Troops Put Tough Questions to Rumsfeld - Page 2

smilingassassin · 12-10-2004, 05:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bluesman

This idiot thinks he's a hero for splashing a vulnerability of friendly troops all over the place. He's happy about what he's done. He thinks the unit's officers are upset because "they thought it would make them look bad".

Those officers will be in those Humvees, too, but this reporter thinks they care more about image than their soldiers or their own lives. Maybe - just MAYBE - they didn't want Bad Guys to know about a whole convoy of soft vehicles headed into Apache Country.

This guy has a typical press take on what the military is all about. His contempt for professional military people, especially high brass is obvious and odious. And he thinks the 'people need to know' every last detail he can give 'em, no matter what that may do to the guys on the pointy end.

If he'd been in the press briefing before OVERLORD, you can bet the people would've known about that, as well. Oh, and Hitler and Rommel and von Rundstedt and every last private on the Atlantic Wall would've known, too.

Why didn't this clown go ahead and give the routes and skeds for the road march from Kuwait while he was at it?

Last thing: note what caused him to get all motivated to tell this story. When he found out HE HIMSELF would be travelling in an unarmored Humvee, well, the story just had to get out. And although it took weeks - and therefore wouldn't be of any use to save his own precious hide - he'd make the military pay, and all the way to the top.

What a smug, self-satisfied, self-important peckerwood. I'll bet he's about as welcome to 'his' unit as a pebble in their boot.

If this is true, this guy should be charged with some sort of crime. Fabricating a story and spinning it to make the brass look bad is simply counterproductive to getting U.S. soldiers out of Iraq in one peice.

Bluesman · 12-10-2004, 06:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by smilingassassin

If this is true, this guy should be charged with some sort of crime. Fabricating a story and spinning it to make the brass look bad is simply counterproductive to getting U.S. soldiers out of Iraq in one peice.

I wish that he could be charged.

But what he reported was true and not technically 'classified information'. Nobody at all in the government wants to pick a losing fight about what is arguably the most important basic Freedom in the Bill of Rights: Freedom of the Press.

About all we can do is despise him for what he's done, and hope like hell the guys Over There don't pay any price for this grandstander's personal glory moment.

Anon · 12-10-2004, 09:34 AM

Hey, when i was in, if we'd gone to war with the Soviets, know how many Humvee's and trucks had armor?

None.

Bluesman · 12-10-2004, 13:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by M21Sniper

Hey, when i was in, if we'd gone to war with the Soviets, know how many Humvee's and trucks had armor?

None.

Dam' good point, Sniper. I heard yesterday that the manufacture of up-armored Humvees has increased from 15 a month last year to over 450 a month now. And Rummy was right: you take what you have to war, you don't get to wish for something and somehow get it instantly.

I agree that this outfit should get better equipment. And in time, I bet they do. But in the meantime, maybe we can get the dam' press to stop letting the enemy know which units they can pick on to cause the most casualties.

**Julie** · 12-10-2004, 14:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by war2004

Oh, I am quite relaxed. However, your professionalism leaves something to be desired.

I am assuming your real life job has very little responsibility.

Cordially

I advise you to respect the Moderators and govern yourself accordingly.

Bluesman · 12-10-2004, 15:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Julie

I advise you to respect the Moderators and govern yourself accordingly.

Now, see, this is why Julie gets all them 'nice points'.

Because I woulda called him a mouth-breathin' tosser and told him to belt up or wait to get thrown out of here on his fat can.

But that's just me.

Anon · 12-10-2004, 16:45 PM

"the manufacture of up-armored Humvees has increased from 15 a month last year to over 450 a month now."

That would be correct Sergeant.

war2004 · 12-10-2004, 17:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bluesman

Now, see, this is why Julie gets all them 'nice points'.

Because I woulda called him a mouth-breathin' tosser and told him to belt up or wait to get thrown out of here on his fat can.

But that's just me.

I would have called you a suck-hole... but that is just me

Bluesman · 12-10-2004, 21:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by war2004

I would have called you a suck-hole... but that is just me

You probably would have, but you wouldn't have been justified, because I wasn't the one poppin' off about the mods.

Furthermore, what you would've said about me isn't true. BIG difference from what I would've said about you.

smilingassassin · 12-11-2004, 04:01 AM

How much protection from IID's does added armor give to a Humvee? I'd guess not much, the main purpose of adding this armor would be to protect against shrapnel and small arms fire. Adding armor to a vehicle originally not designed for the armor also stresses the Chassis, but none of this matters when you can make the brass look bad right? To hell with our soldiers lives we need ratings!!!

Ray · 12-11-2004, 04:56 AM

Smiling,

While you do have a point, but then how can you make it 100% safe?

You invent something. It works for sometime. They invent something to beat that. The you do something to overcome that and then they......

That's how it work.

If fighting a war was 100% safe, then they would be wars alone.

