• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Rumsfeld lies to troups ***Update: Army Rushes to Harden Vehicles***

Miramonti

Lifer
story

"We've been telling the Pentagon for months that we have the capacity to double our production," said former U.S. Rep. Matt Salmon, a consultant for ArmorWorks of Tempe.

Rumsfeld's comments:

"It's essentially a matter of physics," he said. "It isn't a matter of money. It isn't a matter on the part of the Army of desire. It's a matter of production and capability of doing it."


I find this very disturbing. :frown:



UPDATE:

Army Rushes to Harden Iraq-Bound Vehicles.

Accountability is a powerful thing, and hopefully Rumsfeld will be held accountable more often.
 
Wow, that's even worse than the "80% " I heard on the radio this morning.


Dumbsfeld indeed. And yes, it's very disturbing. Were it that our leaders cared as much about our soldiers as they do about little clumps of stem cells.
 
gee, Rummy lying or speaking about things of which he has little knowledge.....actually, I'm more surprised it didn't come from Paul ( 400 dead?) Wolfie....

either way, his answers to the soldiers show you his true capacity for BS and being a major A-hole.....get rid of him now
 
Hopefully this revelation of confusion or mismanagement will only produce benefits. It's good to see that armor supply operations are being scrutinized.
 
Hopefully this revelation of confusion or mismanagement will only produce benefits. It's good to see that armor supply operations are being scrutinized.

So what about dealing with those that have proven themselves inept? I see no benefit in allowing them to keep thier jobs.
 
Eric Ruff, a Defense Department spokesman, said all but about 4,000 of the 19,000 Humvees being used by the U.S. Central Command in Iraq are "up-armored or have been modified at the units level with add-on armor kits" like the ones produced by ArmorWorks.

Those that aren't armored yet are confined to use inside military compounds, according to the Pentagon.

Salmon, however, pointed out that just six weeks ago, members of an Army Reserve quartermaster company refused to go on a supply mission because they said their equipment was inadequate.
They said the equipment wasn't fast enough and the equipment they had complaints about were not up-amorable equipment. Their real complaint was that their escort, which consisted of armored humvees and other vehicles, was not available. So that's quite the red herring of the statement by Mr. Salmon, a consultant who has seen a mdeia opportunity and is seemingly doing some manipulative fishing for business for the company he represents.

I wonder how many other companies are also producing add-on armor kits right now? I bet there's more than just ArmorWorks, and it would make no sense to have one company be producing at peak while others sit around idle. Heck, why don't I google and check it out?

http://www.nationaldefensemaga...4/Aug/Humvee_Armor.htm

August 2004

Humvee Armor Suppliers Working Around the Clock

by Joe Pappalardo

The now familiar sight of Humvees struck by mines and roadside bombs in Iraq are driving the industry to pursue short-term fixes and long-range changes in the way they produce vehicles.

The attacks prompted a frantic effort to send armor kits to Iraq and purchase up-armored versions of the Humvees, which were not designed for frontline combat. They were introduced in the 1980s as a replacement for Jeeps.

In April 2004, Maj. Gen. John Sattler, Director of Operations for CENTCOM, said that their initial request for up-armored Humvees hovered at 1,000 vehicles. ?As the enemy changed his tactics and techniques, we upped that number where we have now in theater about 2,500 up-armored Humvees,? he said during a press conference. ?There are additional up-armored Humvees on contract that will flow in, approximately another 2,000 that will flow in between now and in December. So at that point, we?ll have approximately 4,500.?

He added that commanders on the ground asked for more help, quicker, so the production rate has increased. In addition, the Pentagon purchased and installed 8,000 up-armored kits to protect windshields and doors.

?It?s not a matter of resources, it?s a matter of how fast can we build these things and get them over here,? Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the joint chiefs, said during a May visit to Iraq.

The Army?s sole contractor for putting the armor plating on the standard Humvee chassis, Armor Holdings Inc., established a new group to respond to military requests.

In May, Armor Holdings received a $16.6 million contract to supply additional up-armored Humvees through 2004 and into 2005. The company will increase its vehicle production rates to 350 units per month. The award also includes up-armored Humvees for the United States Air Force for delivery in early 2005.

