Web Site Kicks Sand in Faces of GIs in Iraq Asking for Mats to Ease Hardship of Sleep

[The_Real_ElRoi]

Re: Web Site Kicks Sand in Faces of GIs in Iraq Asking for Mats to Ease Hardship of S

Dear Mr. President,

Support the troops! Start giving to those troops on welfare and heading toward economic oblivion or a hardship such as lack of a mattress--to say you support them and give nothing $ubstantial is just something you say to prop up your bogus loaded political beliefs and values which you think is a weapon but is in all truth--a wet noodle. Let's eliminate your chips, pop, trivial purchases, ISP provider, games, entertainment vices, etc. We need sacrifice--not your posts.

 

[MSgt]

Re: Web Site Kicks Sand in Faces of GIs in Iraq Asking for Mats to Ease Hardship of S

Is there a reason why the military isn't issuing mats to the soldiers? This really sounds like something they should have taken care of.

ISOMATS are a part of basic issue. They are thin layered mats that insulate heat and seperate the "soldier" from the cold ground. They are a part of the combat load for Iraq. However, what this appears to be is a request for padded comfort for an extended period of time in a remote position. Mattresses can be found on the bases where they sleep. Not in the posts away fomr the bases.

The question is whether or not they have cots and if not...why not? Cots are in abundance. I'm sure there's a reason. The most likely is that a nice comfortable pad can make the "soldier" lax. We have had cases where our Marines got too complacent and wound up killed. The most notable was the time 4 snipers were snuck up on and executed in 2004. They had gone against their training and the procedures set for them and began going to the exact same location for their duties, establishing a pattern. They had gotten friendly with their host and the family provided them with comforts for their stays on their roof. Eventually, the family was held hostage as the insurgence snuck up on the Marines. Thinking the individuals coming up the steps was just a friendly delivery of food they never looked back.

And the family was killed. But they did spare the child.

 

[The_Real_ElRoi]

Re: Web Site Kicks Sand in Faces of GIs in Iraq Asking for Mats to Ease Hardship of S

The most likely is that a nice comfortable pad can make the "soldier" lax. We have had cases where our Marines got too complacent and wound up killed.

Does this theory also apply to body and Humvee armor? Clean water? A Coke for under $6.00?

 

[MSgt]

Re: Web Site Kicks Sand in Faces of GIs in Iraq Asking for Mats to Ease Hardship of S

Does this theory also apply to body and Humvee armor? Clean water? A Coke for under $6.00?

Whoa, slow your roll there, pitt bull. Take the partisan goggles off for a second if you can. I don't know what you mean by "theory." I don't know what you mean by a $6.00 coke (I bought 24 case packs of Mountain Dew for my Marines when on the bases for $5.00). I don't know what you mean by clean water (Aside from purified water in water bulls, bottled water was in abundance once Baghdad fell and the civilian contracted company felt safe enough to their jobs that they refused to do before).

"Armor" was a problem. However, it is highly unfair to play this partisan game with this administration in regards to this. The technology for armour has always been there. It wasn't until after 9/11 that the government was made to realize that the military still very much looked like we were still marching in 1975. Let's not pretend that President Clinton had some great focus on military readiness.

With regards to body armour: In 2002, my unit (7th Marines) was among the first to be given the new Flak Jacket. This Flak Jacket was the first Jacket that was meant to stop more than just Flak. However, with pockets for the SAPI plates, we were still absent the plates. Before the invasion into Saddam's Iraq, we were rushed as many as were made. This was barely enough to cover the forward units. But even at the front, I had to pass off my armor to other units as they took point. However, at times, the mission demanded a lighter load for quickness and plates were removed. Eventually, all troops were being supplied this technology. However, because of the rush, a number of these were discovered defective (mine included) and were recalled. As the company slowed the process to ensure quality, the government was forced to find another company to supply. In came the bidding war people shout about for not taking place with Haliburton and troops in the field were stranded with what they had. Of course, nobody seemed to care at all when we were asking for armor during our deployments to Somalia, Bosnia, Haiti, etc. It's of also of note to mention that today's jacket provides no cover to our kidneys.