War is risky and one must take risks.

dave angel · 12-11-2004, 17:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by smilingassassin

How much protection from IID's does added armor give to a Humvee? I'd guess not much, the main purpose of adding this armor would be to protect against shrapnel and small arms fire. Adding armor to a vehicle originally not designed for the armor also stresses the Chassis, but none of this matters when you can make the brass look bad right? To hell with our soldiers lives we need ratings!!!

one assumes that the soldiers weren't completely brain-dead and had a mind to ask such questions anyway, perhaps the presence of the reporter gave the soldiers the 'balls' to ask such questions of such a senior figure without fear of being slapped down.

while there are certainly security concerns that the insurgents now know that X unit doesn't have X- rated armour on its vehicles - though its unlikely to be something they didn't know already - the DoD faces greater public and political scrutiny on this issue than it did previously, and that is a good thing.

Bluesman · 12-11-2004, 18:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dave angel

one assumes that the soldiers weren't completely brain-dead and had a mind to ask such questions anyway, perhaps the presence of the reporter gave the soldiers the 'balls' to ask such questions of such a senior figure without fear of being slapped down.

Okay, let's take a quick poll of military and former military people here:

Has the presence of the press ever been a source of courage to you? Have you ever felt that your lack of 'balls' was due to the absence of a reporter? Do you feel that your fearffulness of your chain of command administering a 'slapping-down' can be mitigated by collusion with the media to set up a senior figure with an 'ambush'-type question?

dave, I believe you may have a completely inaccurate picture of the United States Soldier.

**Julie** · 12-11-2004, 18:48 PM

I do not for a minute believe the soldier would not have asked that question if it had not been true to some extent. Further, the way the soldier was hailed by his fellow soldiers after asking the question. Seems to me there is a huge communication gap between the soldiers and the DoD. But as I always say...exposure is the best medicine, and a doctor could not have prescribed any better.

Bluesman · 12-11-2004, 19:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Julie

I do not for a minute believe the soldier would not have asked that question if it had not been true to some extent. Further, the way the soldier was hailed by his fellow soldiers after asking the question. Seems to me there is a huge communication gap between the soldiers and the DoD. But as I always say...exposure is the best medicine, and a doctor could not have prescribed any better.

Oh, there's no question that what the soldier asked about is true. That's not what's at issue, though.

And neither is the soldier's point-of-view that they could and should be better protected with better equipment. That is also not in doubt. I'll bet each and every one of 'em feels that they should get the latest and greatest equipment. So do I.

But perhaps you and the soldier asking the reporter's questions for him will grant that not every single piece of technology or the most effective gear will magically appear because we wish we had it.

Re-read what I posted, re: the up-armored Humvees being procured at a rate THIRTY TIMES higher than last year. I'd say the problem is being addressed, wouldn't you?

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes	Rate This Thread
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode	Rate This Thread:

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Analysis: Chechnya	Ironduke	The Western Alliance	4	07-28-2008 19:30 PM
Rumsfeld Questions	THL	Political Discussions	82	05-13-2006 18:46 PM
Rumsfeld pays surprise visit to Iraq	Ironduke	International Defense Topics	2	05-13-2004 19:30 PM
Analysis: Ivory Coast Civil War	Ironduke	International Defense Topics	0	05-07-2004 23:30 PM
More Troops	Leader	The Western Alliance	93	05-01-2004 22:00 PM

12-10-2004, 09:34 AM	#18 (permalink)
Anon New Member Join Date: 08-03-03 Posts: 0	Hey, when i was in, if we'd gone to war with the Soviets, know how many Humvee's and trucks had armor? None.

12-10-2004, 16:45 PM	#22 (permalink)
Anon New Member Join Date: 08-03-03 Posts: 0	"the manufacture of up-armored Humvees has increased from 15 a month last year to over 450 a month now." That would be correct Sergeant.

12-11-2004, 04:01 AM	#25 (permalink)
smilingassassin *Senior Contributor* Join Date: 12-12-03 Location: Vancouver Canada Posts: 2,736 Country:	How much protection from IID's does added armor give to a Humvee? I'd guess not much, the main purpose of adding this armor would be to protect against shrapnel and small arms fire. Adding armor to a vehicle originally not designed for the armor also stresses the Chassis, but none of this matters when you can make the brass look bad right? To hell with our soldiers lives we need ratings!!!

12-11-2004, 04:56 AM	#26 (permalink)
Ray Postmaster General *Military Professional* Join Date: 08-20-03 Posts: 27,117 Country:	Smiling, While you do have a point, but then how can you make it 100% safe? You invent something. It works for sometime. They invent something to beat that. The you do something to overcome that and then they...... That's how it work. If fighting a war was 100% safe, then they would be wars alone. War is risky and one must take risks.

12-11-2004, 18:48 PM	#29 (permalink)
Julie Moderator Join Date: 08-04-03 Location: Georgia, USA Posts: 6,550 Country:	I do not for a minute believe the soldier would not have asked that question if it had not been true to some extent. Further, the way the soldier was hailed by his fellow soldiers after asking the question. Seems to me there is a huge communication gap between the soldiers and the DoD. But as I always say...exposure is the best medicine, and a doctor could not have prescribed any better.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)