Bureaucrats' "Gross Mismanagement" Blamed For Hundreds Of Marines' Deaths

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - Bureaucrats' "Gross Mismanagement" Blamed For Hundreds Of Marines' Deaths stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

RICHARD LARDNER | February 16, 2008 07:28 AM EST | AP

Compare other versions »
I Like ItI Don’t Like It
A Category I mine-resistant ambush-protected (MRAP) vehicle, is driven on a test course during a media demonstration at the Aberdeen Proving Ground in Maryland in this Aug. 24, 2007 file photo. (AP Photo/Haraz N. Ghanbari, File)

WASHINGTON — Hundreds of U.S. Marines have been killed or injured by roadside bombs in Iraq because Marine Corps bureaucrats refused an urgent request in 2005 from battlefield commanders for blast-resistant vehicles, an internal military study concludes.

The study, written by a civilian Marine Corps official and obtained by The Associated Press, accuses the service of "gross mismanagement" that delayed deliveries of the mine-resistant, ambush-protected trucks for more than two years.

Cost was a driving factor in the decision to turn down the request for the so-called MRAPs, according to the study. Stateside authorities saw the hulking vehicles, which can cost as much as a $1 million each, as a financial threat to programs aimed at developing lighter vehicles that were years from being fielded.

After Defense Secretary Robert Gates declared the MRAP (pronounced M-rap) the Pentagon's No. 1 acquisition priority in May 2007, the trucks began to be shipped to Iraq in large quantities.

The vehicles weigh as much as 40 tons and have been effective at protecting American forces from improvised explosive devices (IEDs), the weapon of choice for Iraqi insurgents. Only four U.S. troops have been killed by such bombs while riding in MRAPs; three of those deaths occurred in older versions of the vehicles.

The study's author, Franz J. Gayl, catalogs what he says were flawed decisions and missteps by midlevel managers in Marine Corps offices that occurred well before Gates replaced Donald Rumsfeld in December 2006.

Among the findings in the Jan. 22 study:

_ Budget and procurement managers failed to recognize the damage being done by IEDs in late 2004 and early 2005 and were convinced the best solution was adding more armor to the less-sturdy Humvees the Marines were using. Humvees, even those with extra layers of steel, proved incapable of blunting the increasingly powerful explosives planted by insurgents.

Story continues below
advertisement

_ An urgent February 2005 request for MRAPs got lost in bureaucracy. It was signed by then-Brig. Gen. Dennis Hejlik, who asked for 1,169 of the vehicles. The Marines could not continue to take "serious and grave casualties" caused by IEDs when a solution was commercially available, wrote Hejlik, who was a commander in western Iraq from June 2004 to February 2005.

Gayl cites documents showing Hejlik's request was shuttled to a civilian logistics official at the Marine Corps Combat Development Command in suburban Washington who had little experience with military vehicles. As a result, there was more concern over how the MRAP would upset the Marine Corps' supply and maintenance chains than there was in getting the troops a truck that would keep them alive, the study contends.

_ The Marine Corps' acquisition staff didn't give top leaders correct information. Gen. James Conway, the Marine Corps commandant, was not told of the gravity of Hejlik's MRAP request and the real reasons it was shelved, Gayl writes. That resulted in Conway giving "inaccurate and incomplete" information to Congress about why buying MRAPs was not hotly pursued.

_ The Combat Development Command, which decides what gear to buy, treated the MRAP as an expensive obstacle to long-range plans for equipment that was more mobile and fit into the Marines Corps' vision as a rapid reaction force. Those projects included a Humvee replacement called the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle and a new vehicle for reconnaissance and surveillance missions.

The MRAPs didn't meet this fast-moving standard and so the Combat Development Command didn't want to buy them, according to Gayl. The study calls this approach a "Cold War orientation" that suffocates the ability to react to emergency situations.

_ The Combat Development Command has managers _ some of whom are retired Marines _ who lack adequate technical credentials. They have outdated views of what works on the battlefield and how the defense industry operates, Gayl says. Yet they are in position to ignore or overrule calls from deployed commanders.