Another firm, ArmorWorks LLC, is also producing add-on armor kits for Humvees. In 2003, the company sent two engineers on a pilot program to Iraq to train soldiers on how to install armor kits.

In February one of the trucks with the ArmorWorks kit was struck by a roadside bomb, blasting the driver?s side. The Kevlar plates stopped the shrapnel, according to information released by the company, although one soldier went deaf in one ear. That sort of battle testing has increased confidence of commanders and soldiers alike in the up-armored kits, the company said.

ArmorWorks additionally is pursuing energy absorbing technology that can mitigate blast effects from bombs, mines and artillery. These systems are being designed for the U.S. Army Stryker light armored troop carrier and the Marine Corps? new Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle.

The Army, meanwhile, is producing new crew protection kits that augment medium and heavy vehicle seats with ceramic armor plates. The system, designed by Army engineers, is called vehicle class body armor support systems (V-BASS). Mounted on the truck seat, the V-BASS wraps passengers in body armor, but the 60 pounds of weight rest on the seat instead of the soldier. The $1,800 kit already is being used in combat. More than 110 V-BASS systems were shipped to Balad, Iraq, in December 2003 for field evaluation. No further production is expected, according to manufacturer STS International Inc., although the company said it is ready to produce them on a wide scale if asked.

Add-on kits may help save lives in the short term, but more needs to be done in the future to make armor and vehicle designs that are compatible, said industry experts.

Researchers and engineers from armor companies and vehicle manufacturers increasingly are collaborating, said Lori Wagner, manager of Honeywell?s advanced fibers and composites technology division.

?We?re working directly with vehicle manufacturers so that our armoring capabilities will be in concert with the skin and frames of the vehicle,? she said.

?Most armor systems are either add-ons or supplements,? Wagner said. ?We?re looking at being able to incorporate the two in order to mold the two together into one system.?

By fusing armor, skin and frame during production, the weight and toughness requirements could be achieved, she said. Although this level of integration is a future goal, the current collaboration with vehicle engineers and scientists has aided armor suppliers seeking to meet the needs of specific vehicles.

?Beyond that we are looking at how to we?re advancing the fiber itself,? Wagner said. Researchers are reconfiguring the fiber alignment and developing new resins to enhance the energy absorption and pliability of the armor. Honeywell?s Spectra Shield is currently being evaluated for several different applications including the Expeditionary Force Vehicle, Stryker vehicle, Humvees and other trucks.

To protect against rocket-propelled grenades, researchers at Battelle are investigating electromagnetic armor.

Hmm:

?It?s not a matter of resources, it?s a matter of how fast can we build these things and get them over here,? Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the joint chiefs, said during a May visit to Iraq.


Well damn! Wonder where Rummy got his statement from?
 
Originally posted by: kage69
Hopefully this revelation of confusion or mismanagement will only produce benefits. It's good to see that armor supply operations are being scrutinized.

So what about dealing with those that have proven themselves inept? I see no benefit in allowing them to keep thier jobs.

Rumsfeld said he spoke with a general at the Pentagon before traveling to Kuwait and was told the military was doing its best to provide troops the resources they need.

"It's essentially a matter of physics," he said. "It isn't a matter of money. It isn't a matter on the part of the Army of desire. It's a matter of production and capability of doing it."

Is it Rumsfeld or the general who has matters wrong? I don't know how much direct knowledge Rumsfeld has of the armor supply.
 
I don't know how much direct knowledge Rumsfeld has of the armor supply.

I would expect the Secretary of Defense to know things like that, especially one so hellbent on invading other countries. I guess my expectations are too high.
 
Originally posted by: kage69
I don't know how much direct knowledge Rumsfeld has of the armor supply.

I would expect the Secretary of Defense to know things like that, especially one so hellbent on invading other countries. I guess my expectations are too high.

I concur. I'd also like to add that being so blatently ill-prepared for this scenario is enough for Rumsfeld to be asked for his resignation.

