protecting the troops? yeah right

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Free Range Lobster

Follow us?

http://www.oklahomacitybombing.com/o...-bombing-4.jpg

http://img.search.com/thumb/f/f2/WTC...C_1993_ATF.jpg

Are you living in a bubble?

---

Since he wasn't a towel-head...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pope Benedict XVI

quoting Santorum is really fucking persuasive.

---

The Pentagon, White House and CIA didn't think those rusty old shells counted as WMDs :confused:

I doubt even Santorum quotes himself nowadays.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hemas

Since he wasn't a towel-head...

---

Oh right, only muslims are terrorists.
My bad.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tuckerman

Oh Rly?........................

---

So it took three years to place eerrr I mean find those in the country to finally claim justification. I've seen very little about those, just a quick truck in .... here they are! News blurb to select outlets and bob's your uncle.

http://www.docstrangelove.com/2006/0...um-wmd-hunter/
http://www.docstrangelove.com/images/rick_santorum.jpg

Just some blogger, but on topic:

Quote:

---

Either Senator Santorum is an idiot or he thinks the American public are idiots - or both. After his stunning revelations it made some sense to go back and review three crucial reports on the subject of Iraq’s WMD. These are:

• The Final Report of the Iraq Survey Group (also known as the Duelfer Report) released on September 30, 2004.
• The Addendums to the Comprehensive Report of the Special Advisor to the DCI on Iraq’s WMD released in March 2005.
• The Report to the President from the Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction (also known as the Silberman-Robb Commission) released on March 31, 2005.

Senator Santorum claims that the discovery of pre-1991 chemical weapons munitions proves Iraq had WMD. Here is what Volume III of the Duelfer Report, entitled Iraq’s Chemical Warfare Program, had to say about these munitions in its key findings:

While a small number of old, abandoned chemical munitions have been discovered, ISG judges that Iraq unilaterally destroyed its undeclared chemical weapons stockpile in 1991. There are no credible indications that Baghdad resumed production of chemical munitions thereafter, a policy ISG attributes to Baghdad’s desire to see sanctions lifted, or rendered ineffectual, or its fear of force against it should WMD be discovered.

• The scale of the Iraqi conventional munitions stockpile, among other factors, precluded an examination of the entire stockpile; however, ISG inspected sites judged most likely associated with possible storage or deployment of chemical weapons.

The Duelfer Report goes on to state:

Disposition of CW Munitions Post-1991

ISG expended considerable time and effort investigating longstanding Iraqi assertions about the fate of CW munitions known to have been in Baghdad’s possession during the Gulf war. We believe the vast majority of these munitions were destroyed, but questions remain concerning hundreds of CW munitions.

Since May 2004, ISG has recovered dozens of additional chemical munitions, including artillery rounds, rockets and a binary Sarin artillery projectile (see Figure 5). In each case, the recovered munitions appear to have been part of the pre-1991 Gulf war stocks, but we can neither determine if the munitions were declared to the UN or if, as required by the UN SCR 687, Iraq attempted to destroy them. (See Annex F.)

• The most significant recovered munitions was a 152mm binary Sarin artillery projectile which insurgents had attempted to use as an improvised explosive device.
• ISG has also recovered 155mm chemical rounds and 122mm artillery rockets which we judge came from abandoned Regime stocks.

…

Iraq Unilateral Weapons Destruction in 1991

Iraq completed the destruction of its pre-1991 stockpile of CW by the end of 1991, with most items destroyed in July of that year. ISG judges that Iraq destroyed almost all prohibited weapons at that time.

• ISG has obtained no evidence that contradicts our assessment that the Iraqis destroyed most of their hidden stockpile, although we recovered a small number of pre-1991 chemical munitions in early to mid 2004.

These remaining pre-1991 weapons either escaped destruction in 1991 or suffered only partial damage. More may be found in the months and years ahead. [Emphasis added by me.]

The March 2005 Addendum to the Duelfer Report lays the findings out even more clearly:

ISG assesses that Iraq and Coalition Forces will continue to discover small numbers of degraded chemical weapons, which the former Regime mislaid or improperly destroyed prior to 1991. ISG believes the bulk of these weapons were likely abandoned, forgotten and lost during the Iran-Iraq war because tens of thousands of CW munitions were forward deployed along frequently and rapidly shifting battlefronts.

