Drudge Retort: Red Meat for Yellow Dogs
Saturday, February 16, 2008

Hundreds of U.S. Marines have been killed or injured by roadside bombs in Iraq because Marine Corps bureaucrats refused an urgent request in 2005 from battlefield commanders for blast-resistant vehicles, an internal military study concludes. The study, written by a civilian Marine Corps official and obtained by The Associated Press, accuses the service of "gross mismanagement" that delayed deliveries of the mine-resistant, ambush-protected trucks for more than two years.

Liberal Blog Advertising Network

Menu

Subscriptions

Author Info

arbusto

MORE STORIES

Special Features

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in the discussion of this weblog entry should note the site's moderation policy.

Right from the horse's ass......

www.prwatch.org

Thank God we don't have Kerry protecting us with spitballs.

Yes, Kerry would have been disastrous. Our soldiers would have been at risk.

Famous Last Words

"You Go To War With The Army You Have Not The Army You Want"

-Donald Rumsfled


What An Ass Clown

good old kill em all rummie. theirs ours doesnt matter.

In the name of Bechtel, Halliburton and Exxon, let us prey.

AMEN.

So, you'd think this would be exactly the sort of thing a Commander-in-Chief would be aware of an want to intervene in.

I'm sick of politics deciding the lives of our soldiers. We either give these guys everything they need or we bring them home. We've been handling this somewhere in between and Americans are dying because of it. I consider the Dems mostly at fault here because they are the ones who (1)voted in favor then and (2)want to pull funding now. That is seriously evil. Pulling funding is not the right way to get this war to stop.

I reminds me of having a tire put on in Arizona once. The mechanic failed to tighten all the bolts. The tire fell off at speed. The mechanic later said it was all just a mistake. Right....

"Pulling funding is not the right way to get this war to stop...."

Pinkie, I'm being entirely serious here----Do you think Bush ever really wanted to win the war in Iraq, or do you think he's been playing out some rather dark and very personal motivations?

the dems fault? when did your brain stop working?

Pinkie you either A) a commie B) a Log Cabin Repub or C) A dumb Bitch. I'm pulling for C.

*your* I'm on BlackBerry hung over at a cafe with a Bluegrass band next to me. Hard....to....focus....

Hey Zed if He "Won" the war in Iraq then the theft of their oil would cease.

Larry Mohr

PS I put quotes around the word won because it was lost the moment it began.

I've been watching representatives of the right recently. Many seem now ready to concede Bush is stupid, but few that he is malicious. I hold out for malicious.

Think about that, though---Eight years to decide someone isn't smart. Now, is that stupid or malicious?

Zed try partisan loyalty. NOTHING More.

Larry Mohr

Bush is stupid and malicious. He also takes orders. He is in charge of nothing except Jeff Gannons income.

"You Go To War With The Army You Have Not The Army You Want"

-Donald Rumsfled

What An Ass Clown

Posted by Sarge

I guess you would wait until you had your dream army all wraped up in their cocoons so none would get hurt. That would happen when hell freezes over.

"Incum" BB. But you were close...

Snipe defending Rummy? Wow! That's very nobel of you. Regardless that was stupid of him to say. That's like your wife say "I made love with the husband I have, not the guy I wish I had". Most likely true, but not very nice to say;-)

chi, I'm not PC so the hell with talking around the truth. I am not defending anybody but when you fight, it's with what you have, not what you wish you had.

"I consider the Dems mostly at fault here because they are the ones who (1)voted in favor then and (2)want to pull funding now. That is seriously evil."

It's my understanding that the Dem's don't want to pull the funding, they want to bring the troops home. And just what funding have the Dem's pulled that you are blaming on them?

Who's shocked that not one limp-wristed tool from the left has commented on the facts of the matter?

A civilian bureaucracy shit the bed on this one. What do Kerry or Bush have to do with internal Marine Corp reports?

The Dems fooled you retards and you lap up their excretions like hungry little yellow spined dogs.

"Yellow-spined dogs...."

