CAMP BUEHRING, Kuwait - In a rare public airing of grievances, disgruntled soldiers complained to Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld on Wednesday about long deployments and a lack of armored vehicles and other equipment.

"You go to war with the Army you have," Rumsfeld replied, "not the Army you might want or wish to have."

Spc. Thomas Wilson had asked the defense secretary, "Why do we soldiers have to dig through local landfills for pieces of scrap metal and compromised ballistic glass to up-armor our vehicles?" Shouts of approval and applause arose from the estimated 2,300 soldiers who had assembled to see Rumsfeld.

Rumsfeld hesitated and asked Wilson to repeat his question.

"We do not have proper armored vehicles to carry with us north," Wilson, 31, of Ringgold, Ga., concluded after asking again.

Wilson, an airplane mechanic whose unit, the 278th Regimental Combat Team of the Tennessee Army National Guard, is about to drive north into Iraq for a one-year tour of duty, put his finger on a problem that has bedeviled the Pentagon for more than a year. Rarely, though, is it put so bluntly in a public forum.

Rumsfeld said the Army was sparing no expense or effort to acquire as many Humvees and other vehicles with extra armor as it can. What is more, he said, armor is not the savior some think it is.

"You can have all the armor in the world on a tank and a tank can (still) be blown up," he said. The same applies to the much smaller Humvee utility vehicles that, without extra armor, are highly vulnerable to the insurgents' weapon of choice in Iraq, the improvised explosive device that is a roadside threat to Army convoys and patrols.

U.S. soldiers and Marines in Iraq are killed or maimed by roadside bombs almost daily. Adding armor protection to Humvees and other vehicles that normally are not used in direct combat has been a priority for the Army, but manufacturers have not been able to keep up with the demand.

Wilson's ex-wife, Regina, said she was not surprised he challenged Rumsfeld.

"It wouldn't matter if it was Bush himself standing there," she said. "He would have dissed him the same."

Wilson joined the National Guard in June 2003; previously, he had served about four years in the Air Force, beginning in 1994.

Rumsfeld dropped in to Camp Buehring — named for Lt. Col. Charles Buehring, who was killed in a rocket attack on a downtown Baghdad hotel in November 2003 — to thank the troops for their service and to give them a pep talk. Later he flew to New Delhi for meetings Thursday with Indian government officials.

In his prepared remarks in Kuwait, Rumsfeld urged the troops — mostly National Guard and Reserve soldiers — to discount critics of the war and to help "win the test of wills" with the insurgents.

Wilson and others, however, had criticisms of their own — not of the war but of how it was being fought.

During the question-and-answer session, another soldier complained that active-duty Army units seem to get priority over National Guard and Reserve units for the best equipment used in Iraq.

"There's no way I can prove it, but I am told the Army is breaking its neck to see that there is not" discrimination of that kind, Rumsfeld said.

   Yet another soldier asked how much longer the Army would continue using its "stop loss" power to prevent soldiers from leaving the service who are otherwise eligible to retire or return to civilian life at the end of their enlistment.

Rumsfeld said this condition was simply a fact of life for soldiers in times of war. Critics, including some in Congress, say it's proof the Army has been stretched too thin by war.

"It's basically a sound principle, it's nothing new, it's been well understood" by soldiers, he said. "My guess is it will continue to be used as little as possible, but that it will continue to be used."

Sen. Christopher Dodd (D-Conn.), told Rumsfeld in a letter Wednesday that his response to the question about armored vehicles was "utterly unacceptable" and that it was the duty of the government to provide safety equipment.

"Mr. Secretary, our troops go to war with the Army that our nation's leaders provide," he wrote.

The deputy commanding general of U.S. forces in Kuwait, Maj. Gen. Gary Speer, said in an interview at Camp Buehring that as far as he knew, every vehicle deploying to Iraq from Kuwait had at least "Level 3" armor protection. That means it had locally fabricated armor for its side panels, but not bulletproof windows or reinforced floorboards.

Speer said he was unaware that soldiers were searching landfills for scrap metal and discarded glass.

