Marines left swinging in the breeze...

Discussion in 'Military' started by Bullypulpit, May 31, 2007.

  1. Bullypulpit
    Offline

    Bullypulpit Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2004
    Messages:
    5,849
    Thanks Received:
    378
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Columbus, OH
    Ratings:
    +379
    <blockquote>The system for delivering badly needed gear to Marines in Iraq has failed to meet many urgent requests for equipment from troops in the field, according to an internal document obtained by The Associated Press.

    Of more than 100 requests from deployed Marine units between February 2006 and February 2007, less than 10 percent have been fulfilled, the document says. It blamed the bureaucracy and a "risk-averse" approach by acquisition officials.

    Among the items held up were a mine resistant vehicle and a hand-held laser system.- <a href=http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070525/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/marines_critical_gear&printer=1;_ylt=A0WTcUxalF5GRNcAlQ2WwvIE>AP</a></blockquote>

    It would seem to me that if this administration was was as interested in supporting the troops as it claims to be, they would waste no time in removing the bureaucratic hurdles in the procurement process. This is just another example of the lack of gravitas with which this administration has shown since the invasion of Iraq.

    Trying to wage war on the cheap, sending in fewer troops than commanders recommended (The ones recommending the more realistic troop numbers were shown the door}, the travesty at Walter Reed, the miserly increase in salary for our troops and an increase in the death benefit for their survivors, borrowing money to pay for the war rather than raising taxes, an now this. Yes, President Bush supports the troops.
     
  2. CSM
    Offline

    CSM Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2004
    Messages:
    6,907
    Thanks Received:
    708
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Northeast US
    Ratings:
    +708

    Yer full of crap and so is the media. You know nothing of military acquisition processes and neither does the media. As for the bureaucratic hurdles, they were put in place to curb the "military/industrial" demon you so greatly fear.

    Having been in the military, you know damn well how the requisition systems work (or you should). Not every soldier sailor or airman gets his own 500 gallon flamethrower or F-18.

    Buried deep in the article is this:

    The industrial capacity did not exist to quickly build the new mine resistant vehicles and the more heavily armored Humvees were viewed as a suitable solution, Marine Corps officials said

    and this:

    But because the lasers had not passed a safety review process, stateside authorities barred the Marines from using them.


    Your rhetoric becomes more hollow every day.
     
  3. CSM
    Offline

    CSM Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2004
    Messages:
    6,907
    Thanks Received:
    708
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Northeast US
    Ratings:
    +708
  4. Bullypulpit
    Offline

    Bullypulpit Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2004
    Messages:
    5,849
    Thanks Received:
    378
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Columbus, OH
    Ratings:
    +379
    Your link wouldn't load. Yeah like the Dragon Skin flak vests the Pentagon won't let our troops use in favor of the inferior Interceptor vests. Bite me CSM...We've all had family and friends serving and killed in Iraq, including me. My brother-in-law just got back from Iraq and a buddy I trained with in martial arts came back from Iraq in a body bag, so just bite me.
     
  5. CSM
    Offline

    CSM Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2004
    Messages:
    6,907
    Thanks Received:
    708
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Northeast US
    Ratings:
    +708
    Drop yer linen and start your grinnin.....

    Now you are a weapons/armor expert. I truly am sorry for your loss, but that doesn't mean you are now an expert on military acquisition. maybe if you took the time to understand the issues instead of spouting off, you could help. I suppose that would require some actual effort on your part though.

    You are correct, some of us have had family and friends suffer because of Iraq. That does not mean your foaming-at-the-mouth rhetoric is truthful.
     
  6. Bullypulpit
    Offline

    Bullypulpit Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2004
    Messages:
    5,849
    Thanks Received:
    378
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Columbus, OH
    Ratings:
    +379
    Sorry, I deserved that. But it's really tiresome hearing how anyone opposed to this war and the Bush administration's pursuit of it doesn't give a shit about the troops in harms way. That's bullshit and we both know it.
     
  7. CSM
    Offline

    CSM Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2004
    Messages:
    6,907
    Thanks Received:
    708
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Northeast US
    Ratings:
    +708
    Apology accepted.

    You never saw a post from me proclaiming that those opposed to the war are somehow unpatriotic or non supportive of the troops. Neither is anyone who does support the war necessarily a Bush bot (or any other denigrating adjective). There is a reasonable and logical position on both sides.

    Not everything is Bush's fault and not everything the libs fault or the Dem's fault etc. Whenever we as citizens at least try to understand the other side's POV we have some common ground a basis for true debate and discussion...possibly even for compromise. When either side goes rabid, there is no possibility for anything.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  8. onedomino
    Offline

    onedomino SCE to AUX

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,677
    Thanks Received:
    474
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Ratings:
    +476
    You state the opinion that Dragon Skin is superior to Interceptor body armor as though it is a categorical fact. That is far from accurate. If it were true, then the implication is that the Defense Dept (and therefore the Administration) is deliberately allowing our soldiers to be wounded or killed unnecessarily: a horrific allegation. It seems to me that you lunge at anything that will portray the Administration negatively, whether accurate or exaggerated seems to be irrelevant to you.

    The other opinion about Pinnacle (Dragon Skin) armor:
    Some other links on this topic:

    http://www.captainsjournal.com/2007/05/28/body-armor-wars-the-way-forward/

    http://op-for.com/2007/05/dragon_skin_redux.html
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
  9. CSM
    Offline

    CSM Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2004
    Messages:
    6,907
    Thanks Received:
    708
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Northeast US
    Ratings:
    +708
    Well, we can't have anything presented that remotely looks like facts, so you are summarily dismissed!
     
  10. Shogun
    Offline

    Shogun Free: Mudholes Stomped

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2007
    Messages:
    30,495
    Thanks Received:
    2,224
    Trophy Points:
    1,043
    Ratings:
    +2,260

    hehehe...

    can someone bronze this message and hang it on the wall around here?
     

Share This Page