Thanks for explaining that. Your dead soldiers in Iraq thank you.

"A civilian bureacracy...."

Run by what Great Big Texan? But, since the man used to brag about not reading, perhaps he can be excused for not understanding the needs of others so far away.

One assumes part of that reading Bush never quite got to was casualty reports. Or, if he read them, he never asked how they died.

Questions like this might keep another man up nights.

Looked at another way---There are many someones in the Pentagon that do read casualty reports and actual causes of combat deaths.

Bush apparently never talked with any of them. Or, evidently, if he did, he got a large yawn out of it.

Pass the buck.

-Chairpoodle

Zed,
Are you under the impression that the President reviews the requests and validity of every branch of the military's supply requests?

Who is in charge of the Marines budgets? Who decides what equipment to develop and what equipment to order? Try not to answer right away, instead read the article and then for a coherent answer.

Ratsa you simpleton, we're not talking about which Chippendale's air freshener to hang in the cab of the 18 wheeler, butt out.

push this problem out of the White House, where it really belongs.

Rummy stated we go to war with the army we have and further stated that they were building armored personell carriers as fast as they could. But United Defense denied this, stating that they were not using their full manufacturing capacity. The Pentagon didn't want to spend the money protecting troops when it could be diverted to Blackwater and other private enterprizes. Never mind that it cost more for meals that were never served or the $9 billion which they refuse to trace.

Bush's fault.

urgent request in 2005 from battlefield commanders

Why bother? The insurgency was well into its last throes by then.

The Fighty Rightys

NG3, succinct and painfully funny.

"Who is in charge of the Marines budgets? Who decides what equipment to develop and what equipment to order? Try not to answer right away, instead read the article and then for a coherent answer."

101,

Rummy was micromanaging the military everyone knows this. He also would basically toss out anyone who said something that was not part of the strategy he devised.

Remember how he canned people who said we needed more troops for the invasion?

Remember how he canned people who said we need to plan for the occupation?

I'm sure he stated a budbet and insisted everyone meet that budget regardless of the fluid nature of the war in Iraq.

Hey you join the Marines you have, not the Marines you may want.

...Cost was a driving factor in the decision to turn down the request for the so-called MRAPs, according to the study. Stateside authorities saw the hulking vehicles, which can cost as much as a $1 million each, as a financial threat to programs aimed at developing lighter vehicles that were years from being fielded....

Cost was the driving factor? Cost?
Bush and Cheney have made sure to funnel BILLIONS of our tax dollars into Halliburton and their other corporate interests via dead end, cost-plus, no bid Iraq reconstruction contracts yet we are worried about cost?

Billions of dollars worth of war profiteering contracts to help rebuild all that Bush had bombed in Iraq were handed out like candy in a Pez dispenser to his big Republican donors but to date have built very little. That country is way worse off after Bush than before Bush and their people suffer.

But Bush's Republican corporate donors do not suffer in the least as they are guaranteed big fat personal bank accounts for their stock holders and CE0s thru their war profiteering. It is only the American people, our military boys, and the Iraqi people who are suffering under Bush's "war of choice."

We have spent billions of dollars in war profiteering.
Just ONE of those billions would have been enough to pay for 1000 MRAP's for our military. How many lives would have been saved by just giving one billion? Are their lives not worth it or do our military boys continue to be just more cannon fodder for Bush, Inc.

How many lives are going to be lost because Americans lack Universal Health Care. Are the lives of our military the only important lives?

"For a coherent answer...."

If a civilian knows what the signature weapons of the Iraq War have been, and why US servicemen have been dying, I'd expect Bush to.

Then, I'd expect him to kick ass if he needed to with those below him in the chain of command to fix things accordingly.

I'd thought we stopped allowing Bush to hide behind his own government a few years back.


"WAR"

Here's a Bush/Hitler comparison for you---Hitler had an eye for military detail and was at times able to offer concrete and valuable input in regards to what was needed at the front.

If memory serves, Hitler had a high school education.

