Rumsfeld tells soldier to piss off.

[the Talking Can]

Yes, I know, this isn't as earth shattering as the fact that people in London like porn, but....


linky (http://www.abqtrib.com/archives/news04/120804_news_rumsfeld.shtml)

Can you believe this ****ing moron: "You can have all the armor in the world on a tank and it can (still) be blown up," Rumsfeld said.

Well no shit, Sherlock...it doesn't follow then that they don't need it. How about we reduce the President's bodygaurds by 80%....I mean, he could get shot anyway, right?

Washington would be burning to the ground right now if democrats said somthing so ****ing obtuse about soldiers they deployed.




December 8, 2004

Troops gripe to top visitor

The secretary of Defense appeared in Kuwait to give a speech of encouragement to the soldiers, and he left with an earful of complaints.

By Robert Burns
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

CAMP BUEHRING, Kuwait - After delivering a pep talk designed to energize troops preparing to head for Iraq, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld got a little talking to himself from disgruntled soldiers today.

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

Some of soldiers, however, had criticisms of their own - not of the war itself but of how it is being fought.

Army Spc. Thomas Wilson of the 278th Regimental Combat Team, which is made up mainly of citizen soldiers of the Tennessee Army National Guard, asked Rumsfeld in a question-and-answer session why vehicle armor is still in short supply, nearly two years after the war started.

"Why do we soldiers have to dig through local landfills for pieces of scrap metal and compromised ballistic glass to uparmor our vehicles?" Wilson asked. A big cheer arose from the approximately 2,300 soldiers in the cavernous hangar who assembled to see and hear the secretary of defense.

Rumsfeld hesitated and asked Wilson to repeat his question.

"We do not have proper armored vehicles to carry with us north," Wilson said after asking again.

Rumsfeld replied that, "You go to war with the Army you have," not the one you might want, and that the Army was pushing manufacturers of vehicle armor to produce it as fast as humanly possible.

And, the defense chief added, armor is not always a savior in the kind of combat U.S. troops face in Iraq, where the insurgents' weapon of choice is the roadside bomb, or improvised explosive device that has killed and maimed hundreds, if not thousands, of American troops since the summer of 2003.

"You can have all the armor in the world on a tank and it can (still) be blown up," Rumsfeld said.

Asked later about Wilson's complaint, the deputy commanding general of U.S. forces in Kuwait, Maj. Gen. Gary Speer, said in an interview that as far as he knows, every vehicle that is deploying to Iraq from Camp Buehring in Kuwait has at least "Level 3" armor. That means it at least has locally fabricated armor for its side panels, but not necessarily bulletproof windows or protection against explosions that penetrate the floorboard.

Speer said he was not aware that soldiers were searching landfills for scrap metal and used bulletproof glass.

During the question-and-answer session, another soldier complained that active-duty Army units sometimes get priority over the National Guard and Reserve units for the best equipment 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 against the National Guard and Reserve in terms of providing equipment, Rumsfeld said.

Yet another soldier asked, without putting it to Rumsfeld as a direct criticism, how much longer the Army will continue using its "stop loss" power to prevent soldiers from leaving the service who are otherwise eligible to retire or quit.

Rumsfeld said that this condition was simply a fact of life for soldiers at time of 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."

In his opening remarks, Rumsfeld stressed that soldiers who are heading to Iraq should not believe those who say the insurgents cannot be defeated or who otherwise doubt the will of the military to win.

"They say we can't prevail. I see that violence and say we must win," Rumsfeld said.

[KCTitus]

Sorry TC, didnt mean to tamp that gravel into your uterus so hard...

[Baby Lee]

Rumsfeld tells soldier to piss off.
BL calls TC a liar.

[whoman69]

Yet another soldier asked, without putting it to Rumsfeld as a direct criticism, how much longer the Army will continue using its "stop loss" power to prevent soldiers from leaving the service who are otherwise eligible to retire or quit.

Rumsfeld said that this condition was simply a fact of life for soldiers at time of war.

Hostilities officially ceased over a year and a half ago. Mission accomplished.

[Bowser]

Hostilities officially ceased over a year and a half ago. Mission accomplished.

Heh.

[Donger]

Hostilities officially ceased over a year and a half ago. Mission accomplished.

Actually, if you'd care to remember what really Bush said...

He said that "major combat operations in Iraq have ended."

And he was correct.

[Mr. Kotter]

Actually, if you'd care to remember what really Bush said...

He said that "major combat operations in Iraq have ended."

And he was correct.

People who aren't students of history, don't understand there have always been casualities after the "end of the war"--hell, even after the "Treaties" have been signed...

Don't confuse them with facts though.

[Hydrae]

People who aren't students of history, don't understand there have always been casualities after the "end of the war"--hell, even after the "Treaties" have been signed...

Don't confuse them with facts though.


I believe the point is that Rummy used the "war" as justification for extending the time in the service for individuals. If the war is over, there is no more justification for not letting these people out when they were told they were getting out. It has nothing to do with whether there are still casualties.

[Mr. Kotter]

I believe the point is that Rummy used the "war" as justification for extending the time in the service for individuals. If the war is over, there is no more justification for not letting these people out when they were told they were getting out. It has nothing to do with whether there are still casualties.

I'm glad YOU aren't runnin' the armed services of this country.

[Donger]

I believe the point is that Rummy used the "war" as justification for extending the time in the service for individuals. If the war is over, there is no more justification for not letting these people out when they were told they were getting out. It has nothing to do with whether there are still casualties.

No one said the war was over. That is the point.

[Hydrae]

I'm glad YOU aren't runnin' the armed services of this country.


:spock:

[Rausch]

I'd like to think it's pretty ****ing obvious by now that we aren't doing everything we can to equip our men and women over there, and it's sickening.

[Pitt Gorilla]

I'd like to think it's pretty ****ing obvious by now that we aren't doing everything we can to equip our men and women over there, and it's sickening.Isn't that Kerry's fault or something?

[nychief]

Actually, if you'd care to remember what really Bush said...

He said that "major combat operations in Iraq have ended."

And he was correct.


You can't be serious. You sound as bad as some of us kerry people did trying to spin his stances.

[Taco John]

Actually, if you'd care to remember what really Bush said...

He said that "major combat operations in Iraq have ended."

And he was correct.



The hell he was correct... Sheesh!

You must seriously live in another solar system if you believe what you just wrote. Moron.

[Frankie]

But, but, but we all know it was JOHN KERRY'S FAULT!!!

