Jon Soltz: What if 1,000 Armored Vehicles Didn't Get to Troops and No One Cared

[ProSense]

Jon Soltz

What if 1,000 Armored Vehicles Didn't Get to Troops and No One Cared

Posted August 23, 2007 | 11:23 AM (EST)

In the news jumble today -- a new White House front group targeting Republicans on Iraq, Ari Fleischer not knowing the name of the veterans he used in the ads, the president saying we should have stayed in Vietnam while he was defending the airspace of Texas from the VC, and the tragic helicopter crash that killed 14 of our troops -- an important story is getting buried.

Reuters reports that "U.S. troops in Iraq will receive at least 1,000 fewer special armored vehicles than expected this year due to the amount of time needed for shipment."

This is unacceptable. Completely and utterly unacceptable. The issue of getting the most up to date Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles has been a problem for a while, and it's no closer to getting solved.

For years, the United States Marines have urgently requested MRAP vehicles for use in Iraq. Ever since a 2005 memo was sent up the chain of command by then-brigadier general Dennis Hejlik, the Bush administration's civilians in the Pentagon knew of the need for MRAP vehicles. Yet, it wasn't until March of this year that the Pentagon began to move on providing the 3,700 MRAP vehicles requested by the Marines, and over 17,000 requested by the Army. Even still, contract requests that were put out to eight companies didn't forsee production and distribution of the vehicles until 2009.

Now we're finding the ones we've produced can't be shipped quickly enough? That is an outrage. Senator Joseph Biden has it right. In response to the slow production schedule foreseen by the administration, Biden told USA Today, "You cannot tell me that this country is incapable in the next six months of building every single damn one of these vehicles that needs to be built."

more

[obama_girl]

1. Don't send them any vehicles

Bring them home instead.

Sending them more killing machines is just another part of the plan to keep them over there longer.

[ProSense]

2. I understand that argument, but

the soldiers pay, not the politicians. If the troops are still there in six months, should they be denied protection for another Friedman unit? Is the idea to shame politicians into withdrawal by not doing everything to ensure the safety of the soldiers as long as they're in Iraq?

The Bush admin should be forced to send the proper equipment immediately and forced to withdraw by a set deadline. Damn the cost. Take it out of the war profiteers pockets.

[Cameron27]

3. Exactly, "the soldiers pay, not the politicians"

very sad, but true.