• All but two of the chemical weapons discovered since OIF were found in southern Iraq where the majority of CW munitions were used against Iran in the Iran-Iraq war.
• As the Coalition destroys the thousands of conventional munitions at depots around the country the possibility exists that pre-1991 vintage chemical rounds could be found mixed in with conventional munitions at these locations.
  • ISG identified 43 bunkers and depots where the Coalition is in the process of destroying conventional munitions and that were suspected of being associated with the pre-1991 WMD programs.

However, ISG believes that any remaining chemical munitions in Iraq do not pose a militarily significant threat to Coalition Forces because the agent and munitions are degraded and there are not enough extant weapons to cause mass casualties.

Finally, the Silberman-Robb Commission concluded that Iraq had no chemical weapons capability and what remained were discarded pre-1991 munitions:

The Iraq Survey Group’s findings undermined both the Intelligence Community’s assessments about Iraq’s pre-war CW program and, indeed, the very fundamental assumptions upon which those assessments were based. The ISG concluded–contrary to the Intelligence Community’s pre-war assessments–that Iraq had actually unilaterally destroyed its undeclared CW stockpile in 1991 and that there were no credible indications that Baghdad resumed production of CW thereafter. Iraq had not regained its pre-1991 CW technical sophistication or production capabilities prior to the war. Further, pre-war concerns of Iraqi plans to use CW if Coalition forces crossed certain defensive "red lines" were groundless; the "red lines" referred to conventional military planning only. Finally, the only CW the Iraq Survey Group recovered were weapons manufactured before the first Gulf War; the ISG concluded that, after 1991, Iraq maintained only small, covert labs to research chemicals and poisons, primarily for intelligence operations.

…

Overall, although the vast majority of CW munitions had been destroyed, the Iraq Survey Group recognized that questions remained relating to the disposition of hundreds of pre-1991 CW munitions. Still, given that, of the dozens of CW munitions that the ISG discovered, all had been manufactured before 1991, the Intelligence Community’s 2002 assessments that Iraq had restarted its CW program turned out to have been seriously off the mark.

Senator Santorum, it seems, failed to read either the ISG reports or the Silberman-Robb Commission reports. If he had, he would have realized that the "chemical weapons" he is touting are old, ineffective munitions manufactured before 1991 that had been discarded or partially destroyed. Furthermore, these munitions pose no proliferation threat. It should however surprise no one that the Senator would leap to such conclusions. This is exactly the mentality that got us into the Iraq war in the first place. Senator Santorum and the Bush Administration claimed that Iraq had WMD and used any scrap of intelligence to try to justify the case for war. It appears that Senator Santorum has not yet learned the lessons of the Iraq war - that fixing the intelligence around the policy is a dangerous path to follow.
We as a country are being ill served by such ignorant behavior from our Senators and our Congressmen. The only question really is whether Senator Santorum is willfully misleading the public or whether he really is this stupid.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rotorhead

Those of us in the military are always going to get a bit touchy about these things. We know of the problems, the shortages of equipment, proper training, etc. We live it and do our best to work around it. This isn't new, in Bosnia (five million unacounted for mines) during the Clinton administration we had sand bags in the floor of our HUMVEES. I had to sign a waiver to fly acknowledging the fact that my engines where prone to failure, but we can't afford to fix them. If we had everthing we want in the miitary our peacetime budget would be astronomical.
I guess what I'm saying is give AKpoque and the rest of us a break if we defend an unpopular side on this. Nobody likes to hear how fucked up somthing you've dedicated your life to. Believe me I could tell you about many more issues than the Up armored Hummers.
The administration is at fault for much of this, but alot of the stuff we don't have now was brought up long before he was in office. Armored vehicles started coming up in 96.

---

Irony is ND's post was all about safety for the troops and supporting the troops. I have no time for the STFU your opinion isn't as important as mine mindset. There was a lot of that crap going on before this war started and it's even lamer to hear going on now. It has nothing to do with being unamerican or antiamerican as Shrubster's pre war refrain often went. It has to do with what's best for all countries involved and potentially involved.

Nothing says the terrorists won't keep it up and keep coming. Point is the bullshit of this war and the lies that justified it just turned millions more muslim's against the States and it's allies. A great many it pushed beyond anger to brutal action who might otherwise have stood by neutral at least. Instead of war with a nation of 45 million(?) it threatens to be a war against all muslims numbering around 1 billion I believe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Free Range Lobster

Oh right, only muslims are terrorists.
My bad.

