Dad picks up $600 tab to get Marine battle ready

http://www.azcentral.com/news/columns/articles/0618evthomason18Z10.html#

is this really a surprise? Bush swore up and down during the elections that the military was properly equipped, and yet, here it is a year later, and service personal going overseas are being told to buy their own flak jackets.  Amazing.

Amazing.


Not to nitpic, but you misspelled "sickening."  ;)

Karl Rove also based Bush's whole re-election campaign on the promise that he would not allow the "homos" to mary.

Less than a month after his election, the Chimp said he was not going to push an anti-gay marriage amendment to the constitution.

I guess all those good moral values voters in the Red States got screwed on this one, at the same time Bush simultaneously screws our soldiers in Iraq.

Count not his broken pledges as a crime
He meant them, how he meant them... at the time

...though Dubya is no Lloyd George, 'tis true

Or is it the red tape of Gvmnt?

I know of a guy who invented a mine sweeping device from the air that draggs a rack across the fields the soldiers needed to travel and it would blow up the land mines hidden(ARE YOU LISTENING LINDA MCCARTNEY SUPPORTERS)?...Go to pushback.com to see rendition of it...every day we practically hear of landmines left behind killing and maimng citizens or our soldiers AND THE GOVMNT. won't look into it to change their current way...send a million $ tank to drive over them, ruin our tanks when they do and waste our money.

From the air with no human contact sounds plausible to me maybe Brad Pitt will look this one up to suggest it???

Or is it the red tape of Gvmnt?

I know of a guy who invented a mine sweeping device from the air that draggs a rack across the fields the soldiers needed to travel and it would blow up the land mines hidden(ARE YOU LISTENING LINDA MCCARTNEY SUPPORTERS)?...Go to pushback.com to see rendition of it...every day we practically hear of landmines left behind killing and maimng citizens or our soldiers AND THE GOVMNT. won't look into it to change their current way...send a million $ tank to drive over them, ruin our tanks when they do and waste our money.

From the air with no human contact sounds plausible to me maybe Brad Pitt will look this one up to suggest it???


But you miss the point.  You are taking about an unproven and untested technology that might work - or not.  Body armour is proven, as is arming humvees.  The Pentegon just doesn't give a flying f... about those poor Jugheads, G.I.'s, and sailors in the field.  What's a few more coffins to them?  And what's with denying vets their VA benefits?  Please, get real.

It's like one big porno video, everyone is getting screwed and Bush is the director...  ::)

It's like one big porno video, everyone is getting screwed and Bush is the director...  ::)



What is worse? Screwing an intern or screwing the nation?




Cat

What is worse? Screwing an intern or screwing the nation?




Cat


But my darling, he didn't even screw her, all he got was a blo* jo*, and based on the blue dress, not the most satisfying one.  For numerous "crimes and misdomeanours" Lil' Georgie should be impeached.  Hopefully, after next October the House will think so too, and the Senate be in the mood to convict.  Now, could they do a double impeachment?  Lil" Geotgie and that foul mouthed person we call Vice President?

But my darling, he didn't even screw her, all he got was a blo* jo*, and based on the blue dress, not the most satisfying one. 



I know that. It just makes the quote sound better.  :D




Cat

The prisoners were eating and being taken care of better than some of us!

In the next Bush speech, he assures US he plans to address the war info being spread(I think also about the ARMOR that some say wasn't delivered)..We'll see if this thread hold it's point......of him breaking that promise???? 

The prisoners were eating and being taken care of better than some of us!

In the next Bush speech, he assures US he plans to address the war info being spread(I think also about the ARMOR that some say wasn't delivered)..We'll see if this thread hold it's point......of him breaking that promise???? 



Talk is cheap. I am so tired of listening to that guy because I know every thing out of his mouth is a lie. I don't think he knows the truth if it bit him in the @$$!




Cat

As Ann Coulter and the other dipsy-doodles from right-wing Munchkinland explained,
"Soldiers always complain about stuff, that's just the way they are."