However, Maj. Gen. Gus L. Hargett, the adjutant general of the Tennessee National Guard, disputed Speer's remarks. "I know that members of his staff were aware and assisted the 278th in obtaining these materials," he said.

At the Pentagon, spokesman Larry Di Rita said production of armored Humvees had increased from 15 to 450 a month since fall 2003, when commanders in Iraq started asking for them because of insurgents' heavy use of roadside explosives.

Overall, there are 19,000 armored Humvees in the Iraqi theater. Some were built with additional armor, others had it added on later. That's, 2,000 short of what commanders are asking for, Di Rita acknowledged.

Military policy is that troops driving into Iraq in Humvees drive only in armored ones, Di Rita said. Some $1.2 billion has been included in the defense budget to pay for armored vehicles, he said.

This doesn't surprise me. Service men and women are getting fed up. There are those who are suing because their duty is being extended long after they were supposed to get out of the service entirely. There are many who are refusing to go on hazardous convoys. Support our troops? It seems that the American public support them more than the government does.




Cat

This doesn't surprise me. Service men and women are getting fed up. There are those who are suing because their duty is being extended long after they were supposed to get out of the service entirely. There are many who are refusing to go on hazardous convoys. Support our troops? It seems that the American public support them more than the government does.




Cat
I'm just glad one of the soldiers finally had the balls to call Rummy on it, right to his face. I just hope he doesn't suffer any repercussions.

Poor Rummy!  They're really stuck.  They know they can't even talk about reinstating the draft, but they really do need a much bigger army.  How to get it without a draft.  They're starting to call up "reservists" who haven't been "called up" since the '60s!  "Grampa, why do you have to go to Iraq?"
:o
I think of all those $400.00 hammers and $50.00 nails the Pentagon bought, and the billions they spent on that silly missile shield, and now the soldiers picking up old cookie sheets from the dump and making armor out of 'em!
Way to go!

Poor Rummy!  They're really stuck.  They know they can't even talk about reinstating the draft, but they really do need a much bigger army.  How to get it without a draft.  They're starting to call up "reservists" who haven't been "called up" since the '60s!  "Grampa, why do you have to go to Iraq?"
:o
I think of all those $400.00 hammers and $50.00 nails the Pentagon bought, and the billions they spent on that silly missile shield, and now the soldiers picking up old cookie sheets from the dump and making armor out of 'em!
Way to go!


And Lil' Georgie got re-elected because he is strong on defense?  Go figure.

georgie and rumsfeld gave their answer....shut up and die. >:(

Again the fascist booster club--FOX News, Rush Limbaugh, et al.--are trying to blame it on the press.  They're trying to sell the idea that the soldier was "set up" by that reporter from the Chatanooga paper.

Now, reverse the parties.  If it was a DefSec from the Clinton administration in the same situation, what would FOX and Limbaugh be saying?  "It took a lot of guts for this brave young man to stand up to incompetence of the Clinton Administration and blah blah blah blah..."

In other societies that have gone fascist, the fascists arose in a party they founded themselves.  In the case of the USA, the fasiscists simply took over an existing political party--the Republican Party.  Absolutely everything in the Bush Administration and the Busheeshe news media is partisan  It matters not the CV of an appointee, what matters is how devoted he is to the Fascist Republican party, their corporate paymasters, and to God, inc.

georgie and rumsfeld gave their answer....shut up and die. >:(


And, of course, that equates to "support our troops".


Again the fascist booster club--FOX News, Rush Limbaugh, et al.--are trying to blame it on the press. They're trying to sell the idea that the soldier was "set up" by that reporter from the Chatanooga paper.

Now, reverse the parties. If it was a DefSec from the Clinton administration in the same situation, what would FOX and Limbaugh be saying? "It took a lot of guts for this brave young man to stand up to incompetence of the Clinton Administration and blah blah blah blah..."




RIGHT ON]

And, of course, that equates to "support our troops".


When I heard of this, there are 2 things that crossed my mind.