---

Only 99.998% of the time.

You're not bad, just stupid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jer

Only 99.998% of the time.

You're not bad, just stupid.

---

No, There have been many non-Muslim terrorists. It's just that at present they are the primary organized group using such tactics.

FWIW: While I am generally liberal, I happen to believe that a unilateral pullout leaving the Iraqi government without outside support before it can effectively govern its land would be almost as irresponsible as our having gone into Iraq in the first place.

There is nothng new here. In Vietnam, Huey drivers were dying because the seat pans were not armor plated. No matter how loud they screamed, nothing was done. Go find a copy of a book "Chickenhawk" for an eye opening read.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PNWbrit

The Pentagon, White House and CIA didn't think those rusty old shells counted as WMDs :confused:

I doubt even Santorum quotes himself nowadays.

---

hehehe!

Gore doesn't quote himself much these days either.:D

"Al Gore blasts George H.W. Bush for disregarding Iraq's ties to terrorism and ignoring Iraq's attempts to acquire weapons of mass destruction. (1992)"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9JE48...elated&search=

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AKPogue

I think it would be big mistake. Not too many people here are going to agree with me but it took around 10 years for the Vietnamese Army and government to get on there feet. By the time they got on their feet we pulled out all the funding for the Vietnamese Military and they crumbled because they had no ammo or spare parts.

---

Oh boy. Yup, that was a formidable force that just...needed... a....little more....ahem....funding. I'll bet that 75% of previous funding wound up in all sorts of places that had nothing to do with fighting. Or Vietnam, for that matter. Meanwhile, the Cong and the fighters from the North showed the world how to beat the richest country in the world that had B 52's raining hell on their cities and million dollar jet fighters spraying napalm on their villages. While wearing pajamas and eating rice.

Please. Just sit back and watch history repeat itself. Don't worry, if you miss it now, just wait a decade or two.

The article is fundamentally flawed because if the Pentagon really got serious and replaced all Humvees on a one-for-one basis, the next thing heard would be all the crying about all the fraud and waste and abuse going on in the DoD and how they're in bed with the defense industry replacing vehicles that are perfectly functional and how the MRAP is a cold-war leftover and is massively overkill and this is such a boondoggle...

yeah, that'd be pretty much an exact quote.

On the flip side, we could do more to produce the MRAPs. The factory that produces them is cranking them out at capacity; what needs to be done is more license production of a product (like was done in WWII) by other contractors, and to massively activate all of the Reserves and Guard in heavy airlift and get the vehicles over there ASAP, instead of de-mobilizing the units that are available (like mine) because money's getting tight thanks to the Iraq funding bill squabbles. To the DoD's credit they are flying the vehicles over as they can, instead of letting them collect at depots to go out in big, efficient shipments by boat; problem is they weigh so damned much we can only carry 2 or 3 at a time (they're in excess of 35,000 lbs apiece).

The military's been doing far more with far less, at their own peril, for a long time now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by natty dread

NYT:
June 14, 2007
Editorial
A Failure to Protect Our Troops
The Bush administration and military leaders in Washington are always claiming that they will do anything to support American troops fighting in Iraq. That makes it all the more infuriating to learn that, for more than two years, the Pentagon largely ignored urgent requests from field commanders for better armor-protected vehicles that could have saved untold lives and limbs.

Improvised explosive devices, or I.E.D.’s, can blast through the flat underbelly of the military’s standard Humvees, maiming and killing the soldiers within. These devices, a low-tech response to America’s overwhelming military power, are now causing 70 percent to 80 percent of the American combat deaths in Iraq.

More than two years ago, according to newly disclosed documents, Marine commanders in Al Anbar Province, a center of the Sunni insurgency, submitted an urgent request for more than 1,100 Mine Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicles, or MRAPs, that have V-shaped bottoms able to deflect blasts from below. For reasons yet to be satisfactorily explained, military officials initially sat on the request and then ordered relatively few.

Some, second-guessing the judgment of the battlefield commanders, apparently felt that Humvees with upgraded armor could do the job. Others may have been reluctant to invest billions of dollars in vehicles that might have little use after Iraq. Turf battles were probably also a factor, as a large-scale purchase might threaten future weapons programs. But Iraq is the war that Americans are fighting and dying in today.