[Mr. Kotter]

The hell he was correct... Sheesh!

You must seriously live in another solar system if you believe what you just wrote. Moron.

As someone who served as an officer in the Army, it is YOU that is full of shit.

Major combat operations are going on? Hell no, not really; in military jargon it's called "mopping up," "security," and "insurency suppression."

Yes, the average American considers any casualities to be "proof" of 'major combat ops'--but that's because they don't know any better. Now you do. :)

[Loki]

first off, what do you expect from reserve and national guard troops? there is a discernable difference in professionalism between active duty and reserve/guard troops. no, they DON'T get top priority for weapons and equipment like active duty soldiers get. this is NOTHING NEW...

suck it up and drive on. your job is to support front line and first eschelon troops... live with it, or join the active duty ranks (if you can hang...). i still respect those soldiers as they ARE on the team (for the most part) but their whining is an embarassment to the armed forces IMO. they're looking for guarantees that no one can give them. active duty soldiers know this lesson all too well. fact of the matter is that ALL military equipment is built by the lowest bidder.

you want that to change? ride your congressman's ass about their military voting. therein lies the problem.

heckling the secretary of defense changes nothing. :shake:

[KC Jones]

active duty soldiers know this lesson all too well. fact of the matter is that ALL military equipment is built by the lowest bidder.


That's not entirely true. Cost isn't that much of an issue when awarding military contracts for equipment. Instead there's a huge amount of red tape and special requirements involved. That's how you end up with things like the infamous specialized toilet seats on navy ships that cost $500. Those seats have to stand up to 100's of people crapping on them daily after eating military food. They can't afford to have the seats melting down due to radioactive fecal discharge.

The intention IMO is to give our troops superior equipment that's up to the job. However the implementation can often be skewed to favor longstanding relationships between former military working for the contractors and current military leadership. Some guy in his basement might design a shitter that's nearly up to the task and only costs $50, but because of some bizarro speculation buried in the requirements that it glow in the dark on the 3rd blue moon of every year he will not get the contract.

[Loki]

They can't afford to have the seats melting down due to radioactive fecal discharge.


lol...

couldn't you have come up with a better example
than toilet seats that can handle hazardous
military waste?

http://www.osha-slc.gov/needlesticks/biohazard-sample2.jpg

[Taco John]

As someone who served as an officer in the Army, it is YOU that is full of shit.

Major combat operations are going on? Hell no, not really; in military jargon it's called "mopping up," "security," and "insurency suppression."

Yes, the average American considers any casualities to be "proof" of 'major combat ops'--but that's because they don't know any better. Now you do. :)



Dude piss off... Anyone who tries to tell me that Fallujah was not a major combat operation plain and simply is beneath reasonable discussion. Whatever spin you want to put on it to make our idiot president look like less of an idiot, feel free... But don't try to tell me Fallujah wasn't a major combat operation.

I don't GAF if you were in the Army or not. You're full of ca-ca.

[Rausch]

Isn't that Kerry's fault or something?

Who's job is it to supply the troops? The funding?

[DenverChief]

first off, what do you expect from reserve and national guard troops? there is a discernable difference in professionalism between active duty and reserve/guard troops. no, they DON'T get top priority for weapons and equipment like active duty soldiers get. this is NOTHING NEW...

suck it up and drive on. your job is to support front line and first eschelon troops... live with it, or join the active duty ranks (if you can hang...). i still respect those soldiers as they ARE on the team (for the most part) but their whining is an embarassment to the armed forces IMO. they're looking for guarantees that no one can give them. active duty soldiers know this lesson all too well. fact of the matter is that ALL military equipment is built by the lowest bidder.

you want that to change? ride your congressman's ass about their military voting. therein lies the problem.

heckling the secretary of defense changes nothing. :shake:

While I agree there is a difference in professionalism I disagree with your assertation they "get what the deserve"...they are fighting along side active duty with the same risk as active duty...I went Active to Guard and know damn well it is a completely different monster....but when soldiers from my old Guard unit are dying in vehicles that are less armored and when the active soldiers in uparmored vehicles are living something is wrong...its like sending Guard troops in with 9mm's and giving active duty the M16 and M60....it just makes no sense...if they are not combat ready/protected they are a no go till they are

[memyselfI]

But, but, but we all know it was JOHN KERRY'S FAULT!!!

but it's NOT John Kerry's PROBLEM!!! :thumb:

Situation's getting worse by the day and it's not Kerry's problem! :clap:

[patteeu]

Situation's getting worse by the day and it's not Kerry's problem! :clap:

I have no idea what you look like, memyselfi, but you really are an ugly person on the inside, IMO.

[Mr. Kotter]

Dude piss off... Anyone who tries to tell me that Fallujah was not a major combat operation plain and simply is beneath reasonable discussion. Whatever spin you want to put on it to make our idiot president look like less of an idiot, feel free... But don't try to tell me Fallujah wasn't a major combat operation.

I don't GAF if you were in the Army or not. You're full of ca-ca.

I've thought it for a long time. This makes it official.

You are, simultaneosly, the most arrogant and ignorant person on this board. Period.

A few others may be more arrogant; and a few others may be more ignorant. However, both qualities together? You win hands down. :shake:

[memyselfI]

I have no idea what you look like, memyselfi, but you really are an ugly person on the inside, IMO.

Why, dontcha mean the fact I stated is UGLY...AND TRUE!!!

My immediate feeling post election was relief. Iraq is bad and is going to get worse and Kerry won't have it on his resume nor will he have his presidency defined by a mess he did NOT create.

[Metrolike]

I've thought it for a long time. This makes it official.

You are, simultaneosly, the most arrogant and ignorant person on this board. Period.

A few others may be more arrogant; and a few others may be more ignorant. However, both qualities together? You win hands down. :shake:

So you are saying Fallujah wasn't a major combat operation?

[memyselfI]

So you are saying Fallujah wasn't a major combat operation?

sounds like he is. :hmmm:

[Mr. Kotter]

So you are saying Falujah wasn't a major combat operation?

It would depend on one's definition of "major combat operations," I suppose.

As a former Army Officer myself, no, I wouldn't consider it as such.

It is, in military jargon, called "mopping up," "security," and "insurency suppression." For some it would be a semantic distinction, I suppose. But from a military perspective, Falujah was not "major."

[Donger]

The hell he was correct... Sheesh!

You must seriously live in another solar system if you believe what you just wrote. Moron.

Did you see the major combat operations there, skippy? Do you realize the difference?