With regards to HMMWV armor: This technology was never an option or a request until the military started encountering IEDs in Iraq. This equipment was made and sent as quickly as possible (Of course everything could be quicker). However, what we discovered shortly after was that we were going through HMMWVs much quicker, because of axle damage. Our vehicles are not made to carry all the extra weight the armor provides. Also, many units opted not to use (and some individuals still don't) it. I had the armor on my vehicle taken off when not on convoy. The reason is that it is cumbersome and slows reaction time. As great as it is at saving lives, it also endangers lives.

We have other great upgrades to our equipment and much of our tactical gear is of Black Hawk production. Instead of focusing on how we entered the war, we should reflect on the one President that finally focused on our readiness. However, Marines and soldiers continue to fall out of the sky thanks to defective flying machines my father flew in during the Vietnam War. And Washington is still convincing Congress that billions of tax payer dollars are best spent on equipment meant to fight the Soviet Union.

This will enter me into a discussion about our gross defense industry, ignorant politicians, Rumsfeld covens, the ludicrous visions of the RMA, Clinton visions of bloodless or sterile warfare, and the useless hierachy in uniform who merely pad their future jobs supporting Cold War programs that aren't good enough for our troops today. So, I will refrain. Besides, I can only say so much anyway before I am in violation of Marine Corps order and the UCMJ.

 

[The_Real_ElRoi]

Re: Web Site Kicks Sand in Faces of GIs in Iraq Asking for Mats to Ease Hardship of S

I hear ya, "George Bush cares about the troops." That's why he wants to send 20,000 more into the meat grinder so as to attempt to secure the all those lucrative oil contracts that the so-called "Iraqi government" so kindly "awarded" to all those American and British petroleum companies recently. That's how much he cares.
This is the real reason for the war in Iraq and the real reason Bush wants to send in more troops. But, of course anyone with half a brain has known this all along, right?:

Blood and oil: How the West will profit from Iraq's most precious commodity

The 'IoS' today reveals a draft for a new law that would give Western oil companies a massive share in the third largest reserves in the world. To the victors, the oil? That is how some experts view this unprecedented arrangement with a major Middle East oil producer that guarantees investors huge profits for the next 30 years

Published: 07 January 2007

So was this what the Iraq war was fought for, after all? As the number of US soldiers killed since the invasion rises past the 3,000 mark, and President George Bush gambles on sending in up to 30,000 more troops, The Independent on Sunday has learned that the Iraqi government is about to push through a law giving Western oil companies the right to exploit the country's massive oil reserves.

And Iraq's oil reserves, the third largest in the world, with an estimated 115 billion barrels waiting to be extracted, are a prize worth having. As Vice-President Dick Cheney noted in 1999, when he was still running Halliburton, an oil services company, the Middle East is the key to preventing the world running out of oil.

Now, unnoticed by most amid the furore over civil war in Iraq and the hanging of Saddam Hussein, the new oil law has quietly been going through several drafts, and is now on the point of being presented to the cabinet and then the parliament in Baghdad. Its provisions are a radical departure from the norm for developing countries: under a system known as "production-sharing agreements", or PSAs, oil majors such as BP and Shell in Britain, and Exxon and Chevron in the US, would be able to sign deals of up to 30 years to extract Iraq's oil.
Independent Online Edition > Middle East

 

[MSgt]

Re: Web Site Kicks Sand in Faces of GIs in Iraq Asking for Mats to Ease Hardship of S

I hear ya, "George Bush cares about the troops." That's why he wants to send 20,000 more into the meat grinder so as to attempt to secure the all those lucrative oil contracts that the so-called "Iraqi government" so kindly "awarded" to all those American and British petroleum companies recently. That's how much he cares.

Actually, you are hearing only which seems to fuel your political angles of protest. I can say this, because you have taken your simple question, which was angled towards whippping the current administration and for which I answered truthfully, and taken it to a whole different subject, which is angled towards whipping the current administration. How exactly do you see a discussion on insufficient equipment jumping into a post about oil as not being partisan enslavement?

It is a fact that President Bush cares about the troops. It is a fact that President Clinton cared about the troops. It is a fact that no matter what mission the troops have, there was and will always be other factors involved in which partisan individuals will choose to focus on while disregarding all other issues for which the troop is intimately facing.