An inquiry should be conducted by the Marine Corps inspector general to determine if any military or government employees are culpable for failing to rush critical gear to the troops, recommends Gayl, who prepared the study for the Marine Corps' plans, policies and operations department.

The study was obtained by the AP from a nongovernment source.

"If the mass procurement and fielding of MRAPs had begun in 2005 in response to the known and acknowledged threats at that time, as the (Marine Corps) is doing today, hundreds of deaths and injuries could have been prevented," writes Gayl, the science and technology adviser to Lt. Gen. Richard Natonski, who heads the department. "While the possibility of individual corruption remains undetermined, the existence of corrupted MRAP processes is likely, and worthy of (inspector general) investigation."

Gayl, who has clashed with his superiors in the past and filed for whistle-blower protection last year, uses official Marine Corps documents, e-mails, briefing charts, memos, congressional testimony, and news articles to make his case.

He was not allowed to interview or correspond with any employees connected to the Combat Development Command. The study's cover page says the views in the study are his own.

Maj. Manuel Delarosa, a Marine Corps spokesman, called Gayl's study "predecisional staff work" and said it would be inappropriate to comment on it. Delarosa said, "It would be inaccurate to state that Lt. Gen. Natonski has seen or is even aware of" the study.

Last year, the service defended the decision to not buy MRAPs after receiving the 2005 request. There were too few companies able to make the vehicles, and armored Humvees were adequate, officials said then.

Hejlik, who is now a major general and heads Marine Corps Special Operations Command, has cast his 2005 statement as more of a recommendation than a demand for a specific system.

The term mine-resistant, ambush-protected vehicle "was very generic" and intended to guide a broader discussion of what type of truck would be needed to defend against the changing threats troops in the field faced, Hejlik told reporters in May 2007. "I don't think there was any intent by anybody to do anything but the right thing."

The study does not say precisely how many Marine casualties Gayl thinks occurred due to the lack of MRAPs, which have V-shaped hulls that deflect blasts out and away from the vehicles.

Gayl cites a March 1, 2007, memo from Conway to Gen. Peter Pace, then the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, in which Conway said 150 service members were killed and an additional 1,500 were seriously injured in the prior nine months by IEDs while traveling in vehicles.

The MRAP, Conway told Pace, could reduce IED casualties in vehicles by 80 percent. He told Pace an urgent request for the vehicles was submitted by a Marine commander in May 2006. No mention is made of Hejlik's call more than a year before.

Delivering MRAPs to Marines in Iraq, Conway wrote, was his "number one unfilled warfighting requirement at this time." Overall, he added, the Marine Corps needed 3,700 of the trucks _ more than three times the number requested by Hejlik in 2005.

More than 3,200 U.S. troops, including 824 Marines, have been killed in action in Iraq since the war began in March 2003. An additional 29,000 have been wounded, nearly 8,400 of them Marines. The majority of the deaths and injuries have been caused by explosive devices, according to the Defense Department.

Congress has provided more than $22 billion for 15,000 MRAPs the Defense Department plans to acquire, mostly for the Army. Depending on the size of the vehicle and how it is equipped, the trucks can cost between $450,000 and $1 million.

As of May 2007, roughly 120 MRAPs were being used by troops from all the military services, Pentagon records show. Now, more than 2,150 are in the hands of personnel in Iraq and Afghanistan. The Marines have 900 of those.

One section of Gayl's study analyzes a letter Conway sent in late July 2007 to Sens. Joseph Biden, D-Del., and Kit Bond, R-Mo., two critics of delays in sending equipment to Iraq.

More heavily armored Humvees were determined to be the best response to the 2005 MRAP request, the commandant told the senators. He also said the industrial capacity to build MRAPs in large numbers "did not exist" when the request was submitted. Additionally, although the trucks had been fielded in small numbers, they were not adequately tested and exhibited reliability problems, the letter said.

The letter to the senators is evidence of the "bad advice" senior Marine Corps leaders receive, Gayl contends. The letter, he says, portions of which were probably drafted by the Combat Development Command, omitted that the urgent 2005 request from the Iraq battlefield specifically asked for MRAPs _ and not more heavily armored Humvees. It also ignored the Marines' own findings that armored Humvees wouldn't stop IEDs.