[memyselfI]

Did you see the major combat operations there, skippy? Do you realize the difference?


TJ is saying they WERE there, it's SD who is saying they were not. Who knows WTF you are saying with this... ROFL

[Frankie]

Did you see the major combat operations there, skippy? Do you realize the difference?

Oh, I get it. When we don't "see" it it's not there. Sort of like 1,200 flag-draped coffins. :hmmm:

Silly me. I feel a lot better now.

[Donger]

TJ is saying they WERE there, it's SD who is saying they were not. Who knows WTF you are saying with this... ROFL

You apparently misunderstand.

I'm saying there is a difference between saying major combat operations are over, and that any single, isolated major combat operation are over.

For example, Falluja. That was an isolated operation; not theater-wide.

[Donger]

Oh, I get it. When we don't "see" it it's not there. Sort of like 1,200 flag-draped coffins. :hmmm:

Silly me. I feel a lot better now.

No, apparently you don't get it, tiger.

Did you see the underlined "s."

[NewPhin]

You apparently misunderstand.

I'm saying there is a difference between saying major combat operations are over, and that any single, isolated major combat operation are over.

For example, Falluja. That was an isolated operation; not theater-wide.

I guess it just depends on what you mean by "the".

[memyselfI]

You apparently misunderstand.

I'm saying there is a difference between saying major combat operations are over, and that any single, isolated major combat operation are over.

For example, Falluja. That was an isolated operation; not theater-wide.


So you are saying there cannot be an isolated major combat operation? Like that which happened in Fallujah?

That the term major combat operation is reserved for the ENTIRE war and not individual battles...so to speak.

[KCTitus]

I think Frankie may be onto a new energy source...Ive never seen anyone get so much mileage out of 'flag draped coffins' before.

[Donger]

So you are saying there cannot be an isolated major combat operation? Like that which happened in Fallujah?

That the term major combat operation is reserved for the ENTIRE war and not individual battles...so to speak.

Of course there can.

I'm saying that I don't think Bush was saying there wouldn't be when he said "major combat operations" were over. Again, I think he meant major combat operations in a strategic or theater-wide sense.

[Radar Chief]

You apparently misunderstand.

I'm saying there is a difference between saying major combat operations are over, and that any single, isolated major combat operation are over.

For example, Falluja. That was an isolated operation; not theater-wide.

Those trying to claim Fallujah as a “major combat operation” obviously have no idea what kind of firepower is included in an actual “major combat operation”.
Hint, it includes allot more than infantry moping up snipers with assistance from tanks or direct air support.

[Metrolike]

Those trying to claim Fallujah as a “major combat operation” obviously have no idea what kind of firepower is included in an actual “major combat operation”.
Hint, it includes allot more than infantry moping up snipers with assistance from tanks or direct air support.

Hint: that depends.

[Radar Chief]

Hint: that depends.

Actually, no it doesn’t.

[memyselfI]

Of course there can.

I'm saying that I don't think Bush was saying there wouldn't be when he said "major combat operations" were over. Again, I think he meant major combat operations in a strategic or theater-wide sense.

I think he said it without even giving it a second thought that the war (major operations or not) would be getting worse a year and a half later...

the Pentagon has admitted as much.

[Donger]

I think he said it without even giving it a second thought that the war (major operations or not) would be getting worse a year and a half later...

Of course you do.

[Baby Lee]

but it's NOT John Kerry's PROBLEM!!! :thumb:

Situation's getting worse by the day and it's not Kerry's problem! :clap:
Exhibit 11025 in 'the case that Denise deserves all derision pointed her way.'

[memyselfI]

Exhibit 11025 in 'the case that Denise deserves all derision pointed her way.'


I'm simply stating fact. If you don't like it, too bad. I do like that it's not his problem and MOF I'm rather glad he did not win because of the debacle that is Iraq...

why should someone else have to try to clean up DUHbya's mess.

[KCTitus]

Exhibit 11025 in 'the case that Denise deserves all derision pointed her way.'

Surely denise has more than 11,025 posts on a BB she said she'd never post at...

[Donger]

I'm simply stating fact. If you don't like it, too bad. I do like that it's not his problem and MOF I'm rather glad he did not win because of the debacle that is Iraq...

why should someone else have to try to clean up DUHbya's mess.

You keep saying that the situation in Iraq is getting worse.

Based on what? "Our" casualties? Gut feeling? What?

[memyselfI]

You keep saying that the situation in Iraq is getting worse.

Based on what? "Our" casualties? Gut feeling? What?

Casualties on both sides but on OUR side it's the highest percent in history of US combat (per NBC last evening) and the fact that the coalition of the wilting seems to be dwindling just when needed before the election. And the fact that the CIA and the Pentagon's own reports indicate bleak, bleak, and bleaker conditions for the foreseable future. And the fact that the January 'elections' will be sold to the world as being legit even if the entire country does not participate...a move which will hasten civil war.

Oh, there are plenty of reasons...

[Donger]

Casualties on both sides but on OUR side it's the highest percent in history of US combat (per NBC last evening) and the fact that the coalition of the wilting seems to be dwindling just when needed before the election. And the fact that the CIA and the Pentagon's own reports indicate bleak, bleak, and bleaker conditions for the foreseable future. And the fact that the January 'elections' will be sold to the world as being legit even if the entire country does not participate...a move which will hasten civil war.

Oh, there are plenty of reasons...

Highest percent? Percent of what?

What "dwindling" of the coalition?

Of course, you acknowledge that those bleak forecasts are all predicated on the Iraqi government not exercising authority and security. And, it's just a forecast.

I hope they do. I doubt that you do.

[Baby Lee]

I'm simply stating fact. If you don't like it, too bad. I do like that it's not his problem and MOF I'm rather glad he did not win because of the debacle that is Iraq...

why should someone else have to try to clean up DUHbya's mess.
:clap: - is a fact, too.

[memyselfI]

Highest percent? Percent of what?

What "dwindling" of the coalition?

Of course, you acknowledge that those bleak forecasts are all predicated on the Iraqi government not exercising authority and security. And, it's just a forecast.

I hope they do. I doubt that you do.

I believe the percent was injured. I'll try to find the story online. The Coalition

coalition of the willing:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/iraq_orbat_coalition.htm

And the Iraqi government is supposed to exercise authority exactly how?

[Donger]

I believe the percent was injured. I'll try to find the story online. The Coalition

coalition of the willing:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/iraq_orbat_coalition.htm

And the Iraqi government is supposed to exercise authority exactly how?