But let's not pretend that "war for oil" is an evil thing. Troops have been stationed abroad and dying for decades for our oil needs. Plenty of mistakes along the way have been made by every single President. And "war profiteers" will always exist as long as their services are needed by the troop. Troops have died for trade routes, trade securites, in defense of established governments that encouraged American capitalism. Why does oil (something used in every single aspect of our lives) get that taboo stigma? Drive a car lately? Bought a product at a store that was brought there in some manner? Etc.

But focusing on the oil situation: Our oil needs are curently serviced by Saudi Arabia. The House of Saud is behind the very fundamentalism we face by their very long term financing of said movement (It's poetic justice how they have been scurrying around looking for their own creations within their borders). We are allies with Egypt, Pakistan, and Jordan. These four countries are mostly populated with Sunni and the Sunni have always been the international threat and the Sunni Arab is the new "apocalypotic" terrorist.

Now, shift over to the Shi'ite. They are mostly populated in Iran, Lebanon, and Iraq. These three countries are established or birthing democracies. Were it not for Ahmenadejad and his bitter old Mullah supporters and given that Iranians are very much like us in some ways, they could very well be our friends were we able to rid ourselves of intellectual habit in the 90's when we had the chance. Wouldn't it be nice to get our oil supply from a friendlier entity that isn't scared to death of our culture than to have to continue doing business with the lords of terror in Saudi Arabia who use us as a scapegoat as their creations throughout the Middle East blame us for living?

 

[Ikari]

Re: Web Site Kicks Sand in Faces of GIs in Iraq Asking for Mats to Ease Hardship of S

ISOMATS are a part of basic issue. They are thin layered mats that insulate heat and seperate the "soldier" from the cold ground. They are a part of the combat load for Iraq. However, what this appears to be is a request for padded comfort for an extended period of time in a remote position. Mattresses can be found on the bases where they sleep. Not in the posts away fomr the bases.

The question is whether or not they have cots and if not...why not? Cots are in abundance. I'm sure there's a reason. The most likely is that a nice comfortable pad can make the "soldier" lax. We have had cases where our Marines got too complacent and wound up killed. The most notable was the time 4 snipers were snuck up on and executed in 2004. They had gone against their training and the procedures set for them and began going to the exact same location for their duties, establishing a pattern. They had gotten friendly with their host and the family provided them with comforts for their stays on their roof. Eventually, the family was held hostage as the insurgence snuck up on the Marines. Thinking the individuals coming up the steps was just a friendly delivery of food they never looked back.

And the family was killed. But they did spare the child.

Fair enough. Then the question becomes, should the military allow this sort of behavior then. If the soldiers attempting to get items they aren't supplied with by the military can actually harm them or make them lax, shouldn't the military stop soldiers from trying to obtain items which may unnecessarily risk their lives and mission? I'm not making excuses for the company, no one should be a dick to the men and women in our armed forces. But if what you said is true, and there is evidence to support the claim; than wouldn't it be prudent on the part of the military to restrict this sort of behavior?

 

[MSgt]

Re: Web Site Kicks Sand in Faces of GIs in Iraq Asking for Mats to Ease Hardship of S

Fair enough. Then the question becomes, should the military allow this sort of behavior then. If the soldiers attempting to get items they aren't supplied with by the military can actually harm them or make them lax, shouldn't the military stop soldiers from trying to obtain items which may unnecessarily risk their lives and mission? I'm not making excuses for the company, no one should be a dick to the men and women in our armed forces. But if what you said is true, and there is evidence to support the claim; than wouldn't it be prudent on the part of the military to restrict this sort of behavior?

No, you are correct in your questions. They are valid. The military does restrict this behavior when appropriate. With these mattresses, they would have come through the supply system and hopefully someone would have caught them on their way off the base. Here is an example of a military restriction...

I'm sure you are aware of "Underarmour." Up until summer 2006, Underarmour was very popular in Iraq. This piece of gear is outstanding. It not only keeps us cool by using our sweat as "air conditioning," it also keeps us dry. This was a great imrpovement from what we were used to. Our skivvie shirts under our cammies were always cotton and they would leave us drenched in our sweat in the heat with little escape. The military noticed this new gear amongst the troops and began contracting and issuing the shirts to units in Iraq and to units in the States. After all, ranks as high as General was wearing this. It made perfect sense.