Only now are Pentagon leaders, prodded by Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr. and other critics on Capitol Hill, rushing to ramp up production. Congress has accelerated funding to buy more than 7,000 of the vehicles by early next year, and the military services are seeking some 21,000 in all, at a cost that could exceed $20 billion. Defense Secretary Robert Gates has declared his determination to “produce as many of these vehicles and get them into the field as fast as possible,” though the precise number needed has yet to be established.

Unfortunately, the MRAPs will remain vulnerable to the deadliest I.E.D.’s, known as “explosively formed penetrators,” which destroy vehicles from the side. The military is looking for ways to add armor to the MRAPs and is testing another new vehicle to counter that threat.

If the small companies that make these vehicles are not able to produce the quantities needed quickly, President Bush and Secretary Gates ought to make this a crash program and enlist major manufacturers.

There can be no excuse for failing to provide the best possible protection for American troops in this disastrous war.

---

if you understood military procurement you would understand why MRAPs are not all over the place.

First there are the tactical considerations. Is the "MRAP" the best solution to the problem. Sure some people think so but there is another body of folks (at least as big) that think that fast and maneuverable is better then slow and heavily armored. Further most of the MRAP designs are so big that they are not really useful in an urban environment. Ever wonder why we don't have Bradley or M1 platoons patrolling the streets in Baghdad? After all both of those are safer than Humvees.

Second, assuming that the MRAP solution is determined to be the best one, than you have to face the political hurdles. Yes front line commanders requested MRAPS... but do you know why? It wasn't in their initial budget request. However when congress received that initial request a few eager beaver congressman (probably from States who have contractors that want to produce MRAPS) started screaming and yelling that there were no MRAPS in the budget request. Magically MRAPS were there in the next iteration of the budget. Of course then congress has to approve that budget which means that there will be a lot of finagling and jockeying going on to tailor the budget to most benefit this or that congressman's district.

Third there is the contractor selection process. The government has to draw us a set of requirements as to what a "MRAP" should consist of. Some existing models will meet those requirements and some will not. The requirements by law are then put out in an RFP (request for proposal) and all the various contractors put together proposals on how to meet those requirements and what the cost will be. Then the government has to decide which contractor best meets the requirements in the most cost effective manner. Note it is NOT always the lowest bidder that gets the contract.

Fourth, there are the technical aspects. Even after the contractor has won the bid there is often months or years of technical work done before the first wrench is turned on a new weapons system, even after the wrenches are turning adjustments will be made, deadlines not met, and costs will go up.

A short review of the MRAP along with some of it's shortcomings at integrating into the Army deployment capability:

Also apparent from the picture is that MRAP is not very expeditionary (i.e., interfaces readily with existing air, land, and sea transport systems). It cannot be externally transported by helicopter. It doesn't fit very well into amphibious ship use (especially considering it is a replacement for the HMMWV). And, IIRC, it doesn't transport well in C-130's either.

There are actually 9 different manufacturers competing MRAP designs in the two vehicle classes for a place in the production run. Not all of the designs are equally good. That's why there is accelerated testing going on at Aberdeen and elsewhere to sort out which designs will be produced. The testing is necessary. A vehicle design with excellent armor protection but poor automotive design can't be relied on to go on patrol and/or complete them. MRAPs dead in the motor pool do no one any good.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jer

Only 99.998% of the time.

You're not bad, just stupid.

---

99.998% of the time?
I suppose 99.998% of the time you think you're funny huh?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bandogge

if
A short review of the MRAP along with some of it's shortcomings at integrating into the Army deployment capability:

Also apparent from the picture is that MRAP is not very expeditionary (i.e., interfaces readily with existing air, land, and sea transport systems). It cannot be externally transported by helicopter. It doesn't fit very well into amphibious ship use (especially considering it is a replacement for the HMMWV). And, IIRC, it doesn't transport well in C-130's either.

There are actually 9 different manufacturers competing MRAP designs in the two vehicle classes for a place in the production run. Not all of the designs are equally good. That's why there is accelerated testing going on at Aberdeen and elsewhere to sort out which designs will be produced. The testing is necessary. A vehicle design with excellent armor protection but poor automotive design can't be relied on to go on patrol and/or complete them. MRAPs dead in the motor pool do no one any good.

---

Hmmmm. You mean the New York Times didn't print the whole story??

WTF is going on !!!!

To those maggots that served, thank you for you service.

To those who suck up every drop of NYT slanted anti-bush drivel,
SHUT THE FUCK UP YOU FUCKING MORONS.