Right. Many of the coalition will be removing forces right around and after the election.

I guess you call that "dwindling." I call it logical.

A lot depends on this election, no doubt about it.

We'll see if the Iraqis are ready to run their own country pretty quickly. I hope they are.

As to your question, the Iraqi government is to exercise it's authority jjust like another other government: by creating laws and seeing them enforced.

[WilliamTheIrish]

Nice PR job there, Rummy.

Dumbazz.

[Donger]

From Drudge:

RUMSFELD SET UP; REPORTER PLANTED QUESTIONS WITH SOLIDER

[Donger]

From: [Chattanooga Times Free Press military reporter] Pitts, Lee
Sent: Wednesday, December 8, 2004 4:44 PM
To: [Chattanooga Times Free Press staffers]

Subject: RE: Way to go

I just had one of my best days as a journalist today. As luck would have it, our journey North was delayed just long enough see I could attend a visit today here by Defense Secretary Rumsfeld. I was told yesterday that only soldiers could ask questions so I brought two of them along with me as my escorts. Before hand we worked on questions to ask Rumsfeld about the appalling lack of armor their vehicles going into combat have. While waiting for the VIP, I went and found the Sgt. in charge of the microphone for the question and answer session and made sure he knew to get my guys out of the crowd.

So during the Q&A session, one of my guys was the second person called on. When he asked Rumsfeld why after two years here soldiers are still having to dig through trash bins to find rusted scrap metal and cracked ballistic windows for their Humvees, the place erupted in cheers so loud that Rumsfeld had to ask the guy to repeat his question. Then Rumsfeld answered something about it being "not a lack of desire or money but a logistics/physics problem." He said he recently saw about 8 of the special up-armored Humvees guarding Washington, DC, and he promised that they would no longer be used for that and that he would send them over here. Then he asked a three star general standing behind him, the commander of all ground forces here, to also answer the question. The general said it was a problem he is working on.

The great part was that after the event was over the throng of national media following Rumsfeld- The New York Times, AP, all the major networks -- swarmed to the two soldiers I brought from the unit I am embedded with. Out of the 1,000 or so troops at the event there were only a handful of guys from my unit b/c the rest were too busy prepping for our trip north. The national media asked if they were the guys with the armor problem and then stuck cameras in their faces. The NY Times reporter asked me to email him the stories I had already done on it, but I said he could search for them himself on the Internet and he better not steal any of my lines. I have been trying to get this story out for weeks- as soon as I foud out I would be on an unarmored truck- and my paper published two stories on it. But it felt good to hand it off to the national press. I believe lives are at stake with so many soldiers going across the border riding with scrap metal as protection. It may be to late for the unit I am with, but hopefully not for those who come after.

The press officer in charge of my regiment, the 278th, came up to me afterwords and asked if my story would be positive. I replied that I would write the truth. Then I pointed at the horde of national media pointing cameras and mics at the 278th guys and said he had bigger problems on his hands than the Chattanooga Times Free Press. This is what this job is all about - people need to know. The solider who asked the question said he felt good b/c he took his complaints to the top. When he got back to his unit most of the guys patted him on the back but a few of the officers were upset b/c they thought it would make them look bad. From what I understand this is all over the news back home.

Thanks,

Lee

[Taco John]

You apparently misunderstand.

I'm saying there is a difference between saying major combat operations are over, and that any single, isolated major combat operation are over.

For example, Falluja. That was an isolated operation; not theater-wide.



You are officially the stupidest person alive...

You're trying to make a disctinction of plural "major combat operations" vs. "major combat operation?"

OMG you're sad... ROFL

[Cochise]

Ooops! questions were planted.

[Taco John]

I think Frankie may be onto a new energy source...Ive never seen anyone get so much mileage out of 'flag draped coffins' before.


I have. I watched the Bush Administration ride all the way through America on the 9/11 dead. Talk about mileage...

[Taco John]

I'm simply stating fact. If you don't like it, too bad. I do like that it's not his problem and MOF I'm rather glad he did not win because of the debacle that is Iraq...

why should someone else have to try to clean up DUHbya's mess.



And you must be the second stupidest person in America. :rolleyes:

[Donger]

You are officially the stupidest person alive...

You're trying to make a disctinction of plural "major combat operations" vs. "major combat operation?"

OMG you're sad... ROFL

You can't make the distinction, and I'm the stupid one?

[Taco John]

Ooops! questions were planted.


So?

[Taco John]

You can't make the distinction, and I'm the stupid one?


It's not about making a distinction. It's about rejecting the hollow spin.

[Donger]

It's not about making a distinction. It's about rejecting the hollow spin.

As I said earlier, I don't think Bush was saying there wouldn't be any more fighting when he said "major combat operations" were over. I think he meant "major combat operations" in a strategic or theater-wide sense.

[Taco John]

As I said earlier, I don't think Bush was saying there wouldn't be any more fighting when he said "major combat operations" were over. I think he meant "major combat operations" in a strategic or theater-wide sense.



Yeah. And he was wrong...

moving on...

[Taco John]

I don't think Bush meant that "major combat operations" were over when he said "major combat operations were over." I think he meant it in this really narrowly defined sense of "major combat operations." Notice I underlined the 's.' That changes EVERYTHING!

[Donger]

Yeah. And he was wrong...

What other theater-wide or strategic combat operations are presently ongoing or have taken place since President Bush made the statement?

[Taco John]

Ooops! questions were planted.



So during the Q&A session, one of my guys was the second person called on. When he asked Rumsfeld why after two years here soldiers are still having to dig through trash bins to find rusted scrap metal and cracked ballistic windows for their Humvees, the place erupted in cheers so loud that Rumsfeld had to ask the guy to repeat his question.



Oops, it doesn't matter if the questions were planted because the issues are real!

[Taco John]

What other theater-wide or strategic combat operations are presently ongoing or have taken place since President Bush made the statement?


Nah... I'm REJECTING your spin. Hence, you can shove it up your ass.

I'm not playing the game where your idioticly narrow definition of a major combat operation is accepted as anything other than the spin and diversion it's intended to be. Someone else might get caught in your stupid little trap. I prefer to make you look like the fool you are for even making the horrible attempt at some terrible spin.

[Taco John]

The entire region is a major combat operation.

[Donger]

Nah... I'm REJECTING your spin. Hence, you can shove it up your ass.

I'm not playing the game where your idioticly narrow definition of a major combat operation is accepted as anything other than the spin and diversion it's intended to be. Someone else might get caught in your stupid little trap. I prefer to make you look like the fool you are for even making the horrible attempt at some terrible spin.