Conway's assertion there was a lack of manufacturing capacity to build MRAPs is "inexplicable," Gayl says. Manufacturers would have hurried production if they knew the Marines wanted them and any reliability issues would have been resolved, he says.

In late November, the Marine Corps announced it would buy 2,300 MRAPs _ 1,400 fewer than planned. Improved security in Iraq, changes in tactics, and decreasing troop levels allowed for the cut. But Marine officials also listed several downsides to the MRAP: The vehicles are too tall and heavy to pursue the enemy down narrow streets, on rough terrain or across many bridges.

If MRAPs arrived to Iraq late, or proved too bulky for certain missions, the Marine Corps should have come up with different and better solutions several years ago when the IED crisis was growing, Gayl contends.

A former Marine officer, Gayl spent nearly six months in Iraq in 2006 and 2007 as an adviser to leaders of the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force.

His stinging indictment of the Marine Corps' system for fielding gear is not a first. He has been an outspoken advocate for non-lethal weapons, such as a beam gun that stings but doesn't kill and "dazzlers" that use a powerful light beam to steer unwelcome vehicles and people from checkpoints and convoys.

The failure to send these alternative weapons to Iraq has led to U.S. casualties and the deaths of Iraqi civilians, Gayl has said.

Gayl filed for whistle-blower protection in May with the U.S. Office of Special Counsel. He said he was threatened with disciplinary action after meeting with congressional staff on Capitol Hill.

Biden and Bond rebuked the Marine Corps in September for "apparent retaliation" against Gayl.

___

Associated Press researcher Monika Mathur contributed to this report from New York.

___

On The Net: http://www.usmc.mil/marinelink/mcn2000.nsf/homepage?readform

WASHINGTON — Hundreds of U.S. Marines have been killed or injured by roadside bombs in Iraq because Marine Corps bureaucrats refused an urgent request in 2005 from battlefield commanders for bla...
WASHINGTON — Hundreds of U.S. Marines have been killed or injured by roadside bombs in Iraq because Marine Corps bureaucrats refused an urgent request in 2005 from battlefield commanders for bla...
Filed by Nick Sabloff  |  Report Corrections
 
Comments
186
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 Next › Last » (4 pages total)
- kellygrrrl I'm a Fan of kellygrrrl 642 fans permalink
photo

here's an idea: How about we blame the folks who have made the most profit from the war? You know that ol' saying "The Buck Stops Here."

so everyone line up behind cheney and rummy

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:00 PM on 02/16/2008
- BlueBoomer I'm a Fan of BlueBoomer 28 fans permalink

JOE BIDEN was the one who got specific funding for MRAPs into the 2007 funding bills that so many Dems were villified for approving... He even went down to the plant in North (South?) Carolina to ensure that we were getting what we were paying for.

This is the guy that, thanks to the media and the idiots in Iowa, is no longer an option to be our PRESIDENT/COC... Instead we have a former first lady and a glorified preacher to choose from... Swell.

The idiots in Iowa probably can't help being stupid, BUT THE MEDIA IS CLEARLY COMPLICIT... IT HAD AN OBLIGATION TO INFORM US BY PRESENTING FAIR AND EQUAL ACCESS/COVERAGE OF ALL OF THE CANDIDATES, ESPECIALLY DURING THE DEBATES... THEY DID NOT DO THIS.

THERE SHOULD BE SOME ACTION WE CAN TAKE AGAINST THE MEDIA VIA THE PSC OR FCC FOR WHAT AMOUNTS TO THEIR MALFEASANCE.

Anyone got any ideas?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:29 PM on 02/16/2008
- Nyland8 I'm a Fan of Nyland8 90 fans permalink
photo

If we keep zero MRAPs in Iraq, we lose zero MRAPs. The Biden initiative you are touting is moot if we get-the-fuck out of Iraq. Biden's plan was always to keep a presence there forever, so we'd be forever chasing our tails trying to stay one step ahead of the next military "solution" to our presence.