It reminds me of an episode of Fawlty Towers in which Basil starts lecturing a disgruntled American guest as other guests look on:

Fawlty:  If you're not satisfied with our service, I will refund you're money in full, of course, I know how important it is to you Americans, but we British haven't forgetten there are more important things in life, and...

British gentleman: I'm not satisfied!

Fawlty (wheeling around): People like YOU never are!

::)

The prisoners were eating and being taken care of better than some of us!

In the next Bush speech, he assures US he plans to address the war info being spread(I think also about the ARMOR that some say wasn't delivered)..We'll see if this thread hold it's point......of him breaking that promise???? 


better than some of us?  who gets deprived of sleep for days on end and photographed naked? or smeared with menstrul blood.  isolated incidents right?

The armor issue, oh, he'll just claim that these are isolated incidents, or exagerations.  Even when the evidence runs contrary to that point, he'll still claim it.  His followers don't care.  It's a convient lie they can believe, and won't have to be bothered with the truth.

if anyone thinks what Bush says in one of his speeches is the truth, they're not paying attention.  Bush talks about yellowcake being purchased by the Iraqis, it's totally false.  He says the Iraqis will greet us with open arms, well only when they have a big package of tnt under there shirt.

better than some of us?  who gets deprived of sleep for days on end and photographed naked? or smeared with menstrul blood.  isolated incidents right?

The armor issue, oh, he'll just claim that these are isolated incidents, or exagerations.  Even when the evidence runs contrary to that point, he'll still claim it.  His followers don't care.  It's a convient lie they can believe, and won't have to be bothered with the truth.

if anyone thinks what Bush says in one of his speeches is the truth, they're not paying attention.  Bush talks about yellowcake being purchased by the Iraqis, it's totally false.  He says the Iraqis will greet us with open arms, well only when they have a big package of tnt under there shirt.


If your not outrages, you're not paying attention.

and this war in Iraq for OIL??? Why are the prices rising hmmmm?
Spin this one.

and this war in Iraq for OIL??? Why are the prices rising hmmmm?
Spin this one.


Ummmmmm.... I can't....  ::)

and this war in Iraq for OIL??? Why are the prices rising hmmmm?

Because the people who started the war were too f***ing stupid to see the inevitable result of their actions.  If the current (and widely predicted, at least over here) scenario in Iraq had been the generally accepted outcome, do you think that Rummy and co would really have invaded?  Having said that, looking at the price they're getting for their oil, probably.

Because the people who started the war were too f***ing stupid to see the inevitable result of their actions.  If the current (and widely predicted, at least over here) scenario in Iraq had been the generally accepted outcome, do you think that Rummy and co would really have invaded?  Having said that, looking at the price they're getting for their oil, probably.


You know Bush is in a lose-lose scenario with you and the people on the far-left.  When oil is up, it's because Bush is letting his evil friends at the big oil corporations stuff their pockets with profits.  If oil is down, Bush is stealing the oil in Iraq for his greedy corporate friends.

And what the hell do you have against Rumsfeld?

You know Bush is in a lose-lose scenario with you and the people on the far-left.  When oil is up, it's because Bush is letting his evil friends at the big oil corporations stuff their pockets with profits.  If oil is down, Bush is stealing the oil in Iraq for his greedy corporate friends.


I don't think oil prices have to be lower in order for Bush and his friends to be stealing it from the Iraqis.  As a matter of fact, I think they'd prefer that they're higher, more profit for them when they're stealing it.  If the "insurgents" in Iraq didn't keep blowing up the pipelines, they'd probably be making a lot more.

Even after Haliburton is caught dipping their hands in the till, they still get to continue doing business with the government. I wonder how many people get that kind of preferential treatment.

Oil broke $60 a barrel last week.  There's already estimates of $80 a barrel by the end of the year.  I doubt we'll be able to accuse him of stealing oil when it's down in price, since it's unlikely to be lower for a much longer time.

and this war in Iraq for OIL??? Why are the prices rising hmmmm?
Spin this one.