BTW, on a side note. It doesn't matter if a journalist asked the soldier to ask the question. That doesn't matter, the soldier didn't have to, PLUS considering the response the question received, it was probably the most valid question any soldier could have asked.
 
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Eric Ruff, a Defense Department spokesman, said all but about 4,000 of the 19,000 Humvees being used by the U.S. Central Command in Iraq are "up-armored or have been modified at the units level with add-on armor kits" like the ones produced by ArmorWorks.

Those that aren't armored yet are confined to use inside military compounds, according to the Pentagon.

Salmon, however, pointed out that just six weeks ago, members of an Army Reserve quartermaster company refused to go on a supply mission because they said their equipment was inadequate.
They said the equipment wasn't fast enough and the equipment they had complaints about were not up-amorable equipment. Their real complaint was that their escort, which consisted of armored humvees and other vehicles, was not available. So that's quite the red herring of the statement by Mr. Salmon, a consultant who has seen a mdeia opportunity and is seemingly doing some manipulative fishing for business for the company he represents.

I wonder how many other companies are also producing add-on armor kits right now? I bet there's more than just ArmorWorks, and it would make no sense to have one company be producing at peak while others sit around idle. Heck, why don't I google and check it out?

http://www.nationaldefensemaga...4/Aug/Humvee_Armor.htm

August 2004

Humvee Armor Suppliers Working Around the Clock

by Joe Pappalardo

The now familiar sight of Humvees struck by mines and roadside bombs in Iraq are driving the industry to pursue short-term fixes and long-range changes in the way they produce vehicles.

The attacks prompted a frantic effort to send armor kits to Iraq and purchase up-armored versions of the Humvees, which were not designed for frontline combat. They were introduced in the 1980s as a replacement for Jeeps.

In April 2004, Maj. Gen. John Sattler, Director of Operations for CENTCOM, said that their initial request for up-armored Humvees hovered at 1,000 vehicles. ?As the enemy changed his tactics and techniques, we upped that number where we have now in theater about 2,500 up-armored Humvees,? he said during a press conference. ?There are additional up-armored Humvees on contract that will flow in, approximately another 2,000 that will flow in between now and in December. So at that point, we?ll have approximately 4,500.?

He added that commanders on the ground asked for more help, quicker, so the production rate has increased. In addition, the Pentagon purchased and installed 8,000 up-armored kits to protect windshields and doors.

?It?s not a matter of resources, it?s a matter of how fast can we build these things and get them over here,? Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the joint chiefs, said during a May visit to Iraq.

The Army?s sole contractor for putting the armor plating on the standard Humvee chassis, Armor Holdings Inc., established a new group to respond to military requests.

In May, Armor Holdings received a $16.6 million contract to supply additional up-armored Humvees through 2004 and into 2005. The company will increase its vehicle production rates to 350 units per month. The award also includes up-armored Humvees for the United States Air Force for delivery in early 2005.

Another firm, ArmorWorks LLC, is also producing add-on armor kits for Humvees. In 2003, the company sent two engineers on a pilot program to Iraq to train soldiers on how to install armor kits.

In February one of the trucks with the ArmorWorks kit was struck by a roadside bomb, blasting the driver?s side. The Kevlar plates stopped the shrapnel, according to information released by the company, although one soldier went deaf in one ear. That sort of battle testing has increased confidence of commanders and soldiers alike in the up-armored kits, the company said.

ArmorWorks additionally is pursuing energy absorbing technology that can mitigate blast effects from bombs, mines and artillery. These systems are being designed for the U.S. Army Stryker light armored troop carrier and the Marine Corps? new Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle.

The Army, meanwhile, is producing new crew protection kits that augment medium and heavy vehicle seats with ceramic armor plates. The system, designed by Army engineers, is called vehicle class body armor support systems (V-BASS). Mounted on the truck seat, the V-BASS wraps passengers in body armor, but the 60 pounds of weight rest on the seat instead of the soldier. The $1,800 kit already is being used in combat. More than 110 V-BASS systems were shipped to Balad, Iraq, in December 2003 for field evaluation. No further production is expected, according to manufacturer STS International Inc., although the company said it is ready to produce them on a wide scale if asked.

