Posted on 12/12/2004 4:10:28 PM PST by M 91 u2 K
Rumsfeld is not a sacred cow, and if it is okay to criticize our troops as many have done here, then it is okay to criticize Rummy. Nothing wrong with criticism, it is healthy. Such as the fact we are being following to many PC rules in Iraq when it comes to dealing with the enemy.
Yawn!
This guy is a Guard toad who thought that he would be slick.
Rummy is hated by the left-wing media because he is seen as a real man not a girley-man. So to level the playing field they must destroy him, and hope for a girley-man replacement they can push around. Rember the MSN hate's the military period.
Exactly what was wrong with the answer Rumsfeld gave?
A lot of post question analysis indicates the military has done a very good job in ramping up the supply of hardened Humvees.
In this specific case, armored Humvees will be available to these specific troops when they reach their theater area.
Rummy is the best Sec of Defense we have had since well last time he was Sec of Defense under Ford! But he is not perfect and it is okay to criticize him its just that MSM goes overboard with their witch hunt.
Armored Humvees are grossly inferior to unarmored ones for the majority of missions out there, and for the mission they were bought for. They are needed for a particular mission that we now find ourselves in. Not having them was not negligence - except to the extent that as a nation we couldn't justify purchasing armored vehicles (proper ones, not this Armored Humvee stop-gap) as an alternate TOE for multiple divisions.
I dunno who Barry Farber is, but I have a suspicion about what he is not...
I agree, it was based on the BS that the guard alway sucks the hind teat of the supply hog.
They probably were not told how the up-armored equipment was assigned, and they had brought with them their Stateside issue Hummers which do not get up-armored unless needed in a hot area and would have been carried in on flat beds to the motor pools where that occurs.
Rummy's Comment was exactly right in retrospect. They are building the Army they need out of necessity, and as always, the Army adjusts to new circumstances as they emerge.
If anyone made a stupid comment, it was the guard soldier who was out of his element.
You may be right, but I suspect that what our troops really need is to start killing the enemy, killing anyone that harbors or sympathizes with them, and levelling the buildings that shelter them. That just might make them safer than yet more extra additional armor to hide behind.
Turned out to be just rumors and typical motor pool BS, as far as I can ascertain. The company commander was not a strong enough leader to keep a lid on her own mess.
Would'a, could'a, should'a....
Irrespective of why things "should" have been different,
there was nothing wrong with Rumsfeld's answer.
OBTW
Additional armour doesn't do much when the IED is comprised of a 155 round.
...
If you want to learn something about the military acquisition system read on - otherwise please keep you half baked totally uniformed opinions to yourself.
Yes, I have just flamed you. Do I have your attention?
I am retired military, 20 years as combat air crew, half of it in special operations. I have just completed 14 years as a system analyst, a dollar word for contractor, for AFSOC. Almost twelve of those years were in flight test - testing the “newest and greatest”.
The way the CONGRESS has structured the acquisition system:
It takes 8 to 15 years, as a minimum, to bring a new system on line.
You can only start a new system every other year - the paperwork for an odd year start is unbelievable!
I can go out to the commercial market and upgrade the HUMVEE using a third of the official cost at one tenth of the weight. But, since military purchases are viewed as re-election perks, I have to go through an approved vendor no matter the cost , weight and time deltas.
Any project needs between 10,000 and 50,000 pages of paperwork just to make its way to Congress. I have a system that was fast tracked and works but I can not get any money for maintenance until that paperwork makes its way up to and through Congress. The damn system works, there are a few prototypes in outside storage, and I can not get money to move them inside out of the weather.
A decade ago I knew, and could prove beyond the shadow of a doubt, that a sensor would not work - its in the wrong darn place. Since then we have attempted 4 times to fix the problem - all attempts cost in excess of 20 million, each, and all failed. We are now attempting solution # 5 and no one wants to bet me that it too will fail.
Yes these are signs of a serious problem. Most of which were written into Federal Law and Statue by Congress to “correct” problems that they had caused earlier.
What Congress didn’t do, the military did to itself by establishing “centers of excellence” to improve the acquisition process. Since when has a committee improved anything?
Can we do better? Yes, we have!
Kelly Johnson’s “Skunk Works” (Lockheed’s Advance Concepts Division) did the U-2 and SR-71 without going through the official process.
The AC- series of aircraft didn’t go through the official process either. Every variant was delivered ahead of schedule, with the required combat capabilities, at substantial savings.
“Google” an aircraft called Creditable Sport. Then remember it went from a mission requirement to ready for mission execution in less than six months. A heavily modified aircraft that could do things that active duty special operations aircrews still don’t believe is possible.
Enough soap boxing on my part.
If you want to blame a group for the problems the MSM reports with such glee - call your Congressman and Senator first!
The message is that there are no "knowns". There are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we now know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know.So when we do the best we can and we pull all this information together, and we then say, 'well that's basically what we see as the situation,' that is really only the known knowns and the known unknowns. And each year, we discover a few more of those unknown unknowns.
I admit Rummy's a delight at press conferences!
That is still my sense of it all as well, but there is more.
The Troops are compelled to rely on civilian contractors more than ever now over there. Many of those contracted employees simply do not give a crap about safety and security for our Troops. The (some) Troops are aware (or simply believe this)and so some have apprehensions concerning many things.
The Troops should not have to carry such concerns. We owe them that at least!
Sounds like somebody missed the part where a newspaper type posed the question. Typical guerilla reporting...
I want our guys to be as safe as possible, but show me a war where the guys in the mud had everything they were suppose to have.
The fact is that although this may have been a legitimate question it was a set-up by a reporter looking for a story, and only gives the media another black eye.
Do liberals care if our guys get armor? No. What they want is to slap Bush, and this soldier provided the means to do that.
Will our soldiers get armor any faster because of that question? Probably not, but the liberals have something to attack Bush with, and he's the best CIC the military has at the moment.
You would be very wrong in your suspicion. He is a solid right wing Jew from the South, who has a real grasp of world history. The most eloquent speaker I have ever listened to. Do a little research on Barry you won't be disappointed.
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.