Don't you realize you are just as bad as the pro-Bush knee jerk conservatives? Try to think independently for once.
Try to consider the points being made by the few who actually had the balls to step up and forego skiing every day (or even every weekend) and risk their life and limbs (literally) for something they believe in, namely THIS COUNTRY and the threats it is under.
Yes Bush is an idiot.
Yes the war is/was overhyped and everyone fell for it.
Yes Bush will be out of office soon (thank the Lord).
Yes we are actually under attach from Muslim fundamentalists and that threat goes back twenty or more years.

Yes, Iraq was prolly a mistake, but what are you going to do now?
Al Gore was for it.
Hillarity was for it.
I can do no wrong Colin Powell was for it.
We all got snookered.

SHUT THE FUCK UP YOU FUCKING KOOKAID DRINKING ANTI-BUSH FUCKTARDS!
your story is getting old.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Core Shot

Yes the war is/was overhyped and everyone fell for it.

SHUT THE FUCK UP YOU FUCKING KOOKAID DRINKING ANTI-BUSH FUCKTARDS!
your story is getting old.

---

Not everyone fell for it. The problem is those who fell for it yelled shit like this so loud to drown out those that didn't fall for it and many others hopped on to 'feel american'. So shouting at those still against it with all the damning evidence now is just worse behaviour and setting up to do something even stupider next time. Admit and learn from your mistakes don't scream how you couldn't help it and everyone else made you do it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Free Range Lobster

99.998% of the time?
I suppose 99.998% of the time you think you're funny huh?

---

No, but I do think you're gay 99.998% of the time.

Sorry for the reality, skiddouche.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AKPogue

Al Qaeda started all this....

---

I'm going to have to throw out a "LOL" for the first time in years. Thanks.

But seriously, Godspeed to you and all of our soldiers. I'm glad I'm not over there no matter what the agenda or who's doing what. Cheers.

Definition:
Santorum

Pronunciation: san-TOR-um
Function: noun
Etymology: Savage Love - 05/29/03
1. The frothy mix of lube and fecal matter that is sometimes the byproduct of anal sex.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Core Shot

Yes, Iraq was prolly a mistake

---

Prolly? :rolleyes:

Have a drink and relax coreshot. Or don't, your "shut the fuck up" hysterical rant is pretty amusing.

I support and honor our troops who risk life and limb. I wish the shrub administration would do the same, with deeds rather than empty words and slogans.

and let them fight. the rules of engagement in an arab shithole should be "if it moves. kill it"

I tell you one thing - our troops, no matter if they agree or disagree with what is going on, protected or not protected, they do their jobs no questions asked. Absolutely god damned right they do.

I still can't believe how many liberal media brainwashed fucktards this site contains.

Seriously, how did you people survive being so stupid for so long?

Al-qaida attacks happen in Iraq about every week, and still you douchebag dumbfucks still don't get it.

Remember 9-11? We're fighting those fuckers over there...get it?

Yeah, Bush lied to you for your own good. While you were busy calling him dumb, he was attacking the people that attacked us. Instead of you people getting a clue, you bit the hand that feeds (and protects) you.

It's unreal how incredibly dumb a lot of you dolts are.
I swear you carry your political douchebaggery simply cause it seems to be the "hip" thing to do.

Like Coreshot said, think independently...and I'll add, read between the lines. Fucking idiots.

How about you stand up for the country you live in instead of constantly trying to bring it down? The only thing worse than our enemies are you. You're like a cancer that turns on itself and kills what spawned you. Fucking morons. Get fuct. bye

Hurricane,

Remember that Al-Qaeda was not present in Iraq until after we invaded...previously the only terrorist group in Iraq was Ansar-al-Islam, although Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi was hanging out in Iraq from time to time (although I don't believe he'd lived up to his full potential yet at that point).

However, once we invaded Iraq that provided plenty of vitriol for Arabs, and it became convenient for every possible jihadist out there to take their fight to the Americans in probably the best public arsenal possible - just like Tito's Yugoslavia, there were weapons caches throughout the country so fighting the Americans for whatever reason was really easy to do. Thus, enter the Al-quaeda yahoos that can't fight us in Afghanistan/Pakistan for whatever reason...

btw much respect goes out to experience/views of rotorhead and ak_pogue, they've spent far more time on the ground in Iraq than I have.

bump. for some reason the post didn't bump...