Add-on kits may help save lives in the short term, but more needs to be done in the future to make armor and vehicle designs that are compatible, said industry experts.

Researchers and engineers from armor companies and vehicle manufacturers increasingly are collaborating, said Lori Wagner, manager of Honeywell?s advanced fibers and composites technology division.

?We?re working directly with vehicle manufacturers so that our armoring capabilities will be in concert with the skin and frames of the vehicle,? she said.

?Most armor systems are either add-ons or supplements,? Wagner said. ?We?re looking at being able to incorporate the two in order to mold the two together into one system.?

By fusing armor, skin and frame during production, the weight and toughness requirements could be achieved, she said. Although this level of integration is a future goal, the current collaboration with vehicle engineers and scientists has aided armor suppliers seeking to meet the needs of specific vehicles.

?Beyond that we are looking at how to we?re advancing the fiber itself,? Wagner said. Researchers are reconfiguring the fiber alignment and developing new resins to enhance the energy absorption and pliability of the armor. Honeywell?s Spectra Shield is currently being evaluated for several different applications including the Expeditionary Force Vehicle, Stryker vehicle, Humvees and other trucks.

To protect against rocket-propelled grenades, researchers at Battelle are investigating electromagnetic armor.

Hmm:

?It?s not a matter of resources, it?s a matter of how fast can we build these things and get them over here,? Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the joint chiefs, said during a May visit to Iraq.


Well damn! Wonder where Rummy got his statement from?

This is a quote about resources available in May. So there might be your answer, he makes his comments from 6 month old out of date information.
 
Originally posted by: jjsole
This is a quote about resources available in May. So there might be your answer, he makes his comments from 6 month old out of date information.
Did he? That seems mighty speculative. Isn't it possible, even likely, that Rummy asked the General recently about vehicle armor and got the same reply, which he repeated to the soldier?
 
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: jjsole
This is a quote about resources available in May. So there might be your answer, he makes his comments from 6 month old out of date information.
Did he? That seems mighty speculative. Isn't it possible, even likely, that Rummy asked the General recently about vehicle armor and got the same reply, which he repeated to the soldier?

link it.
 
Why wasn't it a big media show when the soldiers added pots and pans to their tanks in WWII to increase the armor. The shame, we sent light tanks in to do a heavy tanks job. Hmm... seems to me that there is a lack of consistancy here in the media. Back then the soldiers were hailed as being resourceful. Today they are victims of the evil Bush regime. What a joke. Like a half inch of armor is going to do much when a 150mm Howitzer shell is detonated next to it. The armor can barely stop a pistol round.

But that is also back when the left actually could stand our soldiers and was not publicly deriding them every chance they got. There was some civility towards those that sacrifice everything they have so some cry baby leftist can protest everything.
 
Originally posted by: jjsole
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: jjsole
This is a quote about resources available in May. So there might be your answer, he makes his comments from 6 month old out of date information.
Did he? That seems mighty speculative. Isn't it possible, even likely, that Rummy asked the General recently about vehicle armor and got the same reply, which he repeated to the soldier?

link it.
How about reading some of the previous posts in this thread and you will find your answer?
 
Originally posted by: irwincur
Why wasn't it a big media show when the soldiers added pots and pans to their tanks in WWII to increase the armor. The shame, we sent light tanks in to do a heavy tanks job. Hmm... seems to me that there is a lack of consistancy here in the media. Back then the soldiers were hailed as being resourceful. Today they are victims of the evil Bush regime. What a joke. Like a half inch of armor is going to do much when a 150mm Howitzer shell is detonated next to it. The armor can barely stop a pistol round.

But that is also back when the left actually could stand our soldiers and was not publicly deriding them every chance they got. There was some civility towards those that sacrifice everything they have so some cry baby leftist can protest everything.
WTF irwin, nobody's knocking our soldiers, just those who send them in harm's way without proper equipment! Jesus, get a fscking grip even if it doesn't offer you an ample opportunity to blather on .
 
But that is also back when the left actually could stand our soldiers and was not publicly deriding them every chance they got. There was some civility towards those that sacrifice everything they have so some cry baby leftist can protest everything.


