Democrats: Real Security. Bush Republicans: Dangerous Incompetence

[JustOneWay]

Am I the only one who remembers that if the dems had not cut military budgets to begin with in the 90s, our troups would have had all of the armor etc they needed to begin with?

It was Bush who sent the soldiers into battle without being fully armored. Why did the Bush administration send unprotected troops into a war?

 

[Yusuf Evans]

It was Bush who sent the soldiers into battle without being fully armored.

With Congressional backing. Both parties are to blamed for this one.

 

[dignitized]

It was Bush who sent the soldiers into battle without being fully armored. Why did the Bush administration send unprotected troops into a war?

"you fight a war with the army you have."

 

[dignitized]

It was Bush who sent the soldiers into battle without being fully armored. Why did the Bush administration send unprotected troops into a war?

Lets not forget that the war went exceptionally well. It's dealing with terrorists that has been a problem.

 

[dignitized]

The Cold War ended. We weren't facing any enemy as massively armed as the USSR. The downsizing of the military began with Bush 41.

Not to the degree that Clinton downsized. Bush 41 cut several no longer necessary big ticket programs and down sized after the gulf war armistice.

REMEMBER which branch of government has the power of the purse. It is not the executive branch. Lay blame at the feet of those who deserve the blame. Congress has the power of the purse. BETTER - why not blame those who are using terrorist tactics?

 

[Eryk]

"you fight a war with the army you have."

The army that the military wanted--based on war games etc--was 500, 000 troops. That's what they told Rumsfeld at the first meeting. Rumsfeld wanted a much smaller force. Gen. Tommy Franks asked for 250,000. Rumsfeld wanted to send 70, 000 and eventually they got 125,000. A larger force could have prevented rampant looting in April 2003, and they wouldn't be exhausted now--a "broken force" as one General described it. Ah, the civilian know-it-all who wouldn't listen to the brass. History will not be kind.

And Rumsfeld lied about armor production.

 

[utdbear]

This thread is a joke...Democrats: Real Security? hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha


Man that was good.

 

[pantsman52]

This thread is a joke...Democrats: Real Security? hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha


Man that was good.

Ya, Bush does a much better job.

"Show your papers Citizen"

 

[Thirst_For_Knowledge]

This thread is a joke...Democrats: Real Security? hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha


Man that was good.

See, this is another example of why Republicans cannot be trusted to lead this country. At least Americans are finally taking notice. Republicans are too busy playing politics and throwing political attacks on their enemies, to protect us. How can we be a safe nation when this is the Republican response?

 

[Eryk]

Oops, forgot this one.

They bombed aspiring factories and fired millions of dollars worth of cruise missiles into empty tents.

The "aspirin factory" is an urban legend/Republican lie. Take the red pill.

Those cruise missle attacks missed bin Laden by only a couple of hours.

Clinton tried to freeze the assets of international organizations accused of funneling $$$ to al Qaeda. But the legislation was killed by the Republican congress, with Republican Senator Phil Graham leading the way. They didn't want to bother their Saudi friends.

 

[utdbear]

See, this is another example of why Republicans cannot be trusted to lead this country. At least Americans are finally taking notice. Republicans are too busy playing politics and throwing political attacks on their enemies, to protect us. How can we be a safe nation when this is the Republican response?

Well, OK, fine. Hmmmm.. ok, here's a real response:

Pacifism has lead to the downfall of every country which has embraced it's philosophies. Right now, the poster child of pacifism can be found today's Democratic Party and modern American liberal. Being a child of pacifism isn't exactly going to inspire anybody to vote for you when you're running on national security. But you go ahead and give it the college try. I wouldn't expect to win though.

I'm going back to my laughing, that was a darn good joke!

 

[burrow_owl]

Dems proposed a supplementary appropriations bill that would've provided for more equipment; the GOP voted it down.

Only one party bears the blame for this state of affairs.

 

[utdbear]

Maybe someone can tell me this, but a couple of House measures that made no financial sense all of the sudden wipes away 50 years of gutting the military? My advice to Dems, stick to your guns, national security is not someplace you want to take on the Republicans head on. You'll lose 10 out of 10 times.

 

[burrow_owl]

Maybe someone can tell me this, but a couple of House measures that made no financial sense all of the sudden wipes away 50 years of gutting the military?

So military equipment while we're engaged in a conflict isn't cost effective? I appreciate your honesty.

Re: military cuts: nope. They just didn't bloat the budget with unnecessary military-hardware pork.

 

[utdbear]

So military equipment while we're engaged in a conflict isn't cost effective? I appreciate your honesty.

Re: military cuts: nope. They just didn't bloat the budget with unnecessary military-hardware pork.

You're right, such pork as body armor. It baffles me to think that some people believe that body armor as other military gear is available with JIT delivery.

 

[Yusuf Evans]

Oops, forgot this one.The "aspirin factory" is an urban legend/Republican lie. Take the red pill.

Those cruise missle attacks missed bin Laden by only a couple of hours.

Clinton tried to freeze the assets of international organizations accused of funneling $$$ to al Qaeda. But the legislation was killed by the Republican congress, with Republican Senator Phil Graham leading the way. They didn't want to bother their Saudi friends.

And Clinton pardoned several thug buddies of his. Dems are just as dishonest as the Republicans.

 

[Fallschirmjägergewehr]

Oops, forgot this one.The "aspirin factory" is an urban legend/Republican lie. Take the red pill.

So it's ok to bomb a country based on faulty intelligence if a Democrat does it?

 

[MachZer0]

The army that the military wanted--based on war games etc--was 500, 000 troops. That's what they told Rumsfeld at the first meeting. Rumsfeld wanted a much smaller force. Gen. Tommy Franks asked for 250,000. Rumsfeld wanted to send 70, 000 and eventually they got 125,000. A larger force could have prevented rampant looting in April 2003, and they wouldn't be exhausted now--a "broken force" as one General described it. Ah, the civilian know-it-all who wouldn't listen to the brass. History will not be kind.

In case you missed it, the invasion force numbered 290,000, more than double your figure of 125,000.

 

[Yusuf Evans]

In case you missed it, the invasion force numbered 290,000, more than double your figure of 125,000.

Yes it was this amount, but why was it shrunk? We are about to hit our fourth OIF operation, as in, this is the fourth FY we are in Iraq. The levels we requested should have been honored, period. It's better to go in with an overkill than to have your foot in your mouth. I can't stand Rumsfield, but I have to respect his position in the DOD.

 

[Eryk]

So it's ok to bomb a country based on faulty intelligence if a Democrat does it?

No, that was good intelligence. They had chemical weapons. "Aspirin factory" is a lie told after the bombing.