However, through real world field testing in Iraq it was discovered that these shirts are highly flammable. The biggest threat to our troops is the IED and the RPG (Rocket Propelled Grenade). The flash given off by these, especially the RPG, causes enough heat that the shirts would catch fire. Many troops died not from the known shrapnel damage, but from the burns.

The Marine Corps has banned this shirt. I don't know about the Army.

This is true for all other commercial gear as well. What looks good in a magazine and on civilian contractors is not necessarily the best thing for the troop. Unfortunatley, thanks to the Internet, we have discovered that troops are buying gear before being authorized. Another issue was our goggles and glasses, but I'll spare you the detail of the damage these caused. The gear we have in our basic issue is much better than it was just four years ago and it may not be what the troop wants, but it has been field tested safely. Troops will continue to try to circumvent the system through the Internet and the military will continue to crack down when appropriate. But, our troops are smart. They know the system. They will get over from time to time in a quest to get what they assume is good for them. And sometimes it will take "Under Armour" incidents to remind them of the dangers.

 

[Stace]

Re: Web Site Kicks Sand in Faces of GIs in Iraq Asking for Mats to Ease Hardship of S

What I find curious is how you all are just assuming that these soldiers are using their own funds to purchase these mats. It's very possible that Sgt. Hess is using military funds. He could very well be a supply sgt. When I was in the Air Force, I possessed a credit card specifically for buying supplies for our office, and I was authorized to use it at many commerical retailers, so Sgt. Hess possessing the same sort of card is not beyond the realm of possibility. Perhaps I missed something, but I didn't see anything in the article specifying where the funds were coming from.

I'm also pretty appalled at the display of partisanship here, even after Gunny commented on it. My God, if you all can't even agree that this is a pretty shitty situation, and that the employee was out of line, without bringing partisan politics into it, what CAN you agree on?

 

[danarhea]

Re: Web Site Kicks Sand in Faces of GIs in Iraq Asking for Mats to Ease Hardship of S

Nah, sounds like one of the greedy, mean-spirited, polluting, employee abusing conservatives whose too cheap to donate a few cots to me.

No. The guy is on the Antiwar side, and gives a black eye to the antiwar side. Want to know why Bush and his bunch are able to get away with the lie that says everyone in the antiwar crowd does not support the troops? It is because of buttheads like this guy, who don't support the troops. Face it, Iremon, there are people on the antiwar side who really hate the troops. They are a very small minority, but they do give Bush plenty of fodder for his own message of hate.

If one really supports the troops, while wanting them out of Iraq, there are many things that can be done, like sending a few care packages to the troops, or not being a complete a$$hole and telling the troops that their hardships are their own problems, because they are in a place they had no control over being in. Our troops signed up for a reason, and a damn good reason, and no matter which side of the debate people are on, these guys should have our complete respect, and not spit upon.

I am glad they fired that butthead. Now will they really show how they feel, and send a few mattresses to Iraq, or was the gesture of firing the employee an empty one?

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Re: Web Site Kicks Sand in Faces of GIs in Iraq Asking for Mats to Ease Hardship of S

Dang, what kind of person or company would have the audacity to respond in such a harsh way to a reasonable request by GI's in Iraq?

Much agreed the guy's a POS.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Re: Web Site Kicks Sand in Faces of GIs in Iraq Asking for Mats to Ease Hardship of S

I hear ya, "George Bush cares about the troops." That's why he wants to send 20,000 more into the meat grinder so as to attempt to secure the all those lucrative oil contracts that the so-called "Iraqi government" so kindly "awarded" to all those American and British petroleum companies recently. That's how much he cares.
This is the real reason for the war in Iraq and the real reason Bush wants to send in more troops. But, of course anyone with half a brain has known this all along, right?:

Blood and oil: How the West will profit from Iraq's most precious commodity

Then why is that the Iraqi constitution guarantees that the oil will remain nationalized?