You are so fvckin clueless it saddens me. Go grind your axe with "the leftists" elsewhere.
 
Originally posted by: jjsole
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: jjsole
This is a quote about resources available in May. So there might be your answer, he makes his comments from 6 month old out of date information.
Did he? That seems mighty speculative. Isn't it possible, even likely, that Rummy asked the General recently about vehicle armor and got the same reply, which he repeated to the soldier?

link it.
Here is the full transcript of the exchange in question.

[...]

Q: Yes, Mr. Secretary. My question is more logistical. We?ve had troops in Iraq for coming up on three years and we?ve always staged here out of Kuwait. Now why do we soldiers have to dig through local landfills for pieces of scrap metal and compromise ballistic glass to up-armor our vehicles and why don?t we have those resources readily available to us? [Applause]

SEC. RUMSFELD: I missed the first part of your question. And could you repeat it for me?

Q: Yes, Mr. Secretary. Our soldiers have been fighting in Iraq for coming up on three years. A lot of us are getting ready to move north relatively soon. Our vehicles are not armored. We?re digging pieces of rusted scrap metal and compromised ballistic glass that?s already been shot up, dropped, busted, picking the best out of this scrap to put on our vehicles to take into combat. We do not have proper armament vehicles to carry with us north.

SEC. RUMSFELD: I talked to the General coming out here about the pace at which the vehicles are being armored. They have been brought from all over the world, wherever they?re not needed, to a place here where they are needed. I?m told that they are being ? the Army is ? I think it?s something like 400 a month are being done. And it?s essentially a matter of physics. It isn?t a matter of money. It isn?t a matter on the part of the Army of desire. It?s a matter of production and capability of doing it.

As you know, you go to war with the Army you have. They?re not the Army you might want or wish to have at a later time. Since the Iraq conflict began, the Army has been pressing ahead to produce the armor necessary at a rate that they believe ? it?s a greatly expanded rate from what existed previously, but a rate that they believe is the rate that is all that can be accomplished at this moment.

I can assure you that General Schoomaker and the leadership in the Army and certainly General Whitcomb are sensitive to the fact that not every vehicle has the degree of armor that would be desirable for it to have, but that they?re working at it at a good clip. It?s interesting, I?ve talked a great deal about this with a team of people who?ve been working on it hard at the Pentagon. And if you think about it, you can have all the armor in the world on a tank and a tank can be blown up. And you can have an up-armored humvee and it can be blown up. And you can go down and, the vehicle, the goal we have is to have as many of those vehicles as is humanly possible with the appropriate level of armor available for the troops. And that is what the Army has been working on.

And General Whitcomb, is there anything you?d want to add to that?

GEN. WHITCOMB: Nothing. [Laughter] Mr. Secretary, I?d be happy to. That is a focus on what we do here in Kuwait and what is done up in the theater, both in Iraq and also in Afghanistan. As the secretary has said, it?s not a matter of money or desire; it is a matter of the logistics of being able to produce it. The 699th, the team that we?ve got here in Kuwait has done [Cheers] a tremendous effort to take that steel that they have and cut it, prefab it and put it on vehicles. But there is nobody from the president on down that is not aware that this is a challenge for us and this is a desire for us to accomplish.

SEC. RUMSFELD: The other day, after there was a big threat alert in Washington, D.C. in connection with the elections, as I recall, I looked outside the Pentagon and there were six or eight up-armored humvees. They?re not there anymore. [Cheers] [Applause] They?re en route out here, I can assure you. Next. Way in the back. Yes. . . . . . . .
 
SEC. RUMSFELD: I talked to the General coming out here about the pace at which the vehicles are being armored. They have been brought from all over the world, wherever they?re not needed, to a place here where they are needed. I?m told that they are being ? the Army is ? I think it?s something like 400 a month are being done. And it?s essentially a matter of physics. It isn?t a matter of money. It isn?t a matter on the part of the Army of desire. It?s a matter of production and capability of doing it.