No. You're refusing to answer the question because the answer will expose the fact that theater-wide, strategic combat operations have ceased since Bush made the statement.

In other words, he was correct.

[Donger]

The entire region is a major combat operation.

Some specifics please?

[Radar Chief]

So?

I agree, the vehicle armor question was solid and should’ve been asked. Course I also thought Rummy answered well by pointing out that vehicles are being armored as quickly as manufactures can build the armor but also knew who’d be here posting “oops” topics and distorting what was actually said.

[Radar Chief]

The entire region is a major combat operation.

People in 14 of the 18 provinces disagree.

[Taco John]

Some specifics please?


You live in a sad, sad little bubble.

[Taco John]

People in 14 of the 18 provinces disagree.



Not this province:

http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsArticle.jhtml?type=worldNews&storyID=620192

[Radar Chief]

The entire region is a major combat operation.

Those trying to claim Fallujah as a “major combat operation” obviously have no idea what kind of firepower is included in an actual “major combat operation”.
Hint, it includes allot more than infantry moping up snipers with assistance from tanks or direct air support. :rolleyes:

[Donger]

You live in a sad, sad little bubble.

That's pretty much what I expected.

[BigChiefDave]

but it's NOT John Kerry's PROBLEM!!! :thumb:

Situation's getting worse by the day and it's not Kerry's problem! :clap:This does not surprise me at all. What a gunt. I hope you die with a flesh eating virus...
:shake:

[Baby Lee]

You live in a sad, sad little bubble.
Oh! No! So sorry. It's the Moops.

[bunnytrdr]

Yes, I know, this isn't as earth shattering as the fact that people in London like porn, but....


linky (http://www.abqtrib.com/archives/news04/120804_news_rumsfeld.shtml)

Can you believe this ****ing moron: "You can have all the armor in the world on a tank and it can (still) be blown up," Rumsfeld said.

Well no shit, Sherlock...it doesn't follow then that they don't need it. How about we reduce the President's bodygaurds by 80%....I mean, he could get shot anyway, right?

Washington would be burning to the ground right now if democrats said somthing so ****ing obtuse about soldiers they deployed.




December 8, 2004

Troops gripe to top visitor

The secretary of Defense appeared in Kuwait to give a speech of encouragement to the soldiers, and he left with an earful of complaints.

By Robert Burns
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

CAMP BUEHRING, Kuwait - After delivering a pep talk designed to energize troops preparing to head for Iraq, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld got a little talking to himself from disgruntled soldiers today.

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

Some of soldiers, however, had criticisms of their own - not of the war itself but of how it is being fought.

Army Spc. Thomas Wilson of the 278th Regimental Combat Team, which is made up mainly of citizen soldiers of the Tennessee Army National Guard, asked Rumsfeld in a question-and-answer session why vehicle armor is still in short supply, nearly two years after the war started.

"Why do we soldiers have to dig through local landfills for pieces of scrap metal and compromised ballistic glass to uparmor our vehicles?" Wilson asked. A big cheer arose from the approximately 2,300 soldiers in the cavernous hangar who assembled to see and hear the secretary of defense.

Rumsfeld hesitated and asked Wilson to repeat his question.

"We do not have proper armored vehicles to carry with us north," Wilson said after asking again.

Rumsfeld replied that, "You go to war with the Army you have," not the one you might want, and that the Army was pushing manufacturers of vehicle armor to produce it as fast as humanly possible.

And, the defense chief added, armor is not always a savior in the kind of combat U.S. troops face in Iraq, where the insurgents' weapon of choice is the roadside bomb, or improvised explosive device that has killed and maimed hundreds, if not thousands, of American troops since the summer of 2003.

"You can have all the armor in the world on a tank and it can (still) be blown up," Rumsfeld said.

Asked later about Wilson's complaint, the deputy commanding general of U.S. forces in Kuwait, Maj. Gen. Gary Speer, said in an interview that as far as he knows, every vehicle that is deploying to Iraq from Camp Buehring in Kuwait has at least "Level 3" armor. That means it at least has locally fabricated armor for its side panels, but not necessarily bulletproof windows or protection against explosions that penetrate the floorboard.

Speer said he was not aware that soldiers were searching landfills for scrap metal and used bulletproof glass.

During the question-and-answer session, another soldier complained that active-duty Army units sometimes get priority over the National Guard and Reserve units for the best equipment 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 against the National Guard and Reserve in terms of providing equipment, Rumsfeld said.

Yet another soldier asked, without putting it to Rumsfeld as a direct criticism, how much longer the Army will continue using its "stop loss" power to prevent soldiers from leaving the service who are otherwise eligible to retire or quit.

Rumsfeld said that this condition was simply a fact of life for soldiers at time of 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."

In his opening remarks, Rumsfeld stressed that soldiers who are heading to Iraq should not believe those who say the insurgents cannot be defeated or who otherwise doubt the will of the military to win.

"They say we can't prevail. I see that violence and say we must win," Rumsfeld said.
Why did they vote for Bush then? I guess they are just stupid grunts right?

[bunnytrdr]

Hostilities officially ceased over a year and a half ago. Mission accomplished.
How many gangstas in the hood have been gunned down in the U.S. during that time?

[Hydrae]

Ok, I have gotten confused, is the war over or not?

[Duck Dog]

Ok, I have gotten confused, is the war over or not?


Yes it's over. The first phase of combat operations, the seizing of the country is over and went quit well. (see Mission Accomplished)

The second phase, peace keeping, security and handing the country back over to the Iraqi's, isn't over and isn't going so well.

Of course the liberals will blame the US for the the problems of phase two, instead of those responsible, the idiotic Muslims who are resisting peace.

[Hydrae]

Yes it's over. The first phase of combat operations, the seizing of the country is over and went quit well. (see Mission Accomplished)

The second phase, peace keeping, security and handing the country back over to the Iraqi's, isn't over and isn't going so well.

Of course the liberals will blame the US for the the problems of phase two, instead of those responsible, the idiotic Muslims who are resisting peace.


So my point from last night still holds. If the war is over, what is the justification for extending these soldiers tenures?

Yet another soldier asked, without putting it to Rumsfeld as a direct criticism, how much longer the Army will continue using its "stop loss" power to prevent soldiers from leaving the service who are otherwise eligible to retire or quit.

Rumsfeld said that this condition was simply a fact of life for soldiers at time of 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."

