RetiredGySgt
Diamond Member
- May 6, 2007
- 56,048
- 18,143
Whaaaat????
For one, there are a lot of gays in the Navy.
Tom Coburn wants cuts: health care program for military targeted - The Washington Post
John McCain wrong to support military benefit cuts
When you start going and looking for who wants to cut military benefits, Republican Senators and Congressmen's names always pop up. I remember when McCain said if you give soldier benefits, they won't stay in the military.
The whole "Republicans support the troops" is all bullshit. Republicans sent troops into Iraq with old and rusty equipment with the sole purpose of making money, which they did.
You know I'm right so go ahead and start screaming Republicans. You support your leaders who do this. Don't direct your faux anger at me, direct it at them. Only you won't. 'Cuz you're lemmings.
By the way Rdean, provide a link to a verifiable unbiased source that claimed we sent troops to Iraq with out of date equipment or rusty equipment.
You can't possibly be serious. You don't remember the troops complaining to Rumsfeld about old and rusty equipment and having to make their own armor? Seriously? Do you have Alzheimers?
No actually they did not. They did complain that their vehicles were not armored enough and that they needed body armor. neither of which include old or rusty.
Now to explain to you the facts. Before the post war in Iraq our Army and Marine Corps did NOT expect a conflict like what happened. The military plans for and equips for wars and contingencies based on what they know and sometimes what they expect.
The Table of Equipment did NOT include 100 percent of Hummers being armored. Nor did it include armored trucks at all. We did not need that in Viet Nam and the military simply did not see the coming problems. Further the military takes several years to design and purchase new equipment.
The reality is that up armoring the Hummers actually broke them quicker because they simply were not built to hold that weight. Trucks in the past were packed with sandbags to provide protection for troops, cargo vehicles were never armored.
The military responded rather quickly to the new reality of what they faced. They fast tracked programs and even allowed units to local buy untested equipment.
Lets play a game, shall we? Lets pretend that when we realized we were going to war with Iraq ( October 16 2002) the Army actually realized the post war conflict. That would have given them what 5 maybe 6 months? It took 2 years to up armor the vehicles and over a year to find a suitable body armor that was flexible enough to work. Pretty simple concept.
Now either provide a link to your claim or shut the fuck up.
By the way? Where is the link to your chart?