We should leave. ASAP

8

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:16 PM on 02/16/2008
- LizM I'm a Fan of LizM 49 fans permalink

I thought you had been safely tucked into the Biden fold a long time ago...what happened?

You know darn well that Biden's plan was and is nothing of the sort you described above. Is there another Joe Biden I don't know about!? Don't answer that!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:33 PM on 02/16/2008
- bushmocker I'm a Fan of bushmocker 7 fans permalink

We could start with waterboarding since these same MSM idiots can't seem to make up their mind if it's torture or not.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:27 PM on 02/16/2008
- onenation I'm a Fan of onenation 6 fans permalink

Iowa didn't stop Joe, some people had longer memories and didn't like some key and major votes in his past. I agree that Joe has the qualities needed for Sec State, Sec Def. or Sen Major Leader. He was not going to get enough votes for Pres. So give up the past.
I think the Sec Def and the Pres were culpable in the no-armour-Humvee crap. For the Sec Def to have his job the day after "you fight a war with the army you have." crappy answer. The right media (faoux noise) made it the reporter the scape goat for helping the group of troops form the question on their mind. And the remaining media was too afraid to tell the truth.
The ComInChief, and Sec Def need to be run through the courts. The profiteers need to be exposed and jailed.
We the people need to hang our heads and stop thinking only about ourselves. WHY DON"T YOU ORGANIZE. Campaign for Obama and get after the leadership in congress. They need to get in the Pres face each day and stay there. Just like this week. Buschco finally got stopped on FISA. Support Obama and SHOUT at the people that can make this change.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:54 PM on 02/16/2008

Mismanagement like this (and all the other atrocities of this war) are not just words that we use to express our disapproval. "The war in Iraq" has become an surreal concept, a campaign talking point. Thousands of American soldiers are dead, and many times more have been maimed. A hundred thousand Iraqi civilians are dead. Millions of Iraqis have been displaced without hope of ever finding a home. It was a series of blatant lies that brought us to this and if you still believe that it had to do with 9/11, you are a fool. The people who orchestrated what could very well turn out to be WWIII are criminals, and worse, murderers. Americans, whether you supported the war or not, if you did nothing to stop it then we all, myself included, now have blood on our hands. We must find a way to begin to repair the damage that we caused.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:11 PM on 02/16/2008

Have you notice NO outcry of this horrible tragedy from the public? Really sad that American's now really only care about their fast food & free porn....lucky break for Bush, huh!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:22 PM on 02/16/2008
- TAC I'm a Fan of TAC 24 fans permalink
photo

"Really sad that American's now really only care about their fast food & free porn..."

Don't forget American Idol and Survivor...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:09 PM on 02/16/2008
- bushmocker I'm a Fan of bushmocker 7 fans permalink

You're giving the Bush version of Iraqi dead,everyone knows it's much higher and I wouldn't quibble but each one had a mother and father and possibly millions of relatives.You're spot on about the "war in Iraq",there's no war,there's occupation and throwing our money away....no....more like letting Halliburton and Blackwater sieze all American assets.Somewhere there's a money trail and I hope there is an accounting as I'm not interested in certain people getting their own spot in hell,we need to bring hell to them while they're alive and breathing like they have to innocent people everywhere,including our troops.Then they even try to weasel out of helping the injured troops.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:37 PM on 02/16/2008

Wow, a bureaucracy that doesn't work well. Now I've seen everything.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:09 PM on 02/16/2008
- apikores I'm a Fan of apikores 6 fans permalink

"Gross Mismanagement" Blamed For "Hundreds of Thousands" Of Iraqi Civilians' Deaths

Thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians have been killed or injured by trigger-happy US Marines, soliders, and pilots in Iraq because Pentagon bureaucrats and spineless Democratic lawmakers refused an urgent request in 2006 from the American people for an end to the war, common sense reports.

The study, obvious to anyone with half a brain, accuses the government of "gross mismanagement" that delayed removal of the violent, bloodthirsty troops from the region for more than two years.