If you are extending the soldiers times then the war must still be continuing. Can't have it both ways can you? :shrug:

[Radar Chief]

So my point from last night still holds. If the war is over, what is the justification for extending these soldiers tenures?



If you are extending the soldiers times then the war must still be continuing. Can't have it both ways can you? :shrug:

Didn’t know it was an either or proposition. Particularly since we’ve experienced “stop loss” during times of peace before.

[Michael Michigan]

Some specifics please?

And...

[CRONUS]

"You can have all the armor in the world on a tank and it can (still) be blown up," Rumsfeld said.

Let me just say this is about the most dumbass statement he could have made. I do not want anyone thinking that just because I am a conservative I support such a stupid statement being made.

[OldTownChief]

Let me just say this is about the most dumbass statement he could have made. I do not want anyone thinking that just because I am a conservative I support such a stupid statement being made.

I agree. I support what we are doing there, but get our troops whatever they need NOW.

[Taco John]

Let me just say this is about the most dumbass statement he could have made. I do not want anyone thinking that just because I am a conservative I support such a stupid statement being made.



:clap:

[Taco John]

Of course the liberals will blame the US for the the problems of phase two, instead of those responsible, the idiotic Muslims who are resisting peace.



Wow. That's just an incredible piece of work.

[CRONUS]

...)

The second phase, peace keeping, security and handing the country back over to the Iraqi's, isn't over and isn't going so well.

Of course the liberals will blame the US for the the problems of phase two, instead of those responsible, the idiotic Muslims who are resisting peace.

DD, uh even I am confused, would there be need for phase 2 if they were not resisting? The problems logically have to be with our handling of the phase if you agree there really are problems.

In a war you cannot blame the enemy for resisting that just does not make any sense. Being upset or angry with their success would make sense.

[Loki]

While I agree there is a difference in professionalism I disagree with your assertation they "get what the deserve"...they are fighting along side active duty with the same risk as active duty...I went Active to Guard and know damn well it is a completely different monster....but when soldiers from my old Guard unit are dying in vehicles that are less armored and when the active soldiers in uparmored vehicles are living something is wrong...its like sending Guard troops in with 9mm's and giving active duty the M16 and M60....it just makes no sense...if they are not combat ready/protected they are a no go till they are

dude, honestly, i don't know where you get that i'm asserting that "they get what they deserve"... :shrug:

i am quite sure i said that i respected them as they are on the same team.

my points are/were:

- reserve and guard DON'T get the "kickass" equipment. this is NOTHING NEW. reserve and guard will always get the "hand me downs" from active duty. (i am of an opinion that this SHOULD change though... reserve and guard seem to be playing a much more active role in the last 15-20 years. dunno if that's such a great idea for several reasons.)

- bitching to the secretary of defense changes nothing, just like bitching to your CO would change nothing. (ie: suck it up and drive on as there is a mission to accomplish.) you know the drill.

[Loki]

Oh, I get it. When we don't "see" it it's not there. Sort of like 1,200 flag-draped coffins. :hmmm:

Silly me. I feel a lot better now.

like you really give two sh!ts?
:rolleyes:

[Loki]

So you are saying there cannot be an isolated major combat operation? Like that which happened in Fallujah?

That the term major combat operation is reserved for the ENTIRE war and not individual battles...so to speak.

looks like you're catching on...

took you long enough.
:banghead:

[Loki]

Yeah. And he was wrong...

moving on...

yeah, and you're a dumbass.

that is all.

[DenverChief]

dude, honestly, i don't know where you get that i'm asserting that "they get what they deserve"... :shrug:

i am quite sure i said that i respected them as they are on the same team.

my points are/were:

- reserve and guard DON'T get the "kickass" equipment. this is NOTHING NEW. reserve and guard will always get the "hand me downs" from active duty. (i am of an opinion that this SHOULD change though... reserve and guard seem to be playing a much more active role in the last 15-20 years. dunno if that's such a great idea for several reasons.)

- bitching to the secretary of defense changes nothing, just like bitching to your CO would change nothing. (ie: suck it up and drive on as there is a mission to accomplish.) you know the drill.
I wasn't saying they deserve any less respect but they are generally less professional than the Acvite guys....and thus have been getting the crap equipment....although now that I think about it the two may not be connected....I agree the Guard shouldn't be deployed overseas the Guard has always been the "home force" and should be used for riots and national disasters...the Reserves OTOH should be used IMHO....Rumsfield is the person to complain to he can make things happen or at least relay the message to someone who can....when I was in Korea and I wanted out of HHT to Bravo Troop I didn't complain to the squad leader or platoon Sgt, I went to 1SG, he made it happen for me

[Mr. Kotter]

I wasn't saying they deserve any less respect but they are generally less professional than the Acvite guys....and thus have been getting ht ecrap equipment....although now that I think about it the two may not be connected....I agree the Guard shouldn't be deployed overseas the Guard has always been the "home force" and should be used for riots and national disasters...the Reserves OTOH should be used IMHO....Rumsfield is the person to complain to he can make things happen or at least relay the message to someone who can....when I was in Korea and I wanted out of HHT to Bravo Troop I didn't complain to the squad leader or platoon Sgt, I went to 1SG, he made it happen for me

DC, what's up with you? I thought we were cool....and you've just dinged me a couple times in the last month....what's up man?

PM me if you want.....I know I may come off, on-line as arrogant at times; it's mostly posing for effect. However, you know I'm not ignorant, now.

[DenverChief]

DC, what's up with you? I thought we were cool....and you've just dinged me a couple times in the last month....what's up man?

PM me if you want.....I know I may come off, on-line as arrogant at times; it's mostly posing for effect. However, you know I'm not ignorant, now.
eh a couple of times? link me

[MadProphetMargin]

Of course the liberals will blame Great Britain for the the problems of phase two, instead of those responsible, the idiotic Colonists who are resisting peace.

FIXED!

[MonroeChief]

I agree. I support what we are doing there, but get our troops whatever they need NOW.

What happens when the troops need something and it does not exist?

For example, the HV's need armor but the manufacturer can only produce x number of full sets of armor a day, you need x+100 per day, how do you give them what they need now?

It seems like you are stating that they have not because the government won't give it to them and that is not the case. The equipment is getting shipped to the conflict as quickly as we can produce it.

As for the other posts that claim our soldiers are looking for armor and bullet proof glass in landfills is beyond common sense. Does the typical Iraqi dispose of heavy gauge steel and bullet proof glass on a regular basis? Would the bombed out buildings be the tree they are picking the fruit of protection from? (scavenging the bullet proof glass and steel from for their vehicles?) That suggestion is ludicrious.