For one, things like this will prevent any politicians (Liberal or Conservative) from giving these "question and answer" sessions to anybody.  After all, why give private individuals a chance to ask questions, when there is a good chance that at least some of them are just working as shills for the press?  And I do not say this because of who is in office, or the question is asked.  This was not a press conference after all.  The reporter should have asked his question at the appropriate time, not had somebody work as a stooge for him.

And while the question may have some merit, it is something that has been covered before.  As most people should know, it takes time from when a problem is realized, and it is corrected.  You have to realize the problem, find a solution, check to make sure the solution works, make the solution, then distribute it to those who need it.

Sometimes, "field expediant" solutions work.  In WWII, they realized that the tanks could not make it through the hedgerows of France.  A clever engineer took the beach obsticles left by Germany and made a crude bulldozer blade out of it and welded it to the front of the tank.  It worked, and soon all allied tanks sported blades like this.  And when the Panzerfaust made it's introduction, it devistated the tanks it struck.  The solution was amazingly simple, place wire fence around the tank, and fill the space between it and the hull with sandbags.

This solution is working yet again now in Iraq.  When anti-tank weapons started damaging our tracked vehicles, the fence solution came back.  It is cheap, fast, and can be added on in the field.  And because of the weight and size, a few hundred pounds does not hampen the fighting ability of a tank or APC.

Now for the HMMWV (Hummer), it is not that easy.  For one, it is wheeled, and does not have the horsepower to add that much weight to the vehicle.  And to add another problem, it would make the vehicle top-heavy, resulting in many more roll-over type accidents.

This means that solutions must be designed, tested, approved, and built back here.  And that means time.  Add to this, the fact that the military must follow a long testing, approval, and contracting system.  Because of the importance of this, the system is being shortcut, but it is still not overnight.  And unlike chain link fence, this armour is a composite, so invilves a more complicated and time consuming solution.

Of course, we can just have the first country that turns in a proposal accepted.  Of course, then you get the "no-bid" contracts that everybody is screaming about that Halliburton recieved.  And I am sure that if our military had people die in the improved vehicles, then they would scream that there were no bids, and that they rushed a solution.

The new improvements are comming out.  In fact, the companies making them are working at full capicity to make them.  But it takes time.  Hopefully, the ones that get there will save lives.  But until then, you have to make do with what you have.

Whatever.  Eighteen months ago, the Bushies on no uncertain terms said this war would be quick and easy, over with shortly, and no urban warfare.

Well...?
>:(

So, this guy's a shill, huh, well let me tell you the story of ANOTHER shill....
:D

Whatever.  Eighteen months ago, the Bushies on no uncertain terms said this war would be quick and easy, over with shortly, and no urban warfare.


Yea, and they also thought the Civil War, WWI, WWII, Korea and Viet Nam would be over quickly.  Some claimed that the first Gulf War would drag on for years.  You can never predict how long a conflict will take.  That is not the issue.


So, this guy's a shill, huh, well let me tell you the story of ANOTHER shill....


Yes.  To me, somebody who asks a question for a reporter is a shill.  I do not care of the person being questioned is Donald Rumsfeld, Les Aspin, William Perry or William Cohen.  I also do not care if it is Hillary Clinton or George Bush.  They are just being a shill for somebody else.

Yes.  To me, somebody who asks a question for a reporter is a shill.  I do not care of the person being questioned is Donald Rumsfeld, Les Aspin, William Perry or William Cohen.  I also do not care if it is Hillary Clinton or George Bush.  They are just being a shill for somebody else.

How do you know the soldier didn't want to ask the question all along?  The "shill" spin is pure partisan politics on the part of the right-wing media.  Nothing more.

And while the question may have some merit, it is something that has been covered before.  As most people should know, it takes time from when a problem is realized, and it is corrected.  You have to realize the problem, find a solution, check to make sure the solution works, make the solution, then distribute it to those who need it.
solution.