Cost was a driving factor in the decision to turn down the request for the so-called "end to the war," according to the study. Stateside authorities saw the massive international fiasco, which may have cost over $1 trillion already, as a financial boon to a military budget bigger than the rest of the worlds' combined.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:06 PM on 02/16/2008
- LarBear I'm a Fan of LarBear 30 fans permalink
photo

apikores...
I'm guessing if you were there in uniform you would not be "trigger happy"... WOW! Such courage...
By the way, in your hurry to blame and fault the troops who have NO control over their assignments, or purchasing of equipment, you sort of, kind of, managed to leave out the much better equipped "Bush" Blackwater Militia"... hmm, are they BushWackers? BushWacko's?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:47 PM on 02/16/2008
- apikores I'm a Fan of apikores 6 fans permalink

If you were an Iraqi insurgent would you be "trigger happy"? Probably. But you are not. And I am not a soldier. So what I would do if I were "there in uniform" is irrelevant, because I am not and will never be in uniform there or anywhere else. What is relevant is the fact that US troops have killed thousands of innocent civilians. They may have no control over their assignments or their "purchasing of equipment" but they do have control over whether or not they murder civilians in cold blood (see: Haditha, Abu Ghraib, etc, etc) and the "best disciplined fighting force in the world" seems to have chosen not to exercise it.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:11 PM on 02/28/2008
- jrb35 I'm a Fan of jrb35 14 fans permalink

So tell me, what would you do if you were in Iraq (like that would ever happen!) and suddenly you found yourself pinned down by machine gun fire coming from a civilian home? What if your two best friends in the world were on either side of you and both were seconds away from being killed? Would you return fire so that you and your friends could escape? Would you ask the Apache gunship circling overhead to please put a rocket or two into the window from which that fire was coming? What if after that was done you went into that home and found that in addition to the insurgent machine gunner, there was also a family of human shields that had been hiding in an adjacent room and that all of them had been killed by your self-defensive fire? What would you say in response to someone online who calls you trigger-happy, violent and bloodthirsty? I think you'd probably say that such a person is an ignorant douche bag who doesn't know what the hell he or she is talking about.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:21 PM on 02/16/2008
- apikores I'm a Fan of apikores 6 fans permalink

That's a pretty funny fantasy scenario. I am not in Iraq because I think killing people over there makes us less safe over here. So your meaningless hypotheticals are just that. What would you do if you were an Iraqi civilian whose entire family had been slaughtered by Americans and who was offered an opportunity to attack a US convoy? You would probably take it. Does that mean that that scenario means anything about you or does anything to bring back any of the tens of thousands of innocent people gunned down since we went over there? No, because you are not an Iraqi civilian just like I am not a solider. It's awfully convenient to focus on the person making the accusations rather than the accusations themselves when you don't have a real defense for the actions under question, but the fact is that what I would do if I were in Iraq has less to do with reality than with what the people who do sign up willingly to go there would and WILL do if they were in Iraq. Often that has included murder, rape, arson, and systematic coverups. So you can fantasize about my imaginary comeuppance all you like, it won't change the reality, which is that the US military has done an enormous amount of damage to an already traumatized nation, killed thousands of innocent people uninvolved with the conflict knowingly and in cold blood, and permanently ruined its image in the Arab world for generations to come.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:19 PM on 02/28/2008
- anelder I'm a Fan of anelder 18 fans permalink
photo

Do any of you know anything about how government works.

If the democrats, when in power, managed to push a bill through with a time table to end the war it would have been vetoed.

To begin with there weren't enoughs dems. to push it through and if there were there were never enough to overide a veto.

Often when I listen to the laments of those on either end of the politcal spectrum, I'm amazed they don't recognize the limits of what they ask for. Know how your government works and then go out and work for it.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:05 PM on 02/16/2008
- jrb35 I'm a Fan of jrb35 14 fans permalink

I find it interesting that many on this site who quite justifiably decry the lack of IED resistant vehicles or body armor or other equipment used to protect the troops are often the first to scream bloody murder when Congress passes appropriations to fund the purchase of these items. "You're funding Bush's war!" they scream. Democrats in Congress are smeared for having "caved in" to Bush's war. Yet those same critics will read this article and say, "Why didn't they send them these vehicles years ago?" This leads me to one of two conclusions. Either such far-left critics never cared about the safety of the troops to begin with and were just taking an anti-Bush stance as a default position regardless of the issue OR they were too lazy to read what the emergency appropriations were for and thus lumped them together as all being affirmations of Bush's war. I tend to think it's the latter. Very few people ever take the time to actually read or do research on such topics.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:04 PM on 02/16/2008
- lastams I'm a Fan of lastams 54 fans permalink