 

[MSgt]

Re: Web Site Kicks Sand in Faces of GIs in Iraq Asking for Mats to Ease Hardship of S

[/B]

Then why is that the Iraqi constitution guarantees that the oil will remain nationalized?

Because our critics don't want to see that part of it. Now, it is very probable that we will get a kick back for our efforts and rightfully so - better from the Shi'ite and Kurds of Iraq than the Sunni of Saudi Arabia. But a stable oil supply coming out of Iraq and onto the international stage is extremely important to Iraq as it is to every one of these countries who rely upon there only real means of monetary security. This is all they have. But just the mention of oil makes our critics salivate at a chance to "reveal" our demonic and evil intentions.

 

[Navy Seal Patriot]

Re: Web Site Kicks Sand in Faces of GIs in Iraq Asking for Mats to Ease Hardship of S

And how are all the posts helping this GI again? No collective solution on getting the funds for a needy GI. Sad, but true. Talk and no walk. :2wave:

 

[MSgt]

Re: Web Site Kicks Sand in Faces of GIs in Iraq Asking for Mats to Ease Hardship of S

And how are all the posts helping this GI again? No collective solution on getting the funds for a needy GI. Sad, but true. Talk and no walk. :2wave:

What are you looking for here? A Debatepolitics.com show of support or ways to individually support?

Although I don't quite get the notion of "Support the Troop, but Not the War," I do understand the sincerity of individuals to care for our volunteer military and what they are going through.


Department of Defense:
America Supports You

Marine Corps Community Services (MCCS):
MCCS - Deployment Support

U.S. Army:
Army Outreach

AT&T:
https://thor.milexch.com/scs/default.aspx

For greater picture help we could write our Congressmen and women and demand that they stop throwing our tax dollars towards a fattened defense industry bent on facing off with the Soviet Army and start giving the troops what they really need. But good luck with this. This is a black hole full of idiots inspired by fools.

 

[Navy Seal Patriot]

Re: Web Site Kicks Sand in Faces of GIs in Iraq Asking for Mats to Ease Hardship of S

What are you looking for here? A Debatepolitics.com show of support or ways to individually support?

I would favor the individual support method, though some good govt. and private sponsored-supported programs do exist--many soldiers fall through the cracks; as for a thread I tried that route at http://www.debatepolitics.com/war-iraq/14346-pro-war-time-give-soldiers-due.html and don't see alleged Pro-War types really being genuine on giving. The problems with waiting on or just writing to your politician is that the GI's are having problems in the present real time; a sad story of a Marine commiting suicide even though he was turned down an VA appointment for a later date; details of this story: http://www.debatepolitics.com/breaking-news/17468-death-traumatized-minn-marine-came-after-iraq.html

For those who know this a genuine war and post likewise my question for them is "what are you doing?" I understand that most would like to believe that all they need is a bumper sticker and vote for this or that guy and post on this belief--but how is that really helping a soldier? Be that in Iraq or not. Do you really need your chips, pops, magazines, trivial purchases-expenses, video games, etc. etc.? Your telling me you admire and respect the Sacrifice of the soldiers and yet you cannot even make a little adjustment in your life? Why should I believe you.


The WWW is a perfect tool to find someone, or a unit that you could help if you know of no other way. The first link above gives a link to numerous links of support organizations and if you know a soldier or a local reserve or National Guard unit--help them. Don't have money? Give them your time. Get to know them--stop hiding behind that monitor. We have soldiers in need; be that for financial reasons, a good sleep to have, a phone card to call home, a lawn to be mowed stateside, etc., the list is endless and not just compacted into a single care package.

 

[MSgt]

Re: Web Site Kicks Sand in Faces of GIs in Iraq Asking for Mats to Ease Hardship of S

I would favor the individual support method, though some good govt. and private sponsored-supported programs do exist--many soldiers fall through the cracks; as for a thread I tried that route at http://www.debatepolitics.com/war-iraq/14346-pro-war-time-give-soldiers-due.html and don't see alleged Pro-War types really being genuine on giving. The problems with waiting on or just writing to your politician is that the GI's are having problems in the present real time; a sad story of a Marine commiting suicide even though he was turned down an VA appointment for a later date; details of this story: http://www.debatepolitics.com/breaking-news/17468-death-traumatized-minn-marine-came-after-iraq.html

For those who know this a genuine war and post likewise my question for them is "what are you doing?" I understand that most would like to believe that all they need is a bumper sticker and vote for this or that guy and post on this belief--but how is that really helping a soldier? Be that in Iraq or not. Do you really need your chips, pops, magazines, trivial purchases-expenses, video games, etc. etc.? Your telling me you admire and respect the Sacrifice of the soldiers and yet you cannot even make a little adjustment in your life? Why should I believe you.