First, because Iraqui oil is just a small piece of the equasion, and ever smaller since their pipelines keep getting blown up.  Second, and more importantly, because to say that to equate the idea that the invasion was about oil with concern about pump prices is not the right equasion.  The focus has to be on control of stratigic resources.  Lil' Georgie couldn't care less about the price at the pump.  What his handlers care about is being able to control the flow of oil to Chine, which appears not to have much, as a counter to China's ownership of a hugh and growing portion of our national debt, the result of the tax cuts to the billionairs.

Manipulation is the oil problem when just a few YEARS ago it was about $9.00 a barrel and now $60??????

Then I hear to be even it has to be at about $48.

Will WE the people stand for it??
When will we revolt? Until the market can't bear it!

Meet me at my SUV...... :D

You know Bush is in a lose-lose scenario with you and the people on the far-left. When oil is up, it's because Bush is letting his evil friends at the big oil corporations stuff their pockets with profits. If oil is down, Bush is stealing the oil in Iraq for his greedy corporate friends.

Bush is on a lose-lose scenario with people like me because he invaded another country under false pretences.


And what the hell do you have against Rumsfeld?

Bush isn't clever enough to do the thinking, so someone obviously did - Rumsfeld's a (or rather *the*) prime candidate for that position.  You can work out the rest for yourself.  I hope.

Bush is on a lose-lose scenario with people like me because he invaded another country under false pretences.
Bush isn't clever enough to do the thinking, so someone obviously did - Rumsfeld's a (or rather *the*) prime candidate for that position.  You can work out the rest for yourself.  I hope.


nah, it's Karl Rove.  I don't think Rumsfeld is all that smart either.

nah, it's Karl Rove. I don't think Rumsfeld is all that smart either.

Ah... maybe that's one of the known unknowns, then ;)

You know Bush is in a lose-lose scenario with you and the people on the far-left.  When oil is up, it's because Bush is letting his evil friends at the big oil corporations stuff their pockets with profits.  If oil is down, Bush is stealing the oil in Iraq for his greedy corporate friends.

And what the hell do you have against Rumsfeld?

Who on the left isn't on the "far" left?  I suppose only people who are actually on the right, like Joe Lieberman and Hillary Clinton.  Not that anyone on the Right would have the cajones to admit Hillary supports 90% of the same imperialist foreign policy and economic agenda pushed by the Bushies.
Bush won't steal the oil from the Iraqis.  When the dust settles, he'll make them an offer they can't refuse.

An why the hell wouldn't you have something against Don Rumsfeld if you have any respect for intellectual integrity.  The man is a joker and a clown, and the clown laughs at YOU!  That's the meaning behind his insipid statements about "known knowns and unknown knowns, known unknowns and unknown knowns," and how "the last throes might be peaceful and placide throes."

Because the people who started the war were too f***ing stupid to see the inevitable result of their actions. 
Let me just correct you on something.  The neo-cons aren't f***ing stupid, they're f***ing psychotic.  There's a difference you know!  The old saying went, "neurotics build castles in the sky, psychotics live in them."  That's what you've got with these neo-cons, people living in sky castles!
::)

Bush isn't clever enough to do the thinking, so someone obviously did - Rumsfeld's


What the hell?  Rumsfeld is the secretary of defense, he is suppose to make the war plan.

The plan was pure brilliance.  We captured Baghdad in something like three weeks and with casualties below the lowest of expectations.  This is what former deputy of defense minister of Russia, Vitaly Shlykov said: "The Iraqi army was a replica of the Russian army, and it's defeat was not predicted by our generals."  Also Vladimir Dvorkin, who runs a Russia defense ministry think-tank said: "The gap between our capabilities and those of the Americans has been revealed, and it is vast."

It's time to dump the conspiracy theories The Mirror tells you, Bush is president, not Karl Rove and not Richard B. Cheney.

What the hell?  Rumsfeld is the secretary of defense, he is suppose to make the war plan.

The plan was pure brilliance.  We captured Baghdad in something like three weeks and with casualties below the lowest of expectations.  This is what former deputy of defense minister of Russia, Vitaly Shlykov said: "The Iraqi army was a replica of the Russian army, and it's defeat was not predicted by our generals."  Also Vladimir Dvorkin, who runs a Russia defense ministry think-tank said: "The gap between our capabilities and those of the Americans has been revealed, and it is vast."