This is a problem for which there is already a solution.  There are already armored vehicles, were before
the "war" was started, unfortunately, for the guys who are fighting and dying, the administration wasn't
prepared for war, but went ahead anyway.  Considering that a good portion of steel used these days
comes from India, and there are welders well equipped to do the job in Iraq right now, it seems
questionable that all that can be done is being done. 

When I heard of this, there are 2 things that crossed my mind.

For one, things like this will prevent any politicians (Liberal or Conservative) from giving these "question and answer" sessions to anybody.  After all, why give private individuals a chance to ask questions, when there is a good chance that at least some of them are just working as shills for the press?  And I do not say this because of who is in office, or the question is asked.  This was not a press conference after all.  The reporter should have asked his question at the appropriate time, not had somebody work as a stooge for him.

If you watch the tape of that Q & A session, you will see the reaction of the other military personnel who were there. That was NOT "staged" so to speak. They all wanted that question asked and it really didn't matter WHO asked it. I think the right is trying to debunk this legitimate question. Also I think that Rummy's response "You go with the army you have..." was just a slap in the face. He didn't say the "equipment" but the "army" which in my book spells out the men and women who are there.




And while the question may have some merit, it is something that has been covered before.  As most people should know, it takes time from when a problem is realized, and it is corrected.  You have to realize the problem, find a solution, check to make sure the solution works, make the solution, then distribute it to those who need it.

This problem was realized a long time ago and the Pentigon has not done anything to solve the problem.

The new improvements are comming out.  In fact, the companies making them are working at full capicity to make them.  But it takes time.  Hopefully, the ones that get there will save lives.  But until then, you have to make do with what you have.


The companies have NOT been working at full capicity. In fact, some of them told the Pentigon that they are ready to increase production and the Pentigon hasn't told them to do so-not until NOW that this question has been brought out in the open.





Cat

As Cat said, the company that already makes the hummer armour is just waiting for the order and is ready to increase production.  So why did it take so long?

The "shill" argument is just so much right wing gas.  The troops present cheered when the question was asked.  They wanted it asked and they wanted it answered.  Rummy's answer was crap, insulting, and so much BS.

What this demonstrates once again is just how delusional this administration really is, and how poorly they planned for contingencies.  Any fool could have told them that what we're seeing was possible, it didn't take a military genious.  In fact, its exactly what I predicted on THIS MESSAGE BOARD before the invasion started.  If stupidity were a  crime these guys would all be serving life (hopefully they soon will be).

As Cat said, the company that already makes the hummer armour is just waiting for the order and is ready to increase production.  So why did it take so long?

The "shill" argument is just so much right wing gas.  The troops present cheered when the question was asked.  They wanted it asked and they wanted it answered.  Rummy's answer was crap, insulting, and so much BS.

What this demonstrates once again is just how delusional this administration really is, and how poorly they planned for contingencies.  Any fool could have told them that what we're seeing was possible, it didn't take a military genious.  In fact, its exactly what I predicted on THIS MESSAGE BOARD before the invasion started.  If stupidity were a  crime these guys would all be serving life (hopefully they soon will be).

You'll never get the right-wingers to admit the Bushies are botching the war.  If they do, the jig is up!

You can bet Rummy doesn't show up anywhere without his armor plated dream machine.

This is a problem for which there is already a solution.  There are already armored vehicles, were before
the "war" was started, unfortunately, for the guys who are fighting and dying, the administration wasn't prepared for war, but went ahead anyway.


Actually, the armored vehicles have been around since the HMMWV first came out!

Having spent 10 years in the Marine Corps Infantry, I can give you an idea of what types of vehicles they are.

Now this information is both a bit dated (1990) and from memory, but it will give you an idea on what kinds and numbers are used in a Marine Infantry Battalion.

The base model "Hummer" is the M998/M1038.  This is a 2 door "truck" model.  It only has armor on the undercarriage, and has rubberized doors and cargo area.  The cargo area normally has 2 rows of bench seats, and can carry 8 people, or apprx. 2,500 lbs of cargo.

In a normal Battalion, there are around 25-35 of this model.  It is used for supply runs, troop movement, and other such jobs.

