Posted on 12/09/2004 9:22:17 AM PST by Nascardude
Edited on 12/09/2004 10:05:10 AM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
Looks to me like the GOP ssupported PNTP
"Is any one to blame for that?"
You may be shocked at my answer to this but I lay the blame squarely at the feet of Rummy.
Gen. Shensecki said very truthfully what it would take to maintain the peace in Iraq and he was poo poohed by Rummy and Co.
Before 9/11 Rummy wanted to do away with another 2 aArmy Divisions.
It drives me nuts that Rummy is running the Pentagon in the spirit of McNamara.
Now that being said...I STILL would not have asked that kind of "gotcha" question to the SecDef. It goes back to "respecting the rank not the person". kind of thing.
As was pointed out earlier.,..that soldier...an NCO to boot...should have asked that question in a way that didn't make it painfully obvious to everyone taht he had a political agenda to what he was doing.
Are you saying President Bush is not clever? Do think he's not smart? He's a Harvard MBA and ran circles around John Kerry in the campaign. Of course he's clever. He also does not exist in a politial vacuum. He answered the question just as Rumsfeld did -- by saying that we are doing our best to get the best equipmnet to the troops as fast as we can. There's nothing wrong with the question per se -- just the way, manner, and circumstance in which it was asked. See 944.
If those soldiers are actually going through trash heaps as is claimed...they are doing it outside the knowlege of their chain of command and outside the prescribed regulations set forth by DoD for in country modifications to the Hummers.
What these guys don't realize is that buy rigging their Hummers w/ "Hillbilly Armor" if they get blown up...the investigators will fault the operators of that vehicle for improper protective modifications. There's a right way and a wrong way to add protection of your own making to your vehicle...these guys were clearly doing it the WRONG way.
I was just pointing out that his editor seemed to be fine with Mr. Pitt's actions.
This lack of equipment is unconcionable. What's more, it is terrible for morale to have a two-tier fighting force: one being the regular Army,preferred,privileged, and well-equipped; and the other being Guard and Reserve--who get the junk and the leftovers.
Are the lives of our Reserves and Guardsmen less valuable than those of the regular military? My state of Pennsylvania has a huge contingent of Guardsmen and Reserves in Iraq. Once a month,in our town, we see families (some young wives with two or three toddlers), saying goodbye as their men are getting on the bus to be taken to the airport and flown over to Iraq. These families deserve to know that their loved ones are not being thrown out front as target practice for the insurgents. BTW, 48% of our forces in Iraq are now Guard and Reserves.
The final vote -- 237 to 197 -- was bolstered by strong Republican support for the bill. 218 votes were needed for passage.
Rep. Bill Archer, R-Texas, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, called the PNTR bill "the most important vote that we cast in our congressional careers."
President Clinton, who made PNTR the major initiative of his final year in the White House, lobbied House Democrats for votes.
But most (House Democrats) opposed the legislation, noting human rights abuses and lack of labor laws in China. Minority Leader Richard Gephardt (Mo.) announced his opposition last month.
"When we stand up, things get better for human rights in China. When we stand down, things get worse," Gephardt told the House.
Supporters said the bill would open China's vast markets to U.S. companies and help promote democratic change by exporting American values. With 1.25 billion people, China is the world's most populous nation and has one of the fastest growing economies.
Opponents -- including the religious right and a coalition of environmental, human rights and veterans organizations in addition to labor -- asserted PNTR would reward a brutal regime and make it easier for U.S. manufacturers to move factories to China and exploit low-wage workers.
Maj. Gen. Gus L. Hargett, Adjutant General of Tennessee
Statement on questions by 278th Soldier to Secretary Rumsfeld
I am surprised by General Speer’s statement that he was not aware of the soldiers using scrap medal and used ballistic glass to up-armor the vehicles. I know that members of his staff were aware and assisted the 278th in obtaining these materials. Our own 230th Area Support Group from Dyersburg, now stationed in Kuwait also assisted in this effort.
Cuter. You'll paraphrase ME:
Exactly what is the opposite of free trade you keep spamming about? The opposite of "free" is "slave"...so you think we need the slave trade to fix our problems?
Before you go into a lengthy explanation...don't bother.
There's a finite amount of capital in a closed system. Example : China. The peasants were revolting due to chronic poverty and death and disease, and when a whole lot of Chinese peasants revolt, the regime is gone, done, defunct, kaput, etc.
Lucky for the Red Chinese, they had Bill Clinton to open up their formerly closed system for them AND to sign Permanent Normalized Trade Relations, thus stopping any subesquent administrations from correcting the egregeous wrong he (Clinton) did to the American people via our economy.
Oh and Bill also opened the Pantagon to Chinese "press" members and invited Chinese agents to learn all the logiastics and tactics of our military in a one sided "exchange" program.
The bush admin is vastly better, night and day, but the Bush admin is not perfect and makes mistakes, everyone does. 20/20 hindsight and all that, I am not dissing DoD, DoD will get the job done, I just don't like seeing someone that asks a hard question strung up. That just doesn't seem fair to me.
Fine. At least you're reading them and thinking. Everything I've posted is easily confirmable via Google.
However, it's not the soldier who asked the question everyone's ready to string up, it's Pitts. The soldier who asked the question is subject to the penalties which bucking the chain of command and insubordinate behavior entitle him...it's his fault he allowed himself to be a sacrificial lamb for the ambitions of a media whore wannabe, but it's STILL Pitts who knowingly embarked on a mission to interfere with a private, internal meeting of military personnel with the goal of undermining authority, degrading morale and purposely misrepresenting the facts in oder to manufacture propaganda which harmms our troops and enables the enemy.
Pitts is the reporter.
I heard it on the radio.
I am not say= I am not ready to say
So you supported Clinton's actions in the mid 90s when he sent troops into different parts of the world to defend whatever nonsensical excuses he used? Why, you know for the life of me I can't seem to recall any conservatives that called for support of Clinton's actions then. Can you? Why 'conservatives' (you included) in the mid 90s must not have been supporting the troops because you didn't support Clinton. Were the troops in harm's way? Did you support Clinton's unconstitutional police actions or did you speak out against them?
Neither partisan politics and nationalism are patriotic and I suspect you know this but don't care
I had the radio on in the car today and I heard Limbaugh speak about this. He definitely DID NOT attack any soldier. He repeatedly said he didn't have any problem with the question and he acknowledged that the troops have the right to ask questions. His beef was with the media.
I see. Even though, I look at it from a military standpoint, where the editor looks at it from a money making standpoint. I guess he would have no problem.
God, I am getting confused now...the posts are all starting to run together!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.