Nowhere in your link does it say the General told him production is maximized, only that they "talked" about the pace of armoring vehicles. Those are Rumsfelds words. But you would like to be a rumsfeld apologist and blame the general instead for misinformation and not hold Rumsfeld accountable for own lies.
 
Originally posted by: jjsole
SEC. RUMSFELD: I talked to the General coming out here about the pace at which the vehicles are being armored. They have been brought from all over the world, wherever they?re not needed, to a place here where they are needed. I?m told that they are being ? the Army is ? I think it?s something like 400 a month are being done. And it?s essentially a matter of physics. It isn?t a matter of money. It isn?t a matter on the part of the Army of desire. It?s a matter of production and capability of doing it.

Nowhere in your link does it say the General told him production is maximized, only that they "talked" about the pace of armoring vehicles. Those are Rumsfelds words. But you would like to be a rumsfeld apologist and blame the general instead for misinformation and not hold Rumsfeld accountable for own lies.
Please, no insertions of words into my mouth. Nowhere in any of the related threads can one find either my apologies or even commentary on the matter.

 
http://www.signonsandiego.com/...a/archives/000980.html
Bait and Switch
The Republican Talk Radio Machine seemed caught off guard by the ferocity of the questioning he received in Kuwait City, especially the ballistic question from Spc. Thomas Wilson, a scout with a Tennessee National Guard unit, over the lack of adequate armor for guardsmen vehicles being deployed north into Iraq.

Limbaugh was mum when the story broke, and most of the rest said scarcely a word in the face of news reports that belayed their continuing assertions from their broadcast bully pulpits that all is well in Iraq but for the slanted reporting of a treacherous American liberal press. Come the next day, however, they had their talking points in line.(Question ? do Limbaugh, and Hannity, et. al, get a fax each morning telling them what to say? An email? Or is it coincidence that they always are in lock step with the message of the day?)

Seems Spc. Wilson had been ?coached? on his question by an embedded reporter from Chattanooga. Ipso facto, Limbaugh and crew declare, the question is null and void ? the tainted fruit of the tree of the treacherous liberal media, the evil serpent in the garden of conservative paradise. Therefore the question can be disregarded, as can Rumsfeld?s stumbling response. Poor Donny was ambushed, you see, by an unfair question. Set up. A sitting duck, like an armorless Humvee sent down the Baghdad airport road. Blame it on the press.

Horse feathers.


Such mindless chatter is simply another example of the bait and switch approach so often used by the nattering nabobs of talk radio to distract people from the real issue at hand. They throw out partisanly charged statements like: ?John Kerry was a coward in Vietnam? to justify the non-sequitur conclusion ?therefore his pointing out the absence of WMD?s in Iraq doesn?t matter!?

It doesn?t matter if the question concerning lack of adequate armor had been written on a hairball hocked up by a cat at Rumfeld?s feet. What matters is the validity of the claim that such armor protection is lacking and the quality of Rumsfeld?s response.

The loud ?Hurah? by the other 2500 soldiers present at the meeting destroys the claim that the question was bogus because it was tainted by contact with a reporter. Unless someone wants to claim the reporter ?coached? the entire audience, that ?Hurah? was the sound of soldiers genuinely affirming their feeling that their high command has left them to march naked into combat.

A number of comments to my column yesterday took me to task for comparing the fiasco in Somalia, that resulted in Clinton?s defense secretary Les Aspin?s resignation, to the armor fiasco in Iraq. Most of these argued that a) Somalia involved tanks and this involves mostly transport vehicles, hence apples and oranges; and b) Aspin had been asked to send in the tanks and refused the request while Rumsfeld has provided the troops with everything they have requested to date.

To the first claim of apples and oranges I say Bananas! Be it tanks, insufficiently armored Humvees or holey long johns?we?re still talking about troops not being supplied with what they needed to be supplied with. And claims that you always go to war with the army you have are disingenuous. It was Rumsfeld?s job to anticipate what the soldiers in the field should have had. Moreover, he?s had two and a half years of military operations to get things right. That he hasn?t is to his discredit, and he should be held accountable.