The M1043/M1044 is an "Armament Carrier".  It is a 4 door model with light armor doors.  There is a pintal mount turret on the roof, that can handle an M-60 machine gun, M-2 50 Cal machine gun, or an MK19 40mm grenade launcher.  It is protected against light arms fire, and features a kevlar/composite door and cargo area.  A Battalion normally has 10-12 of this model, and they are often used for scouting, covering fire for troops in movement from one location to another, and to carry additional ammunition for the other crew served weapons in the unit (mortars, machine guns, anti-tank weapons, etc).

M145/M146 is the TOW model.  It is identical to the M1043/M1044, except the roof mount handles TOW anti-tank weapons instead of machine guns.  There are normally 2-4 in an Infantry Battalion.

M997/M1035 Ambulance.  This is almost identical to the M998/M1038, except it has special equipment inside for use as an ambulance.  It can carry 4 litter patients, or 8 ambulatory patients.  There are normally 2-4 of this version in an Infantry Battalion.

In addition, there is also an additional 1-4 M1043/M1044 models that are given upgraded radio equipment, that are used by the Battalion commander and his staff for unit control.

So out of around 40 "Hummers" in an average USMC Infantry Battalion, only 12 or so are of the armored variety.  And it has been this way since they first made their introduction in the 1980's.

One of the main reasons that this is done is because of cost.  A replacement door for an M998 is rubber and plastic.  It weighs around 15 pounds, and takes up very little room.  The door for an M1043 is metal and kevlar, with bullet resistant glass.  I would say it weighs around 50 lbs, and probably costs a lot more.

So if you think that the problem of not enough armored vehicles is Bush's fault, then it is also Clinton's fault, Bush Sr's fault, and Reagan's fault.  Because it has been this way for around 20 years!

Oh, and another thing that most of us know about:  the armored models tend to flip over a LOT more often.  This is because they are much more top heavy.  And because of the additional weight (and the cargo reduction because of the armor), they carry a lot less cargo.  That means that if you are useing Hummers to carry cargo, you need a lot more of them on the road to perform the same function that you can do with an M998.

Of course, a lot of the vehicles damaged were doing escourt duty for unarmored "duce and a half" vehicles.  These have no armor at all, and have been in use since WWII.  So where are the armored duce and a half trucks?

Myself, I would rather see more LAV-25 vehicles.  That way the people doing escourt duty would be performing it in a fully armored vehicle.  But I forgot, the Clinton administration butchered the numbers of that vehicle.  That is why the Marines still most often use the AAVR7, a Vietnam era troop carrier.

*****

Next time somebody complains about the cost of the defense budget, think back to this discussion.  If anybody thinks it is wrong that "Bush has not given the troops the right vehicles", then you have absolutely no right to complain about the defense budget.  You can either have a higher budget and safer troops, or you get a lower budget, and less protected vehicles.

I know in 1990, my maintenance budget for the Battalion was around $1,000,000.  This covered all parts and contracted repairs for our weapons, vehicles, radios, and other miscellanious equipment (everything from field cookstoves and field tents of the Medical staff, to decontamination equipment and typewriters).  WHen I helped my unit prepare to go to the Gulf in 1990, we got an additional $1,500,000 in order to make "emergency repairs" on all the equipment.  And this is 1 of 4 Battalions in my Regiment.  And that is 1 of 4 Regiments in my Division.  And there are 4 Divisions in the USMC.  Now multiply the number of vehicles that would have to be upgraded from M998, and you get an idea of the scope involved.  How many here are going to not say a word at the blip that would cause in the defense budget?

It is not a matter of the defense budget that gets me-it is HOW they use that budget. The Pentigon would rather give the majority of the budget to Halliburton then for the equipment that personnel NEED to keep them alive!




Cat

"Star Wars" vrs body armour and and armed hummers.  History has shown that generals are very good at fighting the LAST war (in this case, the Cold War) but haven't a clue regarding the next one.  9/11 and Iraq are cases (seperate) in point, although had they planned for a desert version of Vietnam they might have come closer.

