Why register with the Steelers Fever Forums?
 • Intelligent and friendly discussions.
 • It's free and it's quick. Always.
 • Enter events in the forums calendar.
 • Very user friendly software.
 • Exclusive contests and giveaways.

 Donate to Steelers Fever, Click here
 Our 2013 Goal: $400.00 - To Date: $00.00 (00.00%)
 Home | Forums | Editorials | Shop | Tickets | Downloads | Contact Pittsburgh Steelers Forum Feed Not Just Fans. Hardcore Fans.

Go Back   Steelers Fever Forums > Miscellaneous > Locker Room


Steelers Fever Fan Shop

Doc's Sports Get FREE NFL Picks and College Football picks as well as Football Lines like live NFL Lines and updated NFL Power Rankings all at Doc's Sports Service.

Steelers Steelers - Bills Bills
August 16th, 2014, 7:30pmET

CBS
Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 05-05-2009, 05:25 PM   #21
tony hipchest
IRONMAN a.k.a. Tony Stark
 
tony hipchest's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Give me back my game...
Posts: 38,558
Member Number: 658
Thanks: 1,616
Thanked 6,774 Times in 2,937 Posts
Default Re: House DEMOCRATS ask for more money???

WHAT? the pentagon was resisting the surge due to not being properly equipped and being stretched too thinly. not only was ancient equipment putting our troops in danger, but it was also affecting our national guard and our allies as well. this isnt new, and the examples are numerous. of course bush wasnt intentionally trying to kill the troops (i know thats the direction your spin will be going) but the rootin, tootin cowboy ignored good advice. he sure had no problem issuing money for haliburton to make ketchup packs.

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2007/0...diness_070524/

Quote:
WASHINGTON — The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have taken their toll on the National Guard’s readiness, leaving some units with insufficient equipment to respond to a domestic catastrophe such as Hurricane Katrina, top Guard officers told lawmakers Thursday.

“While most adjutant generals believe they have sufficient equipment to deal with single disasters common to their states, they fear ... having to send equipment to support a regional disaster such as Katrina,” said Air Force Maj. Gen. Roger Lempke, president of the Adjutants General Association of the United States.

Lempke was among four Guard officers who testified before the House Homeland Security Committee about the readiness of the National Guard.

State Guard units have suffered equipment shortages because of overseas deployment. Units often lose hardware in combat or are required to leave equipment behind when they return home. That has resulted in a loss of “dual-use” equipment that can be used both in combat and to respond to domestic emergencies.

A Government Accountability Office report released earlier this year said the Mississippi Army National Guard has only about 50 percent of the “dual-use” equipment it needs.

“No matter what your political beliefs about the wars in Iraq or Afghanistan, certain facts are undeniable. The conflicts abroad have left our citizen-soldiers at home without enough equipment and stretched too thin,” said Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., the head of the House Homeland Security Committee.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009...r-british-army

(british troops face same problem)-

Quote:
Iraq: the legacy - Ill equipped, poorly trained, and mired in a 'bloody mess'In the fourth part of our series, Richard Norton-Taylor explains how the six-year conflict in Iraq tested the capacity and bravery of British troops to the limit - and how they were betrayed by the politicians
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/...uipment-05141/

Quote:
UK SAS Commander Quits, Citing Inadequate Equipment
22-Dec-2008 18:32 EST

Related Stories: Britain/U.K., Events, Field Reports, Issues - Political, Official Reports, Policy - Procurement, Scandals & Investigations, Trucks & Transport

Advertisement
Land Rover Snatch
(click to view full)In the USA, a controversy erupted in early 2008 when USMC whistleblower Franz Gayl’s “The Mine Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicle Case Study” [PDF] blamed a slow military procurement system for delays in fielding mine-resistant vehicles. The USMC had actually been an early purchaser, but the vehicles had remained an tiny portion of the total US vehicle fleet in theater until the MRAP competition began in 2006 at the USMC’s urging – over 3 1/2 years into a war that had featured IED land mines as the primary threat since 2003.
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0831-06.htm

Quote:
In the 16 months since President George W. Bush landed on the U.S. aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln and declared major combat activities in Iraq complete, the nearly 400,000 U.S. service men and women deployed in active duty around the globe have faced unprecedented difficulties.

By now, the litany of strategic miscalculations in Iraq by civilian leaders at the Pentagon is well known. What the public and news media often neglect, however, are the less publicized policies that have quietly but insidiously undermined American troops, making it increasingly challenging to fight under the U.S. flag.

Four major Pentagon policies in the past year have undermined the morale of U.S. troops and their families - and are likely to leave a negative long-term impact on the ability of the armed services to recruit and retain service members in the long term.

First, in the dog days of August 2003, while Congress recessed, the Pentagon quietly cut payments for imminent danger and family separation. Earlier that summer, Congress had given the nearly 150,000 U.S. troops serving in Iraq and the 9,000 serving in Afghanistan a $75 a month imminent danger pay increase and a $150 monthly allowance to fund rent and child care for their families at home. The administration cited budgetary concerns for this pay cut. Yet the two payments totaled approximately $450 million - a meager amount next to the $400 billion 2003 defense budget or the $166 billion spent in 2003 on supplemental spending bills for Iraq and Afghanistan.

The White House reluctantly agreed to reinstate the bonuses after outrage in the press and Congress, but had already sent a damaging, demoralizing message to troops in the field: compensating service members would be among the last priorities in war time.
and it just goes on and on and on....
__________________
tony hipchest is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-05-2009, 05:30 PM   #22
xfl2001fan
Living Legend
 

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Columbus OH
Posts: 3,641
Gender: Male
Member Number: 8741
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default Re: House DEMOCRATS ask for more money???