The WWW is a perfect tool to find someone, or a unit that you could help if you know of no other way. The first link above gives a link to numerous links of support organizations and if you know a soldier or a local reserve or National Guard unit--help them. Don't have money? Give them your time. Get to know them--stop hiding behind that monitor. We have soldiers in need; be that for financial reasons, a good sleep to have, a phone card to call home, a lawn to be mowed stateside, etc., the list is endless and not just compacted into a single care package.

Oh, I see what you are stating. People give in their own way. Some write letters and send packages. Others volunteer to the bases to welcome the troops home after deployments. Some protest to end the war in Iraq (though many don't understand what is really going on). Some support simply by cheering for their mission. But, like you said above, it is true that some are simply catering to their political houses and following along with "their guy" or their Party (Both sides of the spectrum).

By the way, regarding the suicide, the Marine Corp has held the number one spot amongst the branches for suicides, motorcycle deaths, and vehicular deaths since 2003(?) The Marines have always been high and usually lead the pack because of our arrogance and "superman" mentality, but since the war in Iraq, the numbers have broken records. Needless to say, we are not too proud to be number 1 in this position. Much of this is due to the rush of adrenaline that many get used to without a means to duplicate it upon a return to the States. With the fattened bank accounts, many are buying motorcycles without any riding experience. The suicides are for various reasons. "Flipping the switch" isn't as easy for some and they bring baggage home with them. This affects marriages, families, and finances.

With programs in place, Chaplains, and experienced leadership, we are trying to gain control of this, but it is hard. This is a leadership problem and we have only recently been made aware of this trend. Recently (last few years) we have allowed the combat readiness of the individual Marine to trump our focus on his individual needs. In other words, we had returned from deployment, given him leave time and informed him of the help that is available to him if needed (which was supposed to magically fix all personal issues), and then immediately began to prepare him for the next deployment.

 

[Caine]

Re: Web Site Kicks Sand in Faces of GIs in Iraq Asking for Mats to Ease Hardship of S

By the way, regarding the suicide, the Marine Corp has held the number one spot amongst the branches for suicides, motorcycle deaths, and vehicular deaths since 2003(?) The Marines have always been high and usually lead the pack because of our arrogance and "superman" mentality, but since the war in Iraq, the numbers have broken records. Needless to say, we are not too proud to be number 1 in this position. Much of this is due to the rush of adrenaline that many get used to without a means to duplicate it upon a return to the States. With the fattened bank accounts, many are buying motorcycles without any riding experience. The suicides are for various reasons. "Flipping the switch" isn't as easy for some and they bring baggage home with them. This affects marriages, families, and finances.

Yeah, no kidding.
A friend of mine who still lives in Jacksonville, NC (Camp Lejune) was nearly killed when a dumb *** Marine was trying to commit suicide by driving his car into a gas pump at 60mph. My friend had parked his company truck at the pump and was on the opposite side of the truck pumping gas when the idiot Marine slammed into his truck and pushed it up nearly on its side. The Marine lived and my friend wasn't hurt thank god.

I say, if you Marines want to go around killing yourselves, the least you can do is try not to take any innocent people out with you. God!!!!!!

 

[chosendudenyc]

Re: Web Site Kicks Sand in Faces of GIs in Iraq Asking for Mats to Ease Hardship of S

Typical responses. It's easier to blame some bed mattress company employee than to blame the Bush Administration for sending soldiers into war situations without fully-completed gear with enough replacements to go around.

As Americans we should be asking, why is their a need for any modern soldier to go without needed military gear and leadership?