How many lives are going to be lost because Americans lack Universal Health Care. Are the lives of our military the only important lives?

Posted by Buffalo_Bob

A little off topic but, How many people have you bought health insurance for that arn't in your family? Do you realy care with your wallet or do you just care with mine?

we can afford tax cuts for the rich, but we can't afford proper equipment for the soldiers on the ground.


Mission Accomplished... Chimpy


Makes me sick.

we can afford tax cuts for the rich, but we can't afford proper equipment for the soldiers on the ground

THIS.

And don't even mention a 3.5% raise in pay for the troops cos Bush'll veto it.

Meanwhile the lawless mercenaries make 3 to 5 times the pay of regular soldiers and have special bars and whorehouses built for them that real soldiers can't avail themselves of.

Actually, given the economic realities right now America can't afford those tax cuts to the rich period even w/o the war.

First thing Obama needs to do is make the tax system more progressive, re-instate the estate tax killed by BushCo and start closing loopholes like a motherfarker. Luckily, Barack is a policy wonk extrodinaire who's commited to doing these things.

The company that makes the vehicles in question that are bomb and ied proof have offered to step up their production and were told not to bother.

Spud is bothered by that.

Makes me sick.

That too.

Be Well.

DETHSPUD - Spoken like a true American...

Sniper

"A little off topic but, How many people have you bought health insurance for that arn't in your family? Do you realy care with your wallet or do you just care with mine?"

Posted by Sniper at 2008-02-16 06:19 PM


I see no difference in paying for an army to protect everyone than paying for Health Insurance to protect everyone. Both are supposed to protect Americans. Both would be paid for by all. Why should I pay for an army to protect a bunch of pants pissers from terrorists in their closet. I think more Americans will need a doctor than will need the army to protect them from terrorists.

How much do you pay for health care a month now?

DETHSPUD - Spoken like a true American...

Here's the dealio, Master Sarge.

Canada's economy is joined at the hip to America's like a freakish Siamese Twin at a circus sideshow. We rise and/or fall together. As long as that reality continues to exist Spud feels perfectly okay with sticking his wee potatoey proboscis into yer bidness.

Asides, everybody needs a hobby. Some people knit. Spud luffs talking to Americans. S'fun fer Spud.

Woo Hoo!

Be Well.

Actually can not argue with that logic - You Be Well. And don't have proboscis envy, we have what we have - lol

They died because George W. Bush, a Criminal of great stature, started an illegal war.
He manipulated and lied his way into Iraq.
Then he claimed the blessing of his false god to justify the evil of his actions.
And most of you bought it from day 1.

It has been, and will always be for the control of man and oil.

As for the US military, you are engaged in a criminal act, you are NOT defending the liberty or freedom of this nation or its citizens. That goes for the entire intelligence community as well.
In fact, it is becoming more apparent with every passing day, that you are a part of the problem, along with your suppliers.

Go die in Iraq, traitors.

I think more Americans will need a doctor than will need the army to protect them from terrorists.

Until the terrorists are at your front door telling you to grow a beard in deference to Allah...oh, but you would comply, wouldn't you?

As for the US military, you are engaged in a criminal act, you are NOT defending the liberty or freedom of this nation or its citizens.

As for the US military, you are engaged in a criminal act, you are NOT defending the liberty or freedom of this nation or its citizens.

No,

the military is obeying the orders of the U.S. Congress and our commander in chief, elected by the civilian populace. The military doesnt act on it's own, for if we did, the likes of Jane Fonda and the Berkley city council would be in Vietnam and the gaza strip (respectively)...

You obviously need an army. But that army has no real use unless it helps buy you those things you need for life. Health care is one of those very important things.

Boaz, poor fellow, thinks engaging in a war of attrition and pissing away trillions is anything else but what his fearsome terrorists wanted him to do.

He'll not have health care; and he may have to grow that beard after all.

Osama Osama Osama Who?? Booo bwhahahahaha God I love that one Thanks Buffalo Bob.