The six hundred billion plus defense bill recently passed by Congress was virtually unopposed by either party.
Along with the omnibus spending bill in December this legislation was generally ignored by the press, including this post.
In addition, only one of the current serving members of Congress who were running for President (six in December) bothered to vote on the bill at all.
I’m not sure where you are seeing that uprising against spending money on the military, but frankly there was enough pork in the last bill to grease every contractor on the planet.
As to being too lazy to "read what the appropriations were for" the actual legislation can be found at www.congress.org.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:45 PM on 02/16/2008
photo

WE SUPPORT THE TROOPS?

We've been 'at war' for five years, what do we need emergency appropriations bills for? Every other president's administration could submit a budget to Congress during a time of war, can't Bu$h's boys figure out how much money they can steal form taxpayers over an entire fiscal year? Or is it just easier to skim, scam and embezzle taxpayer dollars on a quarterly basis?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:15 PM on 02/16/2008

You are mistaken. During WWI and WWII, the war cost far more than annual appropriations or budget projections could predict. That's why the nation had numerous Bond Drives, to pay for the wars.
Semper fi

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:10 PM on 02/16/2008
- TakeSake I'm a Fan of TakeSake 23 fans permalink
photo

The money doesn't go to the troops for proper equipment. It's going to Halliburton's secret accounts for W and the President to retire on.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:22 PM on 02/16/2008
- bushmocker I'm a Fan of bushmocker 7 fans permalink

Why is it the trolls that support the troops don't think there's justification to blame the Bush administration for the negligence of not supplying the troops with the right equipment or for cheating them out of their benefits or not taking care of them properly and immediately when they have serious injuries?You support nobody by not holding their feet to the fire.Oh,nevermind,as Republicans you think they should all pick themselves by their own bootstraps and get off their poor me,I'm hurt and need help routine.Your President has consistently cut benefits and you say nothing,is that your sacrifice to the cause?I got my tax break,let the vets work things out on their own.You trolls are real gems.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:56 PM on 02/16/2008
- jrb35 I'm a Fan of jrb35 14 fans permalink

Hold on a second! I do blame the Bush administration for their gross incompetence and for the countless blunders they have made. I didn't vote for him. I wish he and Cheney were run out of office for their abuse of power and for subverting the Constitution.

What I object to is the lazy reasoning all too often used on this site - even by those whose positions I might support. I object to the hypocracy of those who say "why aren't the troops getting the protection they need?" and then bitch when an emergency appropriations bill to do just that is passed. Get it? Yet you'll probably call me a troll again (boy, THAT'S original!) or accuse me of being some sort of war monger.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:05 AM on 02/17/2008

Well said. These are only the lunatic ravings of the fringe left, who really don't care a whit about the troops, but look for any excuse to jump on this Administration.
Semper fi

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:08 PM on 02/16/2008
- jbatch I'm a Fan of jbatch 42 fans permalink

Berettasskeeter:

Dude. Bush has consistently refused to fund Vets health care needs;
He's failed to provide troops with essential equipment;
He lied us into an uneccessary war that INCREASED the number of terrorists;
He sent in too few troops to fight the war;
He had no post-invasion plan;
He's extended tours beyond what the Army thinks is viable;
etc. etc. etc.

What part of that is "caring for the troops?"

Semper fi?