[the Talking Can]

What happens when the troops need something and it does not exist?

For example, the HV's need armor but the manufacturer can only produce x number of full sets of armor a day, you need x+100 per day, how do you give them what they need now?

well, obviously you could go into battle prepared....but they chose not to

secondly, the company making this armor said they were working at 50% capacity and that they had told the pentagon this....its been all over the news

[MonroeChief]

well, obviously you could go into battle prepared....but they chose not to

secondly, the company making this armor said they were working at 50% capacity and that they had told the pentagon this....its been all over the news

Your politics are showing. The fact that every vehicle was not armored at the beginning of the war is more a political issue than one of being prepared.

Our troops have more safety type equipment than ever before in the history of the country. If you were to be sent to Bahrain or Kuwait City you probably would not be issued kevlar vests (only using this equipment as an example) due to the low percentage of coming under fire. As I've read it in the papers, the guys on the front lines have what they need.

Should every HV be armored? If you said yes, who is going to pay for those that are permanently stationed in the U.S.?

What does the mfgr working at 50% of capacity have to do with the issue at hand? If they can't put it out and they are under contract to the Army/Navy/Air Force/Marines for that equipment/armor why are they not addressing their own problem? (Answer: They only react to more money, most govt. contractors work on a cost plus arrangement, apparently these guys aren't and trying to cut corners to save money, they have less concern for the troops than we do.

[the Talking Can]

Your politics are showing. The fact that every vehicle was not armored at the beginning of the war is more a political issue than one of being prepared.

Our troops have more safety type equipment than ever before in the history of the country. If you were to be sent to Bahrain or Kuwait City you probably would not be issued kevlar vests (only using this equipment as an example) due to the low percentage of coming under fire. As I've read it in the papers, the guys on the front lines have what they need.

Should every HV be armored? If you said yes, who is going to pay for those that are permanently stationed in the U.S.?

What does the mfgr working at 50% of capacity have to do with the issue at hand? If they can't put it out and they are under contract to the Army/Navy/Air Force/Marines for that equipment/armor why are they not addressing their own problem? (Answer: They only react to more money, most govt. contractors work on a cost plus arrangement, apparently these guys aren't and trying to cut corners to save money, they have less concern for the troops than we do.

even for spin that is lame....

[Loki]

look. this is VERY simple.

we SHOULD have been upgrading and refitting our military after gulf war 1. (i have said this a million times...) our planes, tanks, rifles etc are ALL out-friggin-dated. F-15? made 30+ years ago. M-16? saw it's debut in vietnam 30+ years ago. M1 abrams tank? 20+ years old. the list goes on and on. during the reagan years was the last time "modern" systems were worked on and introduced to our armed forces. THAT SH!T IS PATHETIC!!!

if i were to blame any administration, i would have to blame the clinton administration for all the friggin cutbacks to our military and our intelligence communities. they had prime opportunities to make something happen and his administration dropped the ball. he was engaged in @ least 2 major conflicts with our troops (see somalia and bosnia) yet did nothing to refit our forces. they went with status quo and still cut back.

now we're in a MAJOR war, and people are complaining about our troops equipment like it's the current administration's fault??!! DUHHHH....
(ever heard of the words "preparation" or "readiness"?)

serious question:
you want the troops to have good equipment NOW? how do you refit all those service branches with NO time to do it, and HOW are you going to pay for it? as soon as you see the bills for all this rushed equipment y'all are going to sh!t yourselves... (and blame it all on bush2 of course.) and the troops are (once again) going to have slipshod CRAP to fight with.

you retards who want to point a finger of blame can BLAME YOURSELVES for buying into the clinton administrations FEEL-GOODisms and kick yourselves right in your own complacency. why weren't you riding your congressmen THEN?? was not a multi-million dollar warship (see USS cole) blown up by terrorists in a rubber friggin boat then? what? no outrage? no clambor for NEW UPDATED equipment for our troops? all the time and money WASTED on the political correctness and tree-hugging BULLSH!T got our forces nothing new to work with. a $100 RPG round will STILL take out a $60 million dollar M1 tank.

:shake:

we are the most technologically advanced nation, one of the richest nations with a huge industrial base. yet our troops fight with 20-30+ year old outdated crap. this is ridiculous and shouldn't even be an issue, but it is. NOTHING can possibly show the importance of future planning and the dire need to constantly be on the cutting edge of military technologies than this current war. we should actually be arguing over the ethics of sending technologically advanced battle robots and unmanned drones into areas like fallujah while our soldiers control them from relative safety miles away. but we aren't.

ask the romans about those barbarian hordes... oh, well i guess you can't. the romans got complacent also...

face it, we got caught with our pants down and have no one to blame but ourselves. if these facts aren't beginning to make most American's re-think the way we prepare for and wage war, i don't know what will...

in the meantime, keep supporting our troops. they're out there for us.

[MonroeChief]

even for spin that is lame....

I don't believe that you are calling me lame after what you have been saying.

[Duck Dog]

First the libbies say we spend too much on Defense. Then they criticize when we don't spend enough.

No wonder they aren't taken seriously in our society.

[MadProphetMargin]

First the libbies say we spend too much on Defense. Then they criticize when we don't spend enough.

No wonder they aren't taken seriously in our society.

Link to me saying we spend too much on defense?

[Duck Dog]

Link to me saying we spend too much on defense?


Didn't realize you were a libby. Figured you for a Union Democrat.

[MadProphetMargin]

Didn't realize you were a libby. Figured you for a Union Democrat.

Naw. Jefferson liberal.

MPM,
Probably despises the Berkeley set more than you do.

[Clint in Wichita]

"You can have all the armor in the world on a tank and it can (still) be blown up," Rumsfeld said.

Then make the damned things out of plastic and save us all an arseload of tax dollars. Idiot.

[MadProphetMargin]

Then make the damned things out of plastic and save us all an arseload of tax dollars. Idiot.

Mybe we need to have kleenex drives?

[Loki]

Mybe we need to have kleenex drives?

and waste a tree?

you must be a republican... :p

[MadProphetMargin]

and waste a tree?

you must be a republican... :p


WHOOPSIE!

Please don't tell the other libbies!

[badgirl]

I'd like to think it's pretty ****ing obvious by now that we aren't doing everything we can to equip our men and women over there, and it's sickening.
Amen brother and I give rep for that truthful comment :thumb:

[Loki]

WHOOPSIE!