Why aren't Americans putting blame toward the direction in which it must be displayed and not toward avenues that further blind those who refuse to use their eyes?

All the money that was given toward this "war", and yet realities like this continue to pop up without media concern directed at the correct party.

Continue to be blinded and blame political parties like children fighting over candy. That's what both parties want while secretly working together.

 

[Caine]

Re: Web Site Kicks Sand in Faces of GIs in Iraq Asking for Mats to Ease Hardship of S

Typical responses. It's easier to blame some bed mattress company employee than to blame the Bush Administration for sending soldiers into war situations without fully-completed gear with enough replacements to go around.

So, its the President's fault that a small group of soldiers have been sleeping on the floor uncomfortably for a while huh? Are you aware that the ground is where you sleep in combat usually? The standard shouldn't be having a bed or a cot. The standard for sleeping in a combat environment is the ground. Period. A floor mat is not "military gear" or "replacements". What are we REALLY talking about here bub? Stay on Topic!

As Americans we should be asking, why is their a need for any modern soldier to go without needed military gear and leadership?

Again mattresses and floor mats are not "needed" military gear. And where is the lack of leadership you talk about?

Why aren't Americans putting blame toward the direction in which it must be displayed and not toward avenues that further blind those who refuse to use their eyes?

There is nobody to blame here except the ******* employee who responded in such a rude manner.

All the money that was given toward this "war", and yet realities like this continue to pop up without media concern directed at the correct party.

Again... having a comfortable spot to sleep is not a primary concern of the military when it comes to accomplishing a wartime mission.

Continue to be blinded and blame political parties like children fighting over candy. That's what both parties want while secretly working together.

Exactly, even though there is nobody to blame here but a rude *** employee of a mattress company.

 

[MSgt]

Re: Web Site Kicks Sand in Faces of GIs in Iraq Asking for Mats to Ease Hardship of S

Typical responses. It's easier to blame some bed mattress company employee than to blame the Bush Administration for sending soldiers into war situations without fully-completed gear with enough replacements to go around.

As Americans we should be asking, why is their a need for any modern soldier to go without needed military gear and leadership?

Why aren't Americans putting blame toward the direction in which it must be displayed and not toward avenues that further blind those who refuse to use their eyes?

All the money that was given toward this "war", and yet realities like this continue to pop up without media concern directed at the correct party.

Continue to be blinded and blame political parties like children fighting over candy. That's what both parties want while secretly working together.

I love how you accuse others of this "political party blame" game while focusing on ways to blame a political party and Bush. So....

1) The absence of personal armor and vehicular armor is Bush's fault, despite the fact that we entered Somalia, Bosnia, and Haiti without it. Not a mention that we finally got it on Bush's watch.

2) The fact that Marines and soldiers are dying simply because their aging and duct-taped helicopters are dropping out of the sky in combat and in training is Bush's fault, despite the fact that we have been flying and dying in these death traps since the Vietnam War. Not a mention that this has been under Republican and Democratic sponsership.

Shall we even mention all of the upgrades to equipment that we have seen that was completely neglected during the 90's? Or mention the fact that the stage to blame all equipment absences on Bush exists only because it was built by a prior administration? Or does this not meet with the agenda to blame a single Republican political Party and Bush? Is the premise here to pretend that we had a 21st century military up to the day Bush entered office and then it all went backwards?

But this thread was about a single employee that behaved in a manner that was not approving of most Americans whether they agree with our actions against Saddam or not. While it themed around equipment, it had nothing to do with blaming the President or the conjuring of the oil angle as mentioned by another. Surely, this and that post offers us a glimpse of that sentiment you stated above about....."blame political parties like children." It's also trolling, but that's another issue only worth mentioning.

 

[chosendudenyc]

Re: Web Site Kicks Sand in Faces of GIs in Iraq Asking for Mats to Ease Hardship of S

[/B]So, its the President's fault that a small group of soldiers have been sleeping on the floor uncomfortably for a while huh? Are you aware that the ground is where you sleep in combat usually? The standard shouldn't be having a bed or a cot. The standard for sleeping in a combat environment is the ground. Period. A floor mat is not "military gear" or "replacements". What are we REALLY talking about here bub? Stay on Topic!