SUPPORT OUR TROOPS

DUMP RUMSFELD

It doesn't surprise me that Rumsfeld's reply was "Sorry, we can't help you, your on your own."

It is not a matter of the defense budget that gets me-it is HOW they use that budget. The Pentigon would rather give the majority of the budget to Halliburton then for the equipment that personnel NEED to keep them alive!

Cat


That one billion in "accounted" funds the the government has "forgiven" Halliburton for  would go along
way.  Maybe cheney could talk to them(yeah right)

That one billion in "accounted" funds the the government has "forgiven" Halliburton for  would go along
way.  Maybe cheney could talk to them(yeah right)


Sure.... like that's going to happen, his response would be "It would be even worse if John Kerry was elected as president, so stop complaining and suck it!"

"Star Wars" vrs body armour and and armed hummers.  History has shown that generals are very good at fighting the LAST war (in this case, the Cold War) but haven't a clue regarding the next one.  9/11 and Iraq are cases (seperate) in point, although had they planned for a desert version of Vietnam they might have come closer.


Then what is the solution?

"Star Wars" is still around.  In fact, Clinton dumped a lot of money into it, and campaigned quite actively during his second term to increase the funding.  So maybe we should dump it after all.

And as I had stated in my last post, we do not need 100% armed and armored hummers.  In fact, that would mean that even more would be needed.  That means more support troops to keep them running, more replacement parts, etc.  As it is now, the Marines need over 10 support troops for each grunt in the field.  And since armed hummers only have half the cargo capacity, that would mean twice as many vehicles in a convoy.  That then means easier targets, more casualties.

How about replacing the hummer with the LAV-25 vehicle?  Personally, that makes a lot more sense.  The "Armored Hummer" is only designed as a scout vehicle, it is not intended to actually remain in combat.  The LAV on the other hand is an armored vehicle, with an enclosed turret from which the Marines (and Soldiers) can fight from in safety.

And as I said before, how about the casualties from those unarmored duce and half cargo trucks.  I say we also demand that they be armored also.  Who cares if it cuts their capacity in half, right?

Then people wonder why the Military often holds civilians in contempt.  Civilians always seem to think they know more then the military, and demand that they make changes to how THEY think it should be done.  But they are lucky, they do not have to live in the "real world" of budget cuts, being a political pawn, and a scapegoat whenever some politician (or journalist) wants to make "political points".

Then what is the solution?

"Star Wars" is still around.  In fact, Clinton dumped a lot of money into it, and campaigned quite actively during his second term to increase the funding.  So maybe we should dump it after all.
Clinton was subservient to the same rotten military-industrial complex as his predecessors.  The military-industrial complex sets the agenda for the federal government, not vicey-versey.  A lot of very smart people would love to dump "Star Wars," but a lot of very powerful people make sure WE CAN'T.  Besides, Bush has an even better idea, "Start Wars"!
:D


Then people wonder why the Military often holds civilians in contempt.  Civilians always seem to think they know more then the military, and demand that they make changes to how THEY think it should be done.  But they are lucky, they do not have to live in the "real world" of budget cuts, being a political pawn, and a scapegoat whenever some politician (or journalist) wants to make "political points".

Oh de po' military!
:\'(
There are plenty of military experts both in and out of the armed forces who think the Bush Administration is running a fabulous disaster, but of course, they are also written off as shills, or whatever.  Now, among those civilians who think they know more than the military, there wouldn't be any named Bush, Cheney, or Rumsfeld, would there
???

Clinton was subservient to the same rotten military-industrial complex as his predecessors.  The military-industrial complex sets the agenda for the federal government, not vicey-versey.  A lot of very smart people would love to dump "Star Wars," but a lot of very powerful people make sure WE CAN'T.  Besides, Bush has an even better idea, "Start Wars"!
:D


Then people wonder why the Military often holds civilians in contempt.  Civilians always seem to think they know more then the military, and demand that they make changes to how THEY think it should be done.  But they are lucky, they do not have to live in the "real world" of budget cuts, being a political pawn, and a scapegoat whenever some politician (or journalist) wants to make "political points".

