Not Another Rove Thread

[Cathedral]

And we agree on much more than that, Warham.
I still have a conservative heart, just no adequate representation at the moment.

If the entire political arena wasn't such a clusterfuck, we all wouldn't be butting heads so much.

[Cathedral]

I know it isn't a Tank, thome, (though it drinks gas like one)
But they should be equipped to the hilt with everything available before the keys are handed to a soldier.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by Warham
What's the date that this vote was taken?

I'm looking through the Senate voting records now.

Vote on what? This Administration has other priorities obviously.

Troops put thorny questions to Rumsfeld
Defense chief speaks to Iraq-bound soldiers in Kuwait

Thursday, December 9, 2004 Posted: 4:37 AM EST (0937 GMT)

(CNN) -- U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld faced tough questioning Wednesday from troops about to be deployed to Iraq.

Soldiers at Camp Buehring, a staging area in the Kuwait desert, peppered Rumsfeld with queries about the standard of equipment they would be using and about the Pentagon's "stop-loss" policy, which prevents troops from leaving the military service even if they are eligible to retire or quit.

One soldier, identified by The Associated Press as Army Spc. Thomas Wilson of the 278th Regimental Combat Team, a Tennessee National Guard outfit, asked Rumsfeld why more military combat vehicles were not reinforced for battle conditions.

"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.

The question prompted cheers from some of the approximately 2,300 troops assembled in the large hangar to hear Rumsfeld deliver a pep talk at what the Pentagon called a town hall meeting.

Rumsfeld said armored military vehicles have been brought to the region "from all over the world, from where they're not needed to a place they're needed."

In Washington, Pentagon spokesman Larry Di Rita said about 450 armored Humvees are being produced each month. This is up from August 2003 when only 15 per month were made.

That's about the time commanders in Iraq started asking for them because of the increased use of roadside bombs by insurgents.

"It's essentially a matter of physics, not a matter of money," Rumsfeld said. "It's a matter of production and the capability of doing it."

In April, the Pentagon said it was spending $400 million to replace the Army's thin-skinned Humvees in Iraq with the so-called "uparmored" reinforced versions.

"As you know, you have to go to war with the Army you have, not the Army you want," Rumsfeld said.

He added, "You can have all the armor in the world on a tank, and it can [still] be blown up."

Rumsfeld's response to the question drew quick criticism from one Democratic legislator.

Sen. Chris Dodd of Connecticut said he sent a letter to Rumsfeld asking whether the military met a self-imposed July 31 deadline to fully armor the troops.

"I understand how you may be forced into a situation earlier than you'd like where you might not have everything you want, but it's now going into the third year," Dodd said.

Initial war estimates said U.S. forces might need as many as 800 heavily armored vehicles in Iraq, but current estimates call for as many as 6,000, said retired Air Force Maj. Gen. Don Shepperd, a CNN military analyst.

"The command over there basically distributes the armored vehicles to those they think that need them the most," Shepperd said. "Everybody would like to have one, but there's simply not enough in theater right now."

Maj. Gen. Gary Speer, deputy commanding general of U.S. forces in Kuwait, told the AP that as far as he knows vehicles going to Iraq from Kuwait's Camp Buehring have at least "Level 3" armor.

These vehicles would have locally fabricated armor for side panels, but not necessarily bulletproof windows or protection against blasts through floorboards, according to the AP.

Speer said he wasn't aware of anyone looking through landfills for scrap metal and glass, the AP reported.

Maj. Gen. Gus L. Hargett, adjutant general, or commander, of the Tennessee National Guard, disputed Speer's comments.

"I know that members of his staff were aware and assisted the 278th in obtaining these materials," Hargett said in a news release.

About 19,000 armored Humvees are in the Central Command's area of operations, which includes Iraq and Afghanistan, Di Rita said. That is about 2,000 short of what commanders have requested, he said.

Di Rita pointed out it is Pentagon policy that troops driving Humvees into Iraq drive only armored vehicles. Unarmored Humvees are transported into the country on flatbed trucks and used only inside compounds and other relatively safe areas, he said.

The Army has about $1.2 billion in its budget for armored Humvees and armor kits, Di Rita said.

Another soldier asked Rumsfeld about the stop-loss order. Critics of the policy have called it a "backdoor draft." A group of soldiers filed a lawsuit this week challenging the policy.

"My husband and myself both joined a volunteer Army," said the woman, who identified herself as a staff sergeant in a logistics unit from Fort Bragg, North Carolina. "Currently, I'm serving under the stop-loss. I would like to know how much longer you foresee the military using this program."

Rumsfeld said the policy "is something you prefer not to have to use in a perfect world."

"It's based on unit cohesion," Rumsfeld said. "The principle is that -- in the event there is something that requires a unit to be involved in, and people are in a personal situation where their time was ending -- they put a stop-loss on it so cohesion is maintained."

He did not specify how long the stop-loss order would continue.

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

About 7,000 U.S. soldiers have been affected by the stop-loss order, Army officials said.

https://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/12/08/rumsfeld.troops/

CNN's Mike Mount contributed to this report.