As for claims the troops are receiving everything they?ve asked for, double bananas. From before the war started, this Administration has shown it does not want to hear things from the military that don?t support the Administrations political storyline about the ?cakewalk of Iraq.? It was widely reported and substantiated prior to the start of the war that senior officers in the Pentagon felt the Secretary of Defense was dismissive of their arguments they needed more troops and proper equipment for the invasion and a lot more force allocated to the occupation. The forced resignation of Army Secretary Thomas White in 2003 for questioning the post-war occupation plan, or lack thereof, sent a further chilling message to the Military about the perils of reality-baiting. You don?t get told what you tell people not to tell you. And the Administration has made it painfully obvious what they don?t want to be told.

Bottom line, Rumsfeld should have known better. And that he and his handlers didn?t anticipate such hostile questioning from the troops is yet another sign of just how out of the reality loop on Iraq the Secretary appears to be. If you don?t sack a Secretary of Defense for this, what do you sack him for?

Support the troops. Dump Donny.

Seems the right-wing talking heads were a bit flustered and had to wait a day for the head talking point in the White House to get the word to his "troops".
 
It's refreshing to see the troops asking the questions you KNOW they want to ask regardless of who inspired them to ask them. The truly embarassing part is that Rumsfeld had NO answers. Nothing but doubletalk and horsecrap as usual. It's a wonder our military even found Iraq on a map with this kind of ineptitude @ the Defense Dep't...
 
Originally posted by: jjsole
SEC. RUMSFELD: I talked to the General coming out here about the pace at which the vehicles are being armored. They have been brought from all over the world, wherever they?re not needed, to a place here where they are needed. I?m told that they are being ? the Army is ? I think it?s something like 400 a month are being done. And it?s essentially a matter of physics. It isn?t a matter of money. It isn?t a matter on the part of the Army of desire. It?s a matter of production and capability of doing it.

Nowhere in your link does it say the General told him production is maximized, only that they "talked" about the pace of armoring vehicles. Those are Rumsfelds words. But you would like to be a rumsfeld apologist and blame the general instead for misinformation and not hold Rumsfeld accountable for own lies.
Strawman.

What good does maximizing production do? It creates an available overstock sitting in a fbcking warehouse waiting for it to be installed. And the majority of vehicles have alreay been either replaced or retro-fitted anyway while more are being fitted every day as fast a those with the know-how and training to do so can do it. Then there's the loistics of bringing in vehicles for retrofitting and maintaining and adequate number in the field where they are needed.

So please, put down the straw and quit whining about pople being "apologists" while you're standing on your soapbox as a self-appointed judge, jury, and executioner.
 
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
It's refreshing to see the troops asking the questions you KNOW they want to ask regardless of who inspired them to ask them. The truly embarassing part is that Rumsfeld had NO answers. Nothing but doubletalk and horsecrap as usual. It's a wonder our military even found Iraq on a map with this kind of ineptitude @ the Defense Dep't...
I'm just flabbergasted that you guys keep harping on this when tons of progress has already been made already armoring these vehicles. Instead you jibber-jabber as if absolutely nothing is being done.

It quite a vivid demonstration of the fantasy world and ignorance of fact some of the left live in.
 
What good does maximizing production do? It creates an available overstock sitting in a fbcking warehouse waiting for it to be installed. And the majority of vehicles have alreay been either replaced or retro-fitted anyway while more are being fitted every day as fast a those with the know-how and training to do so can do it. Then there's the loistics of bringing in vehicles for retrofitting and maintaining and adequate number in the field where they are needed.

You're making it up as you go along. You're trying to imply the bottleneck is not in supply and even if they had more they wouldn't be able to put it on any faster. Well, since armor isn't currently stockpiled in warehouses, they haven't had a problem putting it on, have they?

I'm just flabbergasted that you guys keep harping on this when tons of progress has already been made already armoring these vehicles. Instead you jibber-jabber as if absolutely nothing is being done.

Ignoring the cheers from the roomful of solders attending the Rumsfeld gathering when the question about armor was posed to him may be convenient for you, but it speaks volumes about what our troups are experiencing. To be honest, I would rank the sentiments from the soldiers in the field a bit higher than your assessments.
 
Back
Top