" might be amazed by the grounds on which he is being pilloried, however.















Take for example the outrage that has accompanied his response in Kuwait to a soldier in the Tennessee National Guard about the lack of adequate armor protection for troops going into Iraq — a response universally described by media and other Rumsfeld critics as "arrogant." Long-time Human Events editor Allan Ryskind recently observed that the sound-bite in question sounds entirely different in the full context of Mr. Rumsfeld's respectful and characteristically thoughtful answer.

The first thing he said was: "I talked to the general coming out here about the pace at which the vehicles are being armored. They have been brought from all over the world, wherever they're not needed, to a place here where they are needed. I'm told that they are being — the Army is — I think it's something like 400 a month are being done. And it's essentially a matter of physics. It isn't a matter of money. It isn't a matter on the part of the Army of desire. It's a matter of production and capability of doing it."

It was only then that Mr. Rumsfeld made what was taken by the troops — who subsequently gave him a standing ovation — as an unexceptionable observation: "As you know, you go to war with the army you have. They're not the army you might want or wish to have at a later time." While the sound bite typically began and ended with those two sentences, Rummy added a further assurance: "Since the Iraq conflict began, the Army has been pressing ahead to produce the armor necessary at a rate they believe — it's a greatly expanded rate from what existed previously — but a rate that they believe is the rate that is all that can be accomplished at this moment." He went on in this deliberate, responsible vein for several minutes more.

Imagine the secretary's surprise when, after these remarks were selectively quoted and repeatedly broadcast in the most unflattering light, the manufacturer of armored Humvees announced he could actually increase production further. More public castigation of Mr. Rumsfeld followed.

Never mind that Mr. Rumsfeld had been given contrary information as recently as when he was en route to his meeting with the troops. It is a cheap shot to denounce him for answering as he did when, to the best of his knowledge, the Army was doing everything humanly possible to meet the current needs. Upon discovering otherwise, full production was ordered.

Mr. Rumsfeld's observation about going to war with "the army you have" is no less appropriate an answer to those who have assailed him for not assigning more U.S. troops to post-liberation Iraq. Had the 500,000 troops in-theater at the time of Desert Storm been used to overthrow Saddam Hussein in 1991, the aftermath of such an operation — to say nothing of the sorry history of the Middle East during the intervening years — may have been very different.

The first President Bush refused to do that, though, drawing notably on counsel from Colin Powell, Brent Scowcroft and Norman Schwartzkopf. And, having prematurely stopped that war, he and his successor, Bill Clinton, decided greatly to reduce the armed forces' size and armaments. These cuts left us unable, as a practical matter, to mount another Desert Storm. Even the deployment and sustaining in Iraq of a contingent half that size would have been highly problematic. Interestingly, few, if any, of those now venting their spleens about Mr. Rumsfeld's ruminations on "the army you have" opposed the cuts that have so limited our present options.

Given the bipartisan agreement that eliminating Saddam's regime was justified and necessary, the second President Bush and his defense secretary were right, under the circumstances, to work to achieve that objective quickly and decisively, then to draw on allied forces and reconstituted and vetted Iraqi units to help maintain post-war security.

Donald Rumsfeld may not be perfect, but neither are any of his critics. He is nonetheless arguably the finest secretary of defense this nation has ever had. His combination of vast expertise, unflagging energy and strategic vision would be desirable under any circumstances. In time of global war, though, they are truly indispensable.

Most of those seeking Mr. Rumsfeld's dismissal hope Mr. Bush will overlook the fact that the secretary is his most faithful and capable Cabinet officer in the execution of the president's policies. They argue some unidentified successor could do better, a false prospect often associated with generic alternatives. In the real world, there is no obvious better man for the job and, to his credit, in his press conference Monday, Mr. Bush signaled that he thinks Mr. Rumsfeld is getting a bum rap and that he intends to hold onto his secretary of defense for the foreseeable future.



Frank J. Gaffney Jr. is president of the Center for Security Policy and a columnist for The Washington Times.



washtimes.com/commentary/...-9042r.htm

[DreamTone7]

Very interesting, Rev9...and in light of the popular media agenda, quite believeable. Thanks for posting that.

[Seismic Anamoly]

Wow.

