G-D, this pisses me off. Why can’t we properly support the troops YOU put in there. I know we’ve been through reasons here and over at GD (not being prepared, not enough troops, being greeted with flowers, etc.) but it just infuriates me to get “support our troops” shoved down our throats by the very government officials who won’t.
I’ve been in the Army for 16 years. That’s from Bush to Clinton to Bush. There was never any thought that every vehicle needed to be armored. From the lowest Private to the highest General, no one ever thought that every HUMMV needed to have a full armor package. Most of my Army career we used the CUCV, you might know it as the Chevy S10. No armor there. To think that Rumsfeld or anyone else should have somehow know what no one else predicted is a little ridiculous. Armored HUMMVs are being produced at the highest rate that can be managed at this time. You try to predict what might happen but in the end " You go to war with the Army you have," and then adjust to the situation.
His lies and incompetence put them there for no good reason while genuine threats to the Repulblic are allowed to fester, and then he had the bloody nerve to tell them “tough titties!” and fly home to a warm bed.
And really, how bad does it have to get for an enlisted man actually says something like that to the Secretary of Defense? The soldier’s remark could not have been made lightly.
Gobear, 5que composed his thread faster then I did, because it didn’t exist when I clicked new thread. It was also closed before I could request to close it.
Armor? Fuck that. Why don’t we just unmanned vehicles and not send any troops? I wanna do my fightin’ from behind a joystick and a 60" plasma monitor inside an NBC hardened pillbox . . . on Antigua.
C’mon guys. There are limits to the level of safety that can be guaranteed to soldiers - both technological and budgetary. If you gotta have absolute assurance that every troop has to be supremely protected from injury, you might as well not have a military.
Spc. Wilson did not ask for “absolute assurance that every troop has to be supremely protected from injury.” He asked 'Why do we soldiers have to dig through local landfills for pieces of scrap metal and compromised ballistic glass to uparmor our vehicles?" and asserted that “We do not have proper armored vehicles to carry with us north.” Seems like a reasonable inquiry, given the circumstances.
Need I point out, Maeglin, that that same Red Army beat the Wehrmacht back to Berlin, and occupied Eastern Europe for close to fifty years?
Good soldiers and sailors, and airmen and Marines, bitch constantly about the amount of supplies they have. They then go out and make do with what they have.
In the case of the American military, that often achieves quite impressive results.
Well, I just checked and am not seeing that information (although there are references to “doing things as fast as we can” in the story about Rumsfeld).
I do understand, though, why you might get your back up a little. After all, it is not as if a precedent exists on this message board for asking folks to back up claims that they make.