Please don't tell the other libbies!

your secret is safe with me buddy...
:p

[Uncle Jesse]

What happens when the troops need something and it does not exist?

For example, the HV's need armor but the manufacturer can only produce x number of full sets of armor a day, you need x+100 per day, how do you give them what they need now?

It seems like you are stating that they have not because the government won't give it to them and that is not the case. The equipment is getting shipped to the conflict as quickly as we can produce it.

As for the other posts that claim our soldiers are looking for armor and bullet proof glass in landfills is beyond common sense. Does the typical Iraqi dispose of heavy gauge steel and bullet proof glass on a regular basis? Would the bombed out buildings be the tree they are picking the fruit of protection from? (scavenging the bullet proof glass and steel from for their vehicles?) That suggestion is ludicrious.

[B]Humvee makers dispute Rumsfeld remarks
More armored vehicles could readily be built, two companies say

By GEORGE EDMONSON
COX NEWS SERVICE

WASHINGTON -- The manufacturer of Humvees for the U.S.
military and the company that adds armor to the utility
vehicles are not running near production capacity and are
making all that the Pentagon has requested, spokesmen for
both companies said.

"If they call and say, 'You know, we really want more,'
we'll get it done," said Lee Woodward, a spokesman for AM
General, the Indiana company that makes Humvees and the
civilian Hummer versions.

At O'Gara-Hess & Eisenhardt, the Ohio firm that turns
specially designed Humvees into fully armored vehicles at a
cost of about $70,000 each, spokesman Michael Fox said they,
too, can provide more if the government wants them.

Sen. Evan Bayh, D-Ind., said yesterday that the companies
could increase production of armored Humvees from 450 a
month to 550 by February.

Blaming the shortage on a lack of production capacity, as
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld did Wednesday, is "just
not true," said Bayh. He said he had told the Pentagon as
early as April that more armored Humvees could be built.

"It's essentially a matter of physics," Rumsfeld told the
soldiers in his reply on Wednesday. "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."

But Bayh, in a telephone conference call with reporters,
said the problem was another indication of the
administration's underestimation of the risks and demands in
Iraq.

"It borders on the naïve," Bayh added.

It exists alright and it's not PHYSICS or procurement logistics, but rather the fact is it wasn't asked for, so it's not there

[HC_Chief]

Because Evan Bayh saye so? :spock:

[Uncle Jesse]

Because Evan Bayh saye so? :spock:

NO because the manufacturer is saying so. Forget Bayh

Or is the manufacturer that produces said armor in question not knowledgeable of the situation either in your opinion?

[HC_Chief]

The manufacturer said it can be done <i>if requested</i>. So why would we request it if we had contractual agreements on delivery beforehand? NOTE: that's common business practice you know: pay for items with the understanding of delivery of x units by y date.

Again, this is just a bunch of legislators bitching about something THEY did... trying to assign blame, rather than take responsibility for their own actions. The SoD didn't downsize the military. The POTUS didn't do it either... it takes an ACT OF CONGRESS to get that job done. It also takes an ACT OF CONGRESS to ramp back up (that, and time).

What we have here are a bunch of bitching and moaning... typical DC politics.

[jiveturkey]

The manufacturer said it can be done <i>if requested</i>. So why would we request it if we had contractual agreements on delivery beforehand? NOTE: that's common business practice you know: pay for items with the understanding of delivery of x units by y date.

Again, this is just a bunch of legislators bitching about something THEY did... trying to assign blame, rather than take responsibility for their own actions. The SoD didn't downsize the military. The POTUS didn't do it either... it takes an ACT OF CONGRESS to get that job done. It also takes an ACT OF CONGRESS to ramp back up (that, and time).

What we have here are a bunch of bitching and moaning... typical DC politics.Nice take.

You get some rep.

[WilliamTheIrish]

http://www.thedailytimes.com/sited/story/html/181162

Armor installed within 24 hours of soldiers' complaint
2004-12-17

From Wire Reports

Senior Army officials told a wire service reporter Wednesday that within 24 hours of a soldier's complaint to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld about shortages of vehicle armor in Iraq, protective armor had been installed on every vehicle in the soldier's unit.

According to a Hearst Newspaper report Thursday, Army Maj. Gen. Stephen Speakes and Army Brig. Gen. Jeffrey Sorenson, senior members of the Army's combat systems development and acquisition team at the Pentagon, said routine pre-deployment preparations before proceeding to Iraq included adding protective armor plates to the last 20 vehicles of the Tennessee-based 278th Regimental Combat Team's 830 vehicles.

``When the question was asked, 20 vehicles remained to be up-armored at that point,'' Hearst reporter Stewart M. Powell quoted Speakes as saying at a Pentagon briefing. '``We completed those 20 vehicles in the next day. ... In other words, we completed all the armoring within 24 hours of the time the question was asked.''

On Dec. 8, Spc. Thomas ``Jerry'' Wilson, 31, of Nashville, asked Rumsfeld why, after almost two years of war, soldiers were searching dumps for metal to weld on vehicles destined for hostile territory.

``Why do we soldiers have to dig through local landfills for pieces of scrap metal and compromised ballistic glass to up-armor our vehicles?'' Wilson said.

The question appeared to surprise Rumsfeld and prompted cheers among the soldiers listening to him in a hangar. After asking Wilson to repeat the question, Rumsfeld replied: '``You go to war with the Army you have, not the Army you might want or wish to have.'``

During Wednesday's briefing, Speakes said the soldier may not have known that ``an existing program'' was under way to add armor to the last of the unit's vehicles when he questioned Rumsfeld.

[KCWolfman]

The manufacturer said it can be done <i>if requested</i>. So why would we request it if we had contractual agreements on delivery beforehand? NOTE: that's common business practice you know: pay for items with the understanding of delivery of x units by y date.

Again, this is just a bunch of legislators bitching about something THEY did... trying to assign blame, rather than take responsibility for their own actions. The SoD didn't downsize the military. The POTUS didn't do it either... it takes an ACT OF CONGRESS to get that job done. It also takes an ACT OF CONGRESS to ramp back up (that, and time).

What we have here are a bunch of bitching and moaning... typical DC politics.
Yup, Back in 95 the same people who are bitchin' about no extra armor on the HumVees were applauding the fact that only 15 HumVees a month even got armor.

[MadProphetMargin]

Yup, Back in 95 the same people who are bitchin' about no extra armor on the HumVees were applauding the fact that only 15 HumVees a month even got armor.

Link?