While I can't speak for the Guard, I can say that the Reserves are getting better. That being said, you are quoting an Army Times article from 2007. Significant amounts of equipment has been pushed out since then.

Classic examples are the MRAP. It's a beast of a replacement for a Humvee...and while it isn't very eco friendly...it saves lives. The "Up-armor" phase was a temporary solution until the contracts could be created for the next wave of vehicles.

Now, units don't even take rolling stock with them overseas anymore. For that matter, there's a huge stock of equipment overseas that stays there full time. The last 3 units that I've sent overseas have all gone with their Weapons, the RFI Gear (helmet, tactical vest, etc...) Gas Mask and that's about it. They leave behind all generators, vehicles, trailers, and communication equipment...as the stuff we have stateside has been outdated in the last 2 years.
__________________
If you take the "U" out of "STUD", you get STD. I'm just saying.
xfl2001fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2009, 03:20 PM   #23
tony hipchest
IRONMAN a.k.a. Tony Stark
 
tony hipchest's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Give me back my game...
Posts: 38,558
Member Number: 658
Thanks: 1,616
Thanked 6,774 Times in 2,937 Posts
Default Re: House DEMOCRATS ask for more money???

so, speaking of that brand spanking new body armor you were shipping out...

http://www.usatoday.com/news/militar...r_N.htm?csp=34

Quote:
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Army can't be sure some of its body armor met safety standards, partly because it didn't do proper paperwork on initial testing of the protective vests, a Defense Department audit said.
Democratic Rep. Louise M. Slaughter of New York, who requested the department inspector general's report, on Wednesday demanded the firing of officials responsible. But the Army said the gear is safe and the issue is a disagreement over when and what type of testing is required — principally so-called "first article testing" typically done on a product before a contract is awarded.

The inspector general reviewed $5.2 billion worth of Army and Marine Corps contracts for body armor from 2004 through 2006.

"Specific information concerning testing and approval of first articles was not included in 13 of 28 Army contracts and orders reviewed, and contracting files were not maintained in 11 of 28 Army contracts to show why procurement decisions were made," the report concluded.

"As a result, DoD has no assurance that first articles produced under 13 of the 28 contracts and orders reviewed met the required standards," or that 11 of the 28 contracts were awarded based on informed decisions, it said.

"This report indicates that nearly half of the Army's contractors did not perform the most basic test on the body armor before it was sent to our troops fighting overseas," Slaughter said. "During a time of war, it's shameful that the Army would not scrupulously ensure that every piece of equipment is properly tested, especially a fundamentally life-and-death product such as body armor."

The Army said the vests are of excellent quality, consistently tested and meet contract requirements.

"Since its initial fielding in 1999, the ... body armor has demonstrated superior combat performance in Kosovo, Afghanistan, and Iraq," said Lt. Col. Martin Downie, an Army spokesman. "Many soldiers are alive today because of it."

Downie said the fact that the inspector general was not completely able to verify testing or aspects of contracting documentation doesn't mean the armor failed specifications.
which one of bush's buddies pockets were lined by skimming off of the testing costs?

i dont care if downey says just cause they werent tested doesnt mean they didnt meet specifications or werent good product.

the fact is, the price of testing each and every piece of equipment was built into the price of the contract, and if that money wasnt spent on testing, where did it go.

atleast this corruption is being exposed and weeded out (to the tune of $295 billion from defense/contractor procurement spending alone).
__________________
tony hipchest is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2009, 03:35 PM   #24
xfl2001fan
Living Legend
 

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Columbus OH
Posts: 3,641
Gender: Male
Member Number: 8741
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default Re: House DEMOCRATS ask for more money???

Quote:
Originally Posted by tony hipchest View Post
so, speaking of that brand spanking new body armor you were shipping out...

http://www.usatoday.com/news/militar...r_N.htm?csp=34
Well, the body armor that we sent them out with was the stuff fresh off of the shelves. You're referring to an article from last year that was done on a study created for the contracts from 2004-2006. Yes, somebody's pockets were lined quite sweetly. I wish I knew how it happened. However, this was discussed by Army Officials at one of the Logistics conference that I attend every year. The procurement for the latest wave of body armor produced did check out.

Tony, in the last two years, we have upgraded nearly every facet of protection for the troops. Now, we have a lot of stuff (crap) on the shelf that we (wasted a lot of money on) to be used as a training aid...but when it's time to go overseas, they get the good stuff.

For instance, when we went to the Range last month, we took the outmoded body armor with us. We weren't expecting to be fired at...and didn't feel like we needed the extra protection to fire an M-16...

However, studies were done with troops overseas...and the ones who practiced firing with flak vests back home did much better in their qualifications (and the fights they got into) when they were overseas and wearing the real thing. It's an adjustment.
__________________
If you take the "U" out of "STUD", you get STD. I'm just saying.
xfl2001fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2009, 04:01 PM   #25
revefsreleets
Living Legend
 
revefsreleets's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Akron, Ohio Home of LeBron James
Posts: 15,403
Gender: Male
Member Number: 5353
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default Re: House DEMOCRATS ask for more money???

No, get it right. Bush hates soldiers and blacks and poor people and wishes they were all dead. HE himself went through and purposefully sabotaged this equipment, and him and his satanic cronies are now off in the Bohemian Grove or something snickering over all the death they caused while they drink the blood of sacrificed 12 year old virgin girls...
__________________
Official Steelersfever Arians Nuthugger
revefsreleets is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:29 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Shoutbox provided by vBShout v6.2.1 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.0.8 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd. Runs best on HiVelocity Hosting.
Navbar with Avatar by Motorradforum
no new posts