Larry Mohr

Until the terrorists are at your front door telling you to grow a beard in deference to Allah...oh, but you would comply, wouldn't you?

With what military? How stupid!

Getting back to the original theme of this thread---Not providing necessary equipment to troops you've sent into a shooting war demonstrates what your values really are in regards to those troops and that war.

Bush did think Iraq would be simple and easy. When it turned out not to be, as wars often turn out, he went "Oh shit" and then spent most of his subsequent time with his head up his ass.

Which means he decided not to care what his troops needed, which was reinforcements, for example, as early as 2003. That's the way it was, and that's the way the learned books on military history will state it.

the military is obeying the orders of the U.S. Congress and our commander in chief, elected by the civilian populace. The military doesnt act on it's own, for if we did, the likes of Jane Fonda and the Berkley city council would be in Vietnam and the gaza strip (respectively)

So instead the military is wasting $trillions, killing tens maybe hundreds of thousands and destroying nations that were no threat to us. Worse, it's done nothing but make more enemies, gotten us nowhere and wrecked our economy. It appalls me to see such stupidity.

"Bush did think Iraq would be simple and easy. When it turned out not to be, as wars often turn out, he went "Oh shit" and then spent most of his subsequent time with his head up his ass.

Which means he decided not to care what his troops needed, which was reinforcements, for example, as early as 2003. That's the way it was, and that's the way the learned books on military history will state it."

As usual, Zed...you are right.

Bottom line. Our military wouldn't need blast resistance vehicles if they weren't destroying other countries. Locals can get a little pissed about those things.

In other news. Thousands of US citizens died today for lack of ever lasting hearts, kidneys and lungs.

How could humans be sent into a world so illequipped to fight?

I say bring em home, so much so that I voted for Ron Paul. Once the shit breaks out here then everyone can make the choice, equally, whether to be victim or soldier. I'm sick of hearing stoopid liberals crying about the genocide and resource wars their policies have help create.

What military equipment might we have had if the 8 years of 'peace dividend' had not happened? You know, Peace Dividend, where you take monies from military spending and use it for social modification programs.

"What military equipment might we have had...?"

What a strange world we live in when people are sad money isn't pissed down the military hole. I take my philosophy here from that radical, President Eisenhower.

Yes, I imagine Bush will try to use "peace dividend" as an excuse for his laziness and lack of knowledge.

I think that if his daddy, Bush I, had understood his idiot child would eventually use the US military in the long-term occupation of two Muslim states, he may have acted differently in 1988.

Hitler had an eye for military detail and was at times able to offer concrete and valuable input in regards to what was needed at the front.

Hitler actually served in WW1 at the front and was awarded a medal. And not in the Bavarian National Guard. However, like Bush he suffered from delusions.

chi, I'm not PC so the hell with talking around the truth. I am not defending anybody but when you fight, it's with what you have, not what you wish you had.

So don't START the fight.

Is that too plain as day for you "sniper"?

Cost was a driving factor in the decision to turn down the request for the so-called MRAPs, according to the study. Stateside authorities saw the hulking vehicles, which can cost as much as a $1 million each, as a financial threat to programs aimed at developing lighter vehicles that were years from being fielded.

After Defense Secretary Robert Gates declared the MRAP (pronounced M-rap) the Pentagon's No. 1 acquisition priority in May 2007, the trucks began to be shipped to Iraq in large quantities.


Although I'm sure many of the facts of this issue have been permanently buried by the corrupt bureaucracy that is BushCo. I suspect that the reason the vehicles weren't sent in mass sooner is that, at some point, the company who produces the vehicles may not have been as helpful to the BushCo agenda as BushCo would have liked, or that it took too much money away from other contractors loyal to BushCo.

The "war on terror" has never had much to do with winning or losing. If it did, we never would have invaded Iraq. In my opinion the Bush administration has ALWAYS been about profits for a relatively small group of participants.

Comments are closed for this entry.


Drudge Retort

Home | News | Comments | User Blogs | Nooner | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Copyright 2012 World Readable