It's time to dump the conspiracy theories The Mirror tells you, Bush is president, not Karl Rove and not Richard B. Cheney.

OK, whatever dude.  Your President is on television right now pushing a bunch of delusional hogwash about the future of Iraq, but you and he probably buy every word of it!
::)

Bush is on a lose-lose scenario with people like me because he invaded another country under false pretences.


And what about Tony Blair?

Remember over 70% of England voted for a pro-Iraq war candidate by voting for either Tony Blair's labor party or Michael Howard's conservative party.

And John Howard got reelected.  And so did George W. Bush.

I guess Iraq wasn't as big an issue as some would have liked.

But you miss the point.  You are taking about an unproven and untested technology that might work - or not.  Body armour is proven, as is arming humvees. 


Actually, this is exactly what a lot of the problem is.

You have to understand, that the Department Of Defense (DOD) is *NOT* run by the military, but is a civilian bureaucracy.  It really runs the military, and 100% of the procurement.  This is why it takes such a gawd-awful amount of time for new items to come into use.

On average, it takes 3-10+ years for new equipment to work it's way through the procurement process.  A good example is the Joint Advanced Strike Fighter (JASF).  The project was started in 1993, and the contract was not awarded until 2003.  The fighter will not even enter service until at least 2008, 15 years after the project began.

The problem is that they will not rush to use anything without thorough testing.  Remember "Agent Orange"?  This is a perfect example as to why such testing and retesting is nessicary.  In any bureaucracy, it is better to be late then to release prematurely a product that is ineffective or possibly harmfull.

And in the end, it is up to Congress to approve such items.  Myself, I worry much more about the ageing air fleet that the US Marines use.  The newest troop helicopter model that the Marines use dates back to the Viet Nam war.  Marines have been waiting for the Osprey for over 20 years, but Congress keeps killing it.  And I have lost friends when I was in to crashes of CH-47 helicopters.

As for people buying equipment on their own, that has been happening for over 200 years.  I myself spent money when I was in the infantry for things that were "Not standard issue".  Some of these things include: flashlight, compass, knife, 2-way radios, GPS, boots, rifle cleaning kits, watches, dogtag silencers, the list goes on and on.  Either the equipment provided was not good enough, or it was not available on an individual level.

And for arming Hummers, there are MANY models of "Hummer" in use by the military (which took from 1979 until 1985 to enter service - 7 years).  They run from the M-998 2-door cargo model (with no armor) to the M-1025 Weapons model (with armor), to the M-1069 (armored w/105mm Howlitzer).

In a normal convoy, there is a mix of armored (and armed) hummers and unarmored ones.  The armored basically only carries the crew, weapons, and their equipment.  The unarmored versions carry the cargo, roughtly the equivelent of a 2 ton truck.  If they only used armored hummers, the convoys would be 2-3 times as large, and would be even more vulnerable.  That is because the armored variants have less then half the cargo capacity as the thin skinned variants.  This is not stingyness, but simple logistics that demands this.


The Pentegon just doesn't give a flying f... about those poor Jugheads, G.I.'s, and sailors in the field.  What's a few more coffins to them?  And what's with denying vets their VA benefits?  Please, get real.


Correction:  as a former "Jarhead", I can tell you it is not "Jughead", he was Archie's buddy.  :P

And once again, we are not talking about the Military, but the civilian beaurocracy.  Many many times, the military has asked for something, only to have it refused by DOD.  And also often times an item requested is changed drastically by the DOD.  A good example is the Hummer.  The original contract request requested an engine that could handle multiple fuels (rotary engine).  What they got was a diesel engine.  I am not saying this is good or bad, just that it was not what was originally requested.

ANd as for VA, that is yet ANOTHER civilian bureaucracy.  Believe me, I know because I have been fighting with them about my benefits for over 12 years now.  The DOD has nothing to do with the VA.  Once you get out of the service (either through completed time, retirement, or disability), all connection with the Military and DOD is gone.  The VA takes it all over from there.  If anybody wants to see what a mess "Socialized Medicine" is, take a look at the VA.  100% free medical care, if you are willing to fight for years to get even basic care.  Myself, I buy my Motrin over the counter rather then go through that BS.