Oh de po' military!
:\'(
There are plenty of military experts both in and out of the armed forces who think the Bush Administration is running a fabulous disaster, but of course, they are also written off as shills, or whatever.  Now, among those civilians who think they know more than the military, there wouldn't be any named Bush, Cheney, or Rumsfeld, would there
???


Or better yet.... they are racked over hot coals by Bill O'Reilly and Fox News.

Then what is the solution?


How about replacing the hummer with the LAV-25 vehicle?  Personally, that makes a lot more sense.  The "Armored Hummer" is only designed as a scout vehicle, it is not intended to actually remain in combat.  The LAV on the other hand is an armored vehicle, with an enclosed turret from which the Marines (and Soldiers) can fight from in safety.

And as I said before, how about the casualties from those unarmored duce and half cargo trucks.  I say we also demand that they be armored also.  Who cares if it cuts their capacity in half, right?

Then people wonder why the Military often holds civilians in contempt.  Civilians always seem to think they know more then the military, and demand that they make changes to how THEY think it should be done.  But they are lucky, they do not have to live in the "real world" of budget cuts, being a political pawn, and a scapegoat whenever some politician (or journalist) wants to make "political points".


The point isn't what kind of vehicles should be used.  The point is the stupidity of the planning.  Had the chickenhawks allowed for the possibility of what we are, in fact, facing they might have allowed the military to plan for it.  They did not - it was to be a cake walk into Bagdad and a quick exit (after Chalabi was welcomed home with open arms).  Any clown off the street who remembers Vietnam could have warned of this possibility, and any fool who can read a map would see how far Bagdad is from our supply bases.  Even C-47s can only carry so much, and in an insurgency would be likely targets landing in Bagdad.  Long supply lines through deserts leave lots of chances for road-side bombs, and with all those tons (how many was it that went missing?) lots of potentially available ordinance.

As to your last comment, I can understand why military planners might hold Rummy & Co. in contempt, as I certainly do, but the fact is that it is a civilian-controlled military, and should remain so.

Actually, the armored vehicles have been around since the HMMWV first came out!

In a normal Battalion, there are around 25-35 of this model.  It is used for supply runs, troop movement, and other such jobs.



here ya go, the answer to the question you posted later:

Why does every battalion need that many armored vehicles, when most are NOT in Iraq?  It's govermnet beaurocracy, someone made a decision that each battalion needs X amount, without upping the number for deployments into combat zones.

There are of course logistics issues to consider when trying to fix the problem now, but the way the current administration is acting, it's as though they haven't heard of this problem. Which is humorous in a morbid sense of the word, since Kerry spoke up on the issue during the debates and his campaign.  They've had quite a bit of time to send additional armored units, they haven't even been ordering additional units, just keeping things at the same levels.  There are providers stating they haven't received additional orders and that they aren't running at full capacity. 

In a typical cold war scenario, most of these unarmored units would be behind the front of the war.  In this type of warfare, they're in the warzone, which is not what they're designed for. The entire country is still hot, but the administration is in denial, and is short changing the troops by stretching the use of vehicles in ways they were not designed for.

According to Colonel David Hackworth, the most decorated soldier alive, no liberal wacko he, we're going to have either reinstate the draft OR reduce in our objectives in Iraq.  In other words, we are stretched to the max, and we can't manage the way the Administration is going.
What are you going to say when they are calling up reserves of 45-year old soldiers and 70 year old officers?  Come on!
::)

According to Colonel David Hackworth, the most decorated soldier alive, no liberal wacko he, we're going to have either reinstate the draft OR reduce in our objectives in Iraq.  In other words, we are stretched to the max, and we can't manage the way the Administration is going.
What are you going to say when they are calling up reserves of 45-year old soldiers and 70 year old officers?  Come on!
::)


Who knows?  70 year old officers might do a better job than the crew we have now, at least if they put them in the Pentagon.