Posted on 12/09/2004 2:05:26 PM PST by mrsmith
Have you read a book called, "Once an Eagle"?
I ask because the comment reminds me of something the character Courtney Massengale would say.
Would I be kicked out of line if I said this "press release" looks a tad ...unofficial?
Not at all. I see the release is stored offsite!
Here's the official website link, it's the last press release in the list.
http://www.tnmilitary.org/Pressrel/PressRel2004.htm
Whois results for tnmilitary.org:
" Tennessee Military Department (XHHTERENSO)
3041 Sidco Drive
Nashville, TN 37204
US
Phone: 615-741-1226
Fax: 615-532-5389
Domain Name: TNMILITARY.ORG
Administrative Contact :
Tennessee Military Department (XHHTERENSO)
tbohannan@tnema.org
3041 Sidco Drive
Nashville, TN 37204
US
Phone: 615-741-1226
Fax: 615-532-5389
"
an e-mail I got from a family member, states that they are recieving the armor...more and more. And that they understand that it takes time to produce the high end armor. It can not be fixed over night.
(Note: production facilities have increased production of the armor....by 26 fold. From around 15 sets a day...to over 400. They are working 2 12 hour shifts a day. That is now 24/7 for most. The steel itself has to be cut in a special manner...with out friction or heat { or it will get weak when it cools}.
So the issue, while serious, is being addressed. And has been "being addressed" for over a year. Which is more than happened under Clinton, as my family member tells me.
The family member informed me that if Congress did not have such convoluted regulations on the military bids process for companies.....it would move even quicker.
So the folks in Congress who are slamming others...need to be slammed themselves.
Also, it seems that a reporter wrote the question asked to Rumsfeld...and got the soldier to ask it. Drudge has been reporting this.
He took advantage of the soldier....and that is wrong. But that is to be expected from the media.
Bottom line....it is a serious issue. BUT it is, and has been addressed. And the media does not want to report that part.
I am under strict orders from my family member, who is in the sand as we speak, to ignore the main stream media. He says we are not getting the whole story on anything.
I will follow that family member's orders...because I trust him...and because he has the ability to stomp a mudhole in me.
a major general who does not know the difference between "medal" -- what kerry throew over the fence -- and "metal," the material in question?
If Rumsfeld really didn't want questions, he shouldn't have pretended he did. Personally, I have a higher opinion of Rumsfeld, i.e., that he's more of a straight shooter, and I have no problem with how either he or the soldier spoke.
Thank You for your service to our country.
correction...it is 400 sets a month...2 12 hour shifts a day.
Still...that is 26 fold increase....and could possibly be more...if Congress would not cloud the bid process with interest legislation.
Finish the thought, please.... it drives me nuts. It's like having a song get cut off before you hear the end. You'll have it stuck in your head for hours.
Overcome!
There's never been a war in which the troops had everything they needed. Probably never will be. Since the best defense is a great offense(meaning shoot the SOB's before they shoot you), ammunition and weapons are most important.
Having heard many, many stories from my family's vets who served from WWI and WWII to Korea, Vietnam and beyond, I can say that all US wars of the 20th century had far, far greater supply and equipment problems. Not that any of us would want to face terrorist ambushes in Iraq without armor, who would? But liberal reporters who jump on this kind of thing ignore (or simply don't know) the facts that:
1) Clinton and Algore had 8 YEARS to get this kind of thing done, and didn't (an appropriate question should be, "Why weren't all US Humvees and trucks armored by the year 2000 if reporters think it's supposed to be required?");
2) Lyndon Johnson, Harry Truman, FDR, and Woodrow Wilson are obvious examples of DEMOCRATIC administrations that had far, far, far greater failings at various points resulting in vastly higher numbers of US military fatalities. For each of those 4 DEMOCRATIC presidents, not to mention the unmentionable Clinton, one can point to numerous ways in which they neglected the military at key points and/or place US forces into combat without proper support and equipment.
Also, until now it has never been considered an expected, required part of Army/Marine equipment even to have armored Humvees (correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that's the case). In previous conflicts we had vast numbers of troops being transported in jeeps, 2 1/2 ton trucks, unarmored helicopters, etc. Yes, it's now become critical to have a lot more armored vehicles in an environment like Iraq, but never before in military history (of any nation) has ALL of an army been required to travel in armored vehicles. Neither NATO nor the Soviets, nor the well-equipped Wehrmacht and SS panzer divisions in WWII, ever required that all troops travel only in armored vehicles.
So, while I certainly want to keep whipping the supply chain bureaucrats to get this kind of thing accomplished more quickly, it rings so hollow and hypocritical when coming from liberal/left reporters and columnists who never cared about properly equipping our military before it was a handy "talking point" against Bush and Rumsfeld.
This guy bypassed about a dozen levels in the chain.
I find it amazing that the flipping terrorists are GREAT at improvising weapons, and a uniformed guy is stifled by having to think about it, and used by a cheap little embedded activist. Hmmm...
Maybe we need to recruit terrorists to improve our improvisational thinking processes??
No joke. It's really bad that this soldier allowed a reporter to entice him and his fellow soldiers into coming across as poorly supported and poorly disciplined (which the media is constantly trumpeting, that's why they constantly latch on to every whiner reservist that wanted to go to college, not fight). I'm sure the guy is feeling pretty bad right now, and I'm betting his commanders are letting him feel the pain for not addressing concerns through the proper channels. Blind-siding your bosses in a public or semi-public forum is not a smart way to do things.
You may have had a localized policy at the discretion of your CO, but to extrapolate that to a public embarassment of the SoD is beyond the pale.
After spending several years in a training command I don't have a real high opinion of many of the National Guard weekend warrior units. Although most were very good, many were highly political organizations rife with patronage and nepotism. Worse, they had a very civil service-like attitude about anything hard or dangerous. Why shouldn't I believe this guy is from one such unit?
Is a press release like this unusual in the military where one major general is implicitly calling another major general a liar? A statement like that seems pretty extraordinary, particularly in a time of war.
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.