You shame the Marine Corps, with your stupidy.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:05 PM on 02/16/2008
- lastams I'm a Fan of lastams 54 fans permalink

Here a list of ARMED groups currently operating in Iraq. This list does not include the so called Iraqi army, police force, or the 140 thousand armed Iraqis currently serving the 35 seperate ministries.
The Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq,
The KDP, THE PUK,
Ansar Al-Islam, Ansar Al-Sunnah Army, Faylaq Badr, The Shahid Al-Sadr Force,
The Islamic Movement of Kurdistan, Sa'd bin Abi Waqqas, Usbat Al-Huda (The daughters of Guidance),
The Resistance Front, The Iraqi Organization of Liberation, Kata'ib Al-Zilzal Al-Mujahidah (Jihadist Earthquake Brigades), Kata'ib Salah Al-Din, Kata'ib Al-Mujahidin, Jama'at Al-Tawhid wa Al-Jihad (Unification and Jihad Group), Jaysh Al-Mahdi, Jund Al-Sham. (God's Wrath), Tha'r Allah, Mafariz Al-Intiqam (Martyrs Brigades of the Hamas Movement), Sarkhi Hassani, Mujahedin Allahu Akbar (God is Great Fighters),
The Ba'ath Arab Socialist Party, Fedayeen Saddam (Saddam's Martyrs), Al-Qiyadah Al-Amah li Jaysh Al-Iraq, The Islamic Jihad Brigades of Muhammad's Army,
The Dawa (Islamic Call) Party,The MEK, Al-Qaeda in Iraq,The Fadihla (Islamic Virtue) Party
The Accordance Front, The Awakening, The Freedom Fighters, The Knights of the Two Rivers,
The Sunni Islamic Party of Iraq,
Gen. Qais Hamza (The Godfather) Aboud and his always popular “Scorpions”,
And leave us not forget, officiating over this cauldron of Islamic idiocy that our President (with a straight face) calls a democracy, is his divine highness, The Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani.
Oh yea, things are working out just fine in-country. In fact, if we pour a little more gasoline on the fire, it just may go out entirely.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:03 PM on 02/16/2008

More gross incompetence by the Bushies and Pentagon. That's not surprising

The United States of America "lacks the industrial capacity" to build Heavy trucks. That's unbelievable and had better not be true.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:26 PM on 02/16/2008
- geobushono I'm a Fan of geobushono 15 fans permalink

so when that traitor peter pace was cocktailing his way around DC, his fellow Marines were being killed by his buddy rumsfeld.
both those fuckers should be marched to the wall.
When I was a Marine, we were always reminded that we were the red-headed stepchild of the Military.......and the money would never be enough to do the mission properly.......that was in '64.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:03 PM on 02/16/2008
- cindyw I'm a Fan of cindyw 47 fans permalink
photo

There was an article in the paper last week about a company who was contracted by the government to manufacture helmets for our military. The company was sued because they shortchanged the armor in over 2 million helmets. The company settled for $2 million. A week before the settlement, the same company was awarded a $74 million dollar contract to make more helmets. I wonder how many of our troops lost their lives or suffered debilitating injuries because of these defective helmets. Isn't anybody watching the damned store?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:59 PM on 02/16/2008
- grisgris I'm a Fan of grisgris 3 fans permalink

I wonder what political ties can be traced from the company to the current administration.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:02 PM on 02/16/2008
- Alvin4NY I'm a Fan of Alvin4NY 24 fans permalink
photo

No shit.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:13 PM on 02/16/2008

Do don't "win" a $74 MILLION CONTRACT by being the most qualified supplier . . .
The "contract management team" should be sent over to escort the delivery of their next shipment in pickup trucks from the Airport to the Green Zone . . . protected by only their helmets . . .

$2 million settlement on over $100 Million plus continued supplier status defies "outrage" . . .

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:23 PM on 02/16/2008

Yeah, its people on both sides who are doing the same thing who are in charge. Until we clean house, both house and senate, rid ourselves of the bad eggs who refuse to do things legit, our troops will continue to suffer. Its both sides. The gate keepers as you refer to it have taken huge pay offs for thier silence. Its how they stay on the senate, in the congress. Its totally wrong, and grounds for an uprising by the American people. Othe countries wouldn't be so quiet about this kind of thing, they would be riotting, which we all should be until someone listens and does the right thing. We are much too soft on our leaders.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:16 PM on 02/16/2008
- Nommo I'm a Fan of Nommo 82 fans permalink
photo

Support the troops. Yes, indeed.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:58 PM on 02/16/2008

The real insanity of this story. The one that everyone doesn't want to deal is that the costs increased because demand for the same vehicles by contractors made it so. Contractors received the vehicles FIRST because they were willing to pay more. You guessed it (Catch 22) WE paid for the contractors purchases. Of course the "good" part was the contractors made a healthy profit off of it. "Free Unregulated Enterprise" at work.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:41 PM on 02/16/2008

So we paid Blackwater (Cost plus) to outbid our own lower paid Patroits?