Your President is on television right now pushing a bunch of delusional hogwash about the future of Iraq, but you and he probably buy every word of it!


I'm watching the Braves game.

But I'd like to ask two things:

1. Mr. President, why do you care about Iraq's borders but not America's?
2. Where has our air force been in Iraq?

Sometimes I think Bush really is blowing it.  He needs to stop trying to appease the left, the media and the anti-war countries that just look for a reason to scream.

Tom Tancredo/George Allen in 2008.

I'm watching the Braves game.

But I'd like to ask two things:

1. Mr. President, why do you care about Iraq's borders but not America's?
2. Where has our air force been in Iraq?

Sometimes I think Bush really is blowing it.  He needs to stop trying to appease the left, the media and the anti-war countries that just look for a reason to scream.

Tom Tancredo/George Allen in 2008.

Unlike the Iraq war, the Braves game will be over in a known period of time, and victory will be certain for one team or the other.  Maybe Dubya got his ideas about war from running a ball time, but apparently he was a dud at that too!

Unlike the Iraq war, the Braves game will be over in a known period of time, and victory will be certain for one team or the other.  Maybe Dubya got his ideas about war from running a ball time, but apparently he was a dud at that too!



He didn't do that great in running a baseball team either.





Cat

What the hell?  Rumsfeld is the secretary of defense, he is suppose to make the war plan.

The plan was pure brilliance.  We captured Baghdad in something like three weeks and with casualties below the lowest of expectations.  This is what former deputy of defense minister of Russia, Vitaly Shlykov said: "The Iraqi army was a replica of the Russian army, and it's defeat was not predicted by our generals."  Also Vladimir Dvorkin, who runs a Russia defense ministry think-tank said: "The gap between our capabilities and those of the Americans has been revealed, and it is vast."


Too bad nobody told the Iraqis the war is over.  How many people have died since the war was "over"?  It's not over until they say it's over, and from what I can telll, they don't think it's over.  Pure brillance?  Pure hogwash.  They had ZERO plans for what to do with the country once they defeated the Iraqi army.  Defeating their army was never a problem.  GH Bush proved that (and he did it faster).  Blair's advisors warned him that the Bushies had no plans for post-invasion, and that was what worried them most (read the Downing St. Memos).

The war is not over.  Rumsfield and his buddies won the invasion, nothing more.  The occupation is a disaster. "Mission Accomplished"


This is all way off topic.  The inital topic was the lack of armor for humvees and soldiers.  Essential equipment the troops need, and aren't being provided.  By a president who stated they had what they needed for fighting this war, and knew he was lying when he said it.

I'm watching the Braves game.

But I'd like to ask two things:

1. Mr. President, why do you care about Iraq's borders but not America's?
2. Where has our air force been in Iraq?

Sometimes I think Bush really is blowing it.  He needs to stop trying to appease the left, the media and the anti-war countries that just look for a reason to scream.

Tom Tancredo/George Allen in 2008.



Well, we need border control from the everyday sneak...but those coming over aren't looking to KILL US.
That's why he said we are doing it all in IRAQ.Makes sense to me.

And what about Tony Blair?

Remember over 70% of England voted for a pro-Iraq war candidate by voting for either Tony Blair's labor party or Michael Howard's conservative party.

And John Howard got reelected. And so did George W. Bush.

I guess Iraq wasn't as big an issue as some would have liked.


I know... I find it fairly sickening, to be honest.  In this farrago we call "democracy", where people think that the third party can't get elected so they're not going to vote for them, the scale of the insular stupidity of the electorate is something that can never be underestimated. :(

Well, we need border control from the everyday sneak...but those coming over aren't looking to KILL US.
That's why he said we are doing it all in IRAQ.Makes sense to me.


I guess you haven't heard of the MS-13 gang or the number of OTM (other than mexicans) caught trying to sneak in.  We need more border patrol agents.