Again mattresses and floor mats are not "needed" military gear. And where is the lack of leadership you talk about?

There is nobody to blame here except the ******* employee who responded in such a rude manner.

Again... having a comfortable spot to sleep is not a primary concern of the military when it comes to accomplishing a wartime mission.



Exactly, even though there is nobody to blame here but a rude *** employee of a mattress company.

It isn't natural for me to read contradictions directed at my words. You seem like the type that will take the same congressional billions for this "war" and use it for other means not related toward the "war" itself, along with not providing for the countless American soldiers who risk their lives.

PROVEN and FACTUAL: Lack of military required gear continues and have been undone since the start of this "war".

Given, our generation is a generation of technology, no soldier should be sleeping on any ground. Yes, I do blame the Bush Administration given that administration is in charge. Not listening toward those that combat for your personal presidential causes is heedless and un-American, not to mention unethical and some how illegal in my view.

This isn't mere assumptions; this is very much proven and factual. If the Bush Adminisration cannot use technology and the money received from congress to protect and bring the military within this generation, what's the use?

 

[chosendudenyc]

Re: Web Site Kicks Sand in Faces of GIs in Iraq Asking for Mats to Ease Hardship of S

It's also trolling, but that's another issue only worth mentioning.

I didn't care for that comment. Please refrain and be a better debater because of such.

 

[chosendudenyc]

Re: Web Site Kicks Sand in Faces of GIs in Iraq Asking for Mats to Ease Hardship of S

1) The absence of personal armor and vehicular armor is Bush's fault, despite the fact that we entered Somalia, Bosnia, and Haiti without it. Not a mention that we finally got it on Bush's watch.

2) The fact that Marines and soldiers are dying simply because their aging and duct-taped helicopters are dropping out of the sky in combat and in training is Bush's fault, despite the fact that we have been flying and dying in these death traps since the Vietnam War. Not a mention that this has been under Republican and Democratic sponsership.

Shall we even mention all of the upgrades to equipment that we have seen that was completely neglected during the 90's? Or mention the fact that the stage to blame all equipment absences on Bush exists only because it was built by a prior administration? Or does this not meet with the agenda to blame a single Republican political Party and Bush? Is the premise here to pretend that we had a 21st century military up to the day Bush entered office and then it all went backwards?

But this thread was about a single employee that behaved in a manner that was not approving of most Americans whether they agree with our actions against Saddam or not. While it themed around equipment, it had nothing to do with blaming the President or the conjuring of the oil angle as mentioned by another. Surely, this and that post offers us a glimpse of that sentiment you stated above about....."blame political parties like children." It's also trolling, but that's another issue only worth mentioning.

Please focus on current events. I see a very unbalanced military exploitation that is without hope, leadership, and Americanism. I listen to the many soldiers that blog and spend their own money on commerials and other media outlets, just so folks like me and you can better understand the truths that goes on thru their eyes and not those of liars and profit tyrants.

If this presidential administration was ethical, honest, patriotic, believed in Americanism and progressive politics, and had the spirit to want to make my country a profound betterment for all Sir, there would be no debate on my part and many in majority.

But there are too many negative debates that seem to continue this administration and rightfully so. Don't blame me for wanting situations to improve. Blame those in leadership positions that refuse to allow proper changes that will positively impact lives gobally.

If you re-visit the past for counter measures you have already proven defeated Sir.

 

[Caine]

Re: Web Site Kicks Sand in Faces of GIs in Iraq Asking for Mats to Ease Hardship of S

It isn't natural for me to read contradictions directed at my words. You seem like the type that will take the same congressional billions for this "war" and use it for other means not related toward the "war" itself, along with not providing for the countless American soldiers who risk their lives.

Um..... no.. and what does any of this have to do with what I said?

PROVEN and FACTUAL: Lack of military required gear continues and have been undone since the start of this "war".

Wrong and Wrong: Your statement here.
Being a combat veteran, I can tell you that all this whining about not having armor, and not having every little thing that we think might be necessary after the fact is retarded. I served in a combat unit during President Bush's so-called "Major Combat Operations", thats right.. I was a member of the "shock and awe" crew. Do you hear me complaining about not having