"Support Our Troops, motto or fact?

[Bill Greenwood]

There is a story in USA TODAY Fri, 9-21, that is sad if true. We are aware of how dangerous roadside bombs are to troops in IRAQ, and that the powerful ones can blow up a Humvee. There is a new program for a more heavily armored vehicle, a MRAP. Of course it is big and expensive, but you'd think folks would get behind the program. But that doesn't take into account the profit being made and palms being greased on other favored programs. A Pentagon science and tech advisor, Franz Gayl reported delays and problems with the program. Did the Marines support him and try to correct the problem as one would hope? Nope, not when big defense contracts are at stake. The Maine brass targeted Gayle for "adverse personnel action". To be fair, these can be complex issues, I am only reporting what the article says. The backers of the MRAP likely have $$$$$$$ as part of their interest also, but the poor GI out on the street should have the best protection.

[tom d. friedman]

i think the majority opinion from the working stiff point of view is that most people support the troops, but not the piss poor way the war is being managed by the government pointy heads & bean counters.

[tom d. friedman]

read in time magazine that it cost 170.00 bucks to outfit a typical ww 2 soldier, 1700.00 bucks in vietnam, & near 15000.00 for current troops. by the next 12 years it's estimated that it will cost around 26000.00. are these costs worth it?? of course!!! they are our troops!!! but the paradox is that the usaf wants to field a new bomber by 2018. we have the tried & true b-52 (no poem intended) the b-1, a great bomber but made a lame duck since peanut head prez carter, the b-2.... state of the art but expensive. the ground pounders lay it on the line, & if flying dinosaurs like the b-52 can hack it this long with all the other bomber technology as back up then the usaf should make due & funnel some of that dough to where it counts the most.

[Broken-Wrench]

No money to grease palms? I saw this article

From the July 19 Washington Post article:

The war proposals are amendments to the annual defense authorization bill, which includes a military pay raise and Iraq equipment upgrades. Reid's ( DEM) decision halted progress on that legislation, promoting criticism from Republicans.

"We are abandoning the men and women in the military if we don't take this bill back up and pass it, conference with the House, and have it signed by the president of the United States, as we have for the past 45 years," said Sen. John McCain (Ariz.).