[DreamTone7]

I wonder if Michael Moore used to work for the media?

Melody and Instruments for the soul...

[Rev9Volts]

[Rev9Volts]

Here is what the soldier asked:

"Our soldiers have been fighting in Iraq for coming up on three years. A lot of us are getting ready to move north relatively soon. Our vehicles are not armored. We're digging pieces of rusted scrap metal and compromised ballistic glass that's already been shot up, dropped, busted, picking the best out of this scrap to put on our vehicles to take into combat. We do not have proper armament vehicles to carry with us north."

Here is how Army Maj. Gen. Stephen Speakes described the actual condition of the 278th Regimental Combat team a week later at a Pentagon press conference.

Reporter: At the time the question was asked, the planted question, the unit had 784 of its 804 vehicles armored?

Gen. Speakes: The theater had to take care of 830 total vehicles. ... Up north in Iraq, they drew 119 up-armored Humvees from what was called stay-behind equipment. That is equipment from a force that was already up there. We went ahead and applied 38 add-on armor kits to pieces of equipment they deployed over on a ship. They also had down in Kuwait 214 stay-behind equipment pieces that were add-on armor kits. And then over there they had 459 pieces of equipment that were given level-three protection [fabricated at the base]. And so when you put all this together, that comes up with 830. ... In other words, we completed all the armoring within 24 hours of the time the question was asked."

Reporter: If he hadn't asked that question, would the up-armoring have been accomplished within 24 hours?

Gen. Speakes: "Yes. This was already an existing program."

[Galmin]

As time goes by, here two, current, related articles on the subject.



2 top Marines say `lack of leadership' led to Humvee armor delay



Marine units found to lack equipment

Quote:

---

Re: Humvee Arour;

"I acknowledge that we took our eye off the ball on that contract"

-----

Hunter said conversations about providing more armor for Marine Humvees began earlier this year, after a Marine sergeant came up with a way of using scrap steel to fashion plates to protect the undersides of Humvees. After initial discussions with Defense Department officials in February went nowhere, Hunter met in April with Nyland, who agreed that steel in Kuwait could be used to produce 650 protective kits, Hunter said. A contract to produce those kits wasn't signed until Monday, however.

-----

Nyland said efforts were under way to ensure that almost 2,000 Humvees and trucks had the necessary protective armor kits by December

---

So, not only was the first report true, you were lied to aswell.

So much for supporting the troops.

[Seismic Anamoly]

Makes me wonder how many Mamas won't get to hear their Sons/Daughters voice this coming Christmas because of this "oversight"....man, that is depressing.



If you're gonna do it, do it RIGHT.

[NRKofOver]

And I think that's the biggest thing with this war. The administration was overconfident as to how it would go. Underestimating your enemy can be a fatal flaw in conflict. They were not adequately prepared to do what is necessary to actually win this war.



I personally believe that Donald Rumsfeld is an idiot. He had his top Pentagon guys telling him he was high to try Iraq the way he wanted to and he basically ran those guys out and got yes men to say that Rumsfeld's plan was solid. It obviously wasn't.



I have been opposed to this war since day one, but everday I hear about more dead soldiers the more pissed off I get.



I decided the best way to insure that we only go to war when necessary is to have a death benefit for soldier's families of some outrageous amount, like $2 million. That would make the idiot leaders understand that dead soldiers suck, the these humans have great value as living humans and if you're going to fight a war, it better be worth it.

My music for the disenchanted masses

[Rev9Volts]

well they sure do not get much for being killed... i can not remember what it is...



makes you wonder why powell left when he did.... mayhaps he could see the future... still lots of terrorists out there with plans...

[Galmin]

Grunts get about $1800.- a month, including combat pay.



Those who are in it for the money work as mercenaries employees for a private army contractor.

[Seismic Anamoly]

If I didn't have an 8 year old son, I'd seriously consider it....depending on the objective, that is.



www.sofmag.com/home.do

[Rev9Volts]

seismic you are a man of my heart... i love reading s.o.f magazine. when i worked in d.c. and took the metro train in i kept a copy in my napsack. i would read it regularly, but when it was packed like sardines i would pull it out and people would back away and give me some room.

[Galmin]

It's only 600 bucks a day, Seismo. ;)