Copyright 2004 CNN. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Associated Press contributed to this report.

[LoungeMachine]

read it yourself

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=1&vote=00108

[LoungeMachine]

Originally posted by Warham
Well, gee, if I contradicted a talking point, maybe I am a free thinker!

Can you imagine?

No.

You've never seen a Repuke talking point you didn't love

[thome]

Originally posted by Cathedral
I know it isn't a Tank, thome, (though it drinks gas like one)
But they should be equipped to the hilt with everything available before the keys are handed to a soldier.

Thats what a tank is for this is to replace the JEEP why dont you all
go back to the jeep and try to make it invulnerable to all types
of arms OOOO THEN ITS A TANK.G..D. Its meant to move sm amts of troops fast.Im pissed .you all pontificate on dumbSH#T .
Post what you want i know what it IS.

[Warham]

Originally posted by LoungeMachine
No.

You've never seen a Repuke talking point you didn't love

Sure, I have.

You and Nick just aren't paying attention.

Tsk tsk, it's a requirement in this forum, my good man.

[Cathedral]

Those answers didn't make me feel any better, and i'm sitting here in Ohio.
You can't talk to the troops in the same manner as you would the press.
They see right through that shit because their lives depend on that.

[BigBadBrian]

Originally posted by Warham
Gee, could it be that Lounge's information was false?

I thought so.

Here's the official link, right to Kerry's vote...

http://www.vote-smart.org/issue_keyv...an_id=S0421103

Indeed.

To be sure, what really would payoff in Iraq is an armored vehicle especially designed for urban/desert patrol. The Humvee is a replacement for the jeep. Armoring a Humvee is a stopgap measure at best. Hopefully Lockheed Martin or some other defense contractor has a new vehicle under study. And FORD feels the military-industrial complex is unnecessary.

[Nickdfresh]

Originally posted by BigBadBrian
Indeed.

To be sure, what really would payoff in Iraq is an armored vehicle especially designed for urban/desert patrol. The Humvee is a replacement for the jeep. Armoring a Humvee is a stopgap measure at best. Hopefully Lockheed Martin or some other defense contractor has a new vehicle under study. And FORD feels the military-industrial complex is unnecessary.

So we spend billions to counter a threat which costs at most a few thousend dollars to make (IED's) if that? That makes a lot of sense. That money could have gone towards homeland defense.

[Cathedral]

Originally posted by thome
Thats what a tank is for this is to replace the JEEP why dont you all
go back to the jeep and try to make it invulnerable to all types
of arms OOOO THEN ITS A TANK.G..D. Its meant to move sm amts of troops fast.Im pissed .you all pontificate on dumbSH#T .
Post what you want i know what it IS.

Calm down, breathe in, then out.

I'm not following your point.
Anyone can see that a Hummer isn't a Tank, but it's not a Jeep either.
And if you are saying that they should have Tanks as opposed to the Hummer, well, Tanks get blown up too, bro.

You need to listen to the stories of some survivors of attacked armored Hummvee's and you'll understand that the armor can stop and RPG from killing those inside it.

A tank is not appropriate in this kind of warfare and would be far more prone to breakdown in the sand.

But still, i don't understand what your point is.
Are you saying they need tanks and not Hummers?

Please explain...........

[Cathedral]

Originally posted by BigBadBrian
Indeed.

To be sure, what really would payoff in Iraq is an armored vehicle especially designed for urban/desert patrol. The Humvee is a replacement for the jeep. Armoring a Humvee is a stopgap measure at best. Hopefully Lockheed Martin or some other defense contractor has a new vehicle under study. And FORD feels the military-industrial complex is unnecessary.

Is there something better than the Hummvee we can send them right now?
I'm all for whatever the troops need, but as far as i know, The Hummvee (with armor) is the best option right now.
Safer than a jeep, more reliable than a tank in those conditions.

I'm losing some people on this issue because i'm not clear on what other options are available that people want deployed.

[thome]

Originally posted by BigBadBrian
Indeed.

To be sure, what really would payoff in Iraq is an armored vehicle especially designed for urban/desert patrol. The Humvee is a replacement for the jeep. Armoring a Humvee is a stopgap measure at best. Hopefully Lockheed Martin or some other defense contractor has a new vehicle under study. And FORD feels the military-industrial complex is unnecessary.

Thats the Bradley What happend there i dont know.

I know its like rolling around in a big weird coffin.

[bobgnote]

The armor-Rumsfeld-Abu Graib issues

See what happened to Lynndie and Charlie? That nekkid photo session was all about the armor issue, so that the media needed to see the prisoners-in-suits issue parallel to the use of not just dug-up stuff, but also old flak vests, to stuff in Humvee door panels.

Charlie Grainer got 10 years. He did what he did to bring up the GW photo show at first inauguration, so he brought this on, to show whatup with armor, and he got HAMMERED.

[Nickdfresh]

After reading successive posts by THOME and BOBGNOTE, I really, really need a beer right now.