Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Please, Sir, May I Have Some Armor? | NYT slaps Rummy

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
nostamj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-09-04 10:07 AM
Original message
Please, Sir, May I Have Some Armor? | NYT slaps Rummy
We're used to hearing Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld answer questions about things that went wrong in Iraq by saying they went right. When he does that to reporters, it's annoying. When he does it to troops risking their lives in his failed test of bargain-basement warfare, it's outrageous.
Yesterday, Mr. Rumsfeld told soldiers at a staging area in Kuwait to ignore "the doubters" who say the escalating war is not going well. Then he invited the troops, some of them headed to their second combat tours, to ask him "tough questions." They evidently thought he meant it.

A National Guard scout from Tennessee asked why there was still an equipment shortage that forced units to scrounge for "hillbilly armor": "pieces of rusted scrap metal and compromised ballistic glass that's already been shot up, dropped, busted." When the cheering died down, Mr. Rumsfeld said that, really, there was plenty of armor and in any case, "all the armor in the world" might not save you from a roadside bomb.

<snip>

Mr. Rumsfeld talks a lot about supporting the troops. We wish that someone powerful would explain to him that doing so includes treating them with respect and telling them the truth.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/09/opinion/09thu2.html

Please visit my online store | Nostamj_Online
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Pacifist Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-09-04 10:10 AM
Response to Original message
1. I overheard that yesterday when I was
puttering around in another room. It was downright embarrassing. And is it my imagination or does Rumsfeld's voice sound awfully high-pitched these days? That man is such an ass. No, that doesn't begin to describe him. Jon Stewart is right. Apparently the way to keep your job in the Bush administration is to be not only a failure, but a colossal failure. Bastard!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bryant69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-09-04 10:14 AM
Response to Original message
2. Hey I'm all for supporting the troops but let's not get carried away
After all, job # 1 in the Bush White house is protecting the Bush tax Cuts. Anything we can do to keep those tax cuts, any sacrifice that has to be made is worth it, to reward the only Americans worth a damn--the wealthy! Are those soldiers wealthy? Nope. SO they don't count. If they were productive americans they would buy their own armor.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-09-04 10:15 AM
Response to Original message
3. I am glad that they are slamming Rummy but...
why is the chimp getting off easy? After all, it was his decision to go to war, he chose the time and even said it "feels good" when he did it. The blame points squarely at him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nostamj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-09-04 10:43 AM
Response to Reply #3
6. they have certainly covered
the 'faulty' intelligence leading to the invasion. maybe not as soon or as aggressively as we'd like, but...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gratuitous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-09-04 10:22 AM
Response to Original message
4. MoDo's column takes on the same thing
I wonder why the Times suddenly granted itself permission to provide critical analysis of this corrupt administration's happy talk nonsense?

Of course, the really telling passage from the editorial is this:

"We're used to hearing Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld answer questions about things that went wrong in Iraq by saying they went right. When he does that to reporters, it's annoying. When he does it to troops risking their lives in his failed test of bargain-basement warfare, it's outrageous."

So, the Times is accustomed to Rumsfeld lying in reporters' faces, which they find . . . "annoying." Golly gee fellas! That Rumsfeld guy just lied in our faces again. That's so . . . so, euhm, annoying! Oh well, let's be sure we copy down verbatim what he said, even though we know it's a lie. And don't hint that it's a lie either.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mandate My Ass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-09-04 11:15 AM
Response to Reply #4
13. Methinks someone told them Rummy is fair game
NYT toes the administration line. I get the feeling from his disappearing act before the election they know the SEC DEF is a big liability and they're distancing themselves from him. This kind of arrogant blather is nothing new from him.

There is no honor among thieves or war criminals. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gatorboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-09-04 10:23 AM
Response to Original message
5. Liberal rag!!!
Don't they know they need to shut up about this sort of thing and live with it? Geez!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-09-04 10:45 AM
Response to Original message
7. how about "armor might save you from a roadside bomb"
talk about "framing the debate"...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sinkingfeeling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-09-04 10:45 AM
Response to Original message
8. My question: What the hell is the $400 Billion a year of taxpayer
money being used for?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nostamj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-09-04 10:54 AM
Response to Reply #8
10. ask cheney!
most of it is being funnelled back into corporate coffers. you would think that PATRIOTS whose main reason for living is to SUPPORT THE TROOPS would be the outraged ones... and not us commie liberals.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProfessorGAC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-09-04 11:08 AM
Response to Reply #8
12. $400 Billion? You're Low Balling
By about $50 billion plus the $150 billion they spent in Iraq, OFF-BUDGET. (Special appropriations.)

I knew what you were getting at, but wanted to be sure we all knew it's a LOT more than $400 billion per year.
The Professor
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Squatch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-09-04 10:47 AM
Response to Original message
9. NYT login: Use "newslinks" for both logon and pword
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
landdaddy Donating Member (473 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-09-04 11:01 AM
Response to Original message
11. From another time
a couple of pics from my experience with "hillbilly" armor. I know what those soldiers are going through, and what they will go through, and my heart goes out to them!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Squeech Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-09-04 11:26 AM
Response to Original message
14. Question
There was that $87 billion supplemental appropriation for the Iraq war that Kerry voted for before he voted against.

My impression was, there was an appropriation for more armor in that bill. Is that true?

My further impression was, the later version of the bill Kerry voted against, but which eventually passed, contained a provision that the Secretary of Defense could, at his option, move a bunch of the money around between the various accounts specified in that bill. Is that what happened to the armor money? Did Rummy divert the money that Congress specifically intended to protect our troops to some other purpose?

Actually, if he did deliberately underfund the armor budget, and then stand up in front of our troops and say what he said, then he certainly has more personal courage than anybody else in the Chimpministration.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nostamj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-09-04 11:33 AM
Response to Reply #14
15. my understanding
is that the repukes put in a line that allowed * to use the funds ANY WAY HE SAW FIT.

and, IIRC, this was one element that BYRD railed against.

of course, the repukes SAID that Kerry voted against body armor for our troops but have not said a word about the bushies failing to spend the money
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 02:20 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC