Author Topic: Rumsfeld at his best...... (Read 1895 times)

Toad · « **Reply #45 on:** December 09, 2004, 02:17:37 PM »

Then we must hang the man who approved the plan to use GP vehicles at all, I guess.

Clearly, the only vehicles we should be using in Iran are the Abrams and Bradley. Modified as necessary to carry fuel and supplies, of course.

If this is the case, I think we should consider hanging the guy that approved building GP vehicles at all. We obviously need way more Abrams and Bradleys.

In short, it just not easy to foresee all situations and eventualities perfectly, is it?

Eagler · « **Reply #46 on:** December 09, 2004, 02:24:34 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Airhead
How could they? Iraq was a non-issue as Kerry pledged to keep our troops there- and, in fact, Kerry voted against the appropiations bill that financed this war.

anything to make the current admn look bad - anything
both then and now..

the real story in all of this is the fact the soldier has freedom to voice his question directly

in the majority of other militaries aropund the world, the soldier would be dead or wish he was ...

jamusta · « **Reply #47 on:** December 09, 2004, 02:27:33 PM »

Toad. Anyone who would send a humvee into that type of an environment is a fool. I have used humvees for many years and know what they are capable of. To send them into a city to support troops is not how they should be used. The humvees only defense is its size agility and speed. All of which is useless in house to house fighting. To see them zooming through the streets getting wounded and bringing equipment is what you should expect. To watch them stationary with a mounted machinegun on a city block with RPGs all around is not.

Ripsnort · « **Reply #48 on:** December 09, 2004, 02:34:03 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by jamusta
Toad. Anyone who would send a humvee into that type of an environment is a fool. I have used humvees for many years and know what they are capable of. To send them into a city to support troops is not how they should be used. The humvees only defense is its size agility and speed. All of which is useless in house to house fighting. To see them zooming through the streets getting wounded and bringing equipment is what you should expect. To watch them stationary with a mounted machinegun on a city block with RPGs all around is not.

Quote

Originally posted by Ripsnort
Exactly. Now if someone were to critisize how battlefield generals are using this platform, I'd agree. But to lay blame on Rummy just shows how desperate the left is to show its dismay of who is in power.

DoctorYO · « **Reply #49 on:** December 09, 2004, 02:35:40 PM »

Roadside bombs have existed for quite some time.. Kind of like the threat of hijacking (no pilot doors squished by special interest is a primary catalyst for 9/11 how many Israel airlines have been hijacked since their door campaign years ago... how bout none... and note with nearly ten times the threat level we have ... greed caused 9/11 why is it so hard to understand) has existed for some time.. To claim ignorance like this is some new type of warfare by coming up with creative names (IED) for old school tactics is pathetic .. I see right thru it... When i went thru training roadside bombs were a known threat and the ambush that usually follows one was also well known and trained upon... To claim this is new school only shows your IQ or lack of it..

My opinion is the primary mode of transport should be bradleys in a city enviroment.... Yeah a 155mm (our own arse stuff used against us..) shell underground most likely will imobilize one possibly destroy it.. all these coke can and pipe bomb crap would have little to no effect.. Bingo you just limited your enemy to confined tactics (using huge bombs..) thus enabling you to pinpoint his source of supply and remove it.. But hey what the hell do i know im just some arm chair as some claim.... heh.. some of you people are very inept/closeminded on tactics it very evident you have no formal training..

Humvees should be used but in a limited enviroment as long as all these roadsides are going off..

even a armored hummer has very little floor board armor so armoring them up is rather moot for anything larger than 7.62 rounds... from the sides front and back..

Rummy is a putz.. and yes he does make many generals skin crawl because he is tactically inept.... borderline clueless.. listen to your freaking generals or prove your system is better.. Proof i see is quite the contrary to anything positive comming from Rummy's light in light out approach and this shock and awe bull ****.. want to know iraqi low tech moab (shock and awe) is head lapping and raodside bombs; rather effective for the cost of them.. nothing has changed since 1917.... you fugs should read your history..

The issue here is not humvees or bombs.. the issue is soldiers think they need armor (or any other supplies for that fact) and 2 years into the conlfict they have little to none of what they have requested.. anyone who says our supply chain is healthy is a moron on the same page as rummsfield.

DoctorYo

PS with exception to the marines retention is at a all time low.. Ill say again eagler, rip and other warmongers post them reup papers america needs you as a meat shield go get em.. (3 to 1 odds same response as last time snappy comeback but no put up when called on.. more like clam up....) (if they say your too old then post your rejection letter that will suffice for your patriotic arses...)

Toad · « **Reply #50 on:** December 09, 2004, 02:56:08 PM »

I'm not disagreeing with you at all.

However, it's pretty clear that the US did not buy enough GP-type "armored" vehicles to do what we're attempting to do over there.

In fact, we really didn't procure much in the way of "armored" GP vehicles at all.

Those Cougars look nice... but the contract was $10 million for 40 of them, about $250K each.

Right now an armored Humvee is about $150K.

I'd cheerfully ante up on my taxes to pay for the better vehicle but it's going to take a while to catch up, eh?

How come the crystal ball wasn't showing the need and the President wasn't asking for the $$$$ back in 1997 when Force Protection, the company that makes Cougars, started up?

I also wonder if, way back in 1983 the military had specified a Cougar-like GP vehicle and we now had tens of thousands of those in Iraq, would the enemy still use IEDs as their main weapon?

I mean, if ALL our vehicles were heavily armored to the point that IEDs were ineffective, the enemy would change tactics, wouldn't they?

Is it possible for all our operations to be impregnable to any tactic they can devise? Would they just not seek out another weakness?

Yeah, the Humvees suck at what they are being used to do, given the enemies tactics.

Could this have been foreseen in 1983 before we settled on it as the GP vehicle?

Could our present "battle plan" have been altered so that the Humvee's vulnerability to IEDs could not be exploited? If so, how? Do we have enough other armored vehicles to fill the transportation needs?

Does ANYONE doubt that this experience will cause significant change in our military vehicles? Sure it will. See, you build your new stuff based on your past experience.

We'll improve our GP vehicles. Our enemies will then look for a different weakness to exploit or tactics/weapons to negate our improvements.

All that being said, I didn't like the Humvee when it was first approved. There were lots of folks saying that based on what was happening in South Africa and Israel/Palestine that it needed to be significantly armored.

We have to live with it now and patch it as fast as we can.

mosgood · « **Reply #51 on:** December 09, 2004, 02:59:28 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Ripsnort
Did we armor the Jeep in WW2? No.

Are we armoring the Humvee out of need? Yes.

We going above and beyond what we've done in the past, and reacting swifter to changing events in the battlefield.

Most war falls between black and white, and its up to us to flex with it. We are.

Not really sure if you are agreeing with me then or not.

but anyways.... Runsfeld is an arrogant salamander that has had a few MAJOR job related blackeyes and should go.

Ripsnort · « **Reply #52 on:** December 09, 2004, 03:05:05 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by mosgood
..that has had a few MAJOR job related blackeyes and should go.

This instance is not one of them...

mosgood · « **Reply #53 on:** December 09, 2004, 03:56:15 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Ripsnort
Exactly. Now if someone were to critisize how battlefield generals are using this platform, I'd agree. But to lay blame on Rummy just shows how desperate the left is to show its dismay of who is in power.

comon Rip, it's now the lefts fault that Rumsfeld is being held responsible for the problems in his dept?

Ripsnort · « **Reply #54 on:** December 09, 2004, 03:59:37 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by mosgood
comon Rip, it's now the lefts fault that Rumsfeld is being held responsible for the problems in his dept?

Do Toad and I have to re-emphasize our points again? Please re-read them..

jamusta · « **Reply #55 on:** December 09, 2004, 04:00:47 PM »

This one is not Rummys fault. Humvees were not built for this type of warfare. This was clearly demonstrated in Somalia. That experience showed a humvee can take a massive amount of abuse but was inadequate for urban combat. I saw a humvee and a contractor chevy pickup truck collide head on going about 30mhp each. The humvee was completely destroyed in the front but the chevy looked like it was capable of driving off. Certain parts like the whole frontend, doors and rear hatch on humvees are made of a fiberglass type material that is not so thick. I used to punch holes in the floor with a screwdriver to allow water to drain.

mosgood · « **Reply #56 on:** December 09, 2004, 04:10:59 PM »

lol ya i got a little off track. I don't know enough to know if it's his fault or not...... really... i admite it....

I do know that his type of DEAMEANor (and I emphisis DEMEAN) is not a good quality in a leader or administrator OR a public servant. It really doesn't serve anyone except him.

(ok fire away)

Ripsnort · « **Reply #57 on:** December 09, 2004, 04:17:09 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by mosgood
lol ya i got a little off track. I don't know enough to know if it's his fault or not...... really... i admite it....

I do know that his type of DEAMEANor (and I emphisis DEMEAN) is not a good quality in a leader or administrator OR a public servant. It really doesn't serve anyone except him.

(ok fire away)

So you admit that the point of your thread was just to find something...ANYTHING to bash Rummy?

That says alot about the blind bias that does not allow you to intellectually analyze the situation in Iraq in a fair manner, thus mitigating your opinion to that of a gnats.

WhiteHawk · « **Reply #58 on:** December 09, 2004, 04:51:31 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Eagler
I for one am vary glad he is staying as he knows his biz, not to mention he makes every liberals skin crawl
LOL

Yea, sacrificing hard fighting men to piss off the liberals is cool.

Toad · « **Reply #59 on:** December 09, 2004, 05:08:23 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by jamusta
This one is not Rummys fault. Humvees were not built for this type of warfare.

And that pretty well nails it down. This thread should just dry up and end now.