No wonder Eric is so happy with this Administration of War Profiteers . . .

"100 MORE YEARS!"

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:27 PM on 02/16/2008
- NotWaldo I'm a Fan of NotWaldo 44 fans permalink
photo

George W. Bush : "The buck stops ... over there."

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:38 PM on 02/16/2008
- vontrapp I'm a Fan of vontrapp 9 fans permalink

From what I've read, the MRAP is an inefficient vehicle for our military. Large, bulky, unreliable and with extremely limited application. Even in urban environments, where its anti-IED/mine design is most needed, it is unwieldy to use due to its large size and poor maneuverability.

Perhaps some military commanders don't want to be saddled with a surfeit of these limited-use vehicles.

I've read of the MRAP being described as a classic case of a good-intentioned but late and very imperfect civilian/congressional response to a specific and immediate problem faced by our soldiers in the field.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:38 PM on 02/16/2008
photo

The MRAP is also obsolete.The insurgents just went to more powerful and better-shaped charges in their IEDs.The MRAP is now just as vulnerable as any Humvee.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:10 PM on 02/16/2008

And where did the bad guys GET so much high explosive?

Google "al Qa'Qaa."

We left 380 TONS of the stuff unguarded in our rush to Baghdad. Insurgents nabbed it.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:32 PM on 02/16/2008
photo

What do you expect from a company that only made jet-engined pleasure boats less than ten years ago? Force Protection Inc. - Google them. Toss whistleblowers into the Google mix and the picture becomes crystal clear!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:53 PM on 02/16/2008
photo

THis is not news. The press simply failed to report it last May. Senator Biden fought for MRAPs and finally got them included in a war funding amendment. He refused to vote without that amendment. He was a Presidential candidate back then, working hard in the Senate and running a campaign. An expert in the Middle East and prodigiously qualified in foreign relations.
The real issues and the war have been ignored by the press, and we have ill-informed about the war that is bleeding us dry and robbed of some serious candidates.

We go with what we have now.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:29 PM on 02/16/2008
photo

I'm just hoping that Joe Biden is either Secretary of Defense or State in the next administration,and is allowed to do what's needed in either area.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:11 PM on 02/16/2008
- cakelady I'm a Fan of cakelady 3 fans permalink

I totally agree with you about Biden. The press and the talking heads did not even give him proper coverage. They desided they wanted Obama and Hillary and what they really pushed and are pushing is Obama. The one candidate who has the least experience of them all. This also happened when Bush was running. They all thought he was just like a regular guy who you would like to have a beer with. Not Gore, he was too intellectual, too knowing all, and Kerry they named him the flip flopper and they kept up that drum beat and so we ended up with his second term. Lord, help us! All we need is someone with little experience at a time when our country needs someone at the helm who understands what and how to fix the mess we find ourselves in today because of Bush's incompetence. This is a crazy world. Obama is a great speaker but has accomplished nothing in his time in office. He needs more experience and being in the senate of a vp would do that for him. I feel that this country is in big trouble and there is nothing we can do but pray that all ends well. Some people are so sure of the outcome, but I see it as a big hope of an outcome they want. Nothing is ever certain in life, except death and taxes, or so the saying goes.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:18 PM on 02/16/2008

Kudos similarly should go to DODD...

...for waging a one-man multi-year campaign to get adequate BODY ARMOR to the troops, even to the point of having to force the Pentagon to actually BUY the stuff AFTER Congress mandated it.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:28 PM on 02/16/2008
photo

Why would the press report it last May when they have failed to report this atrocity since late '05 - early '06.

CorporateMedia protects the hand that owns them.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:55 PM on 02/16/2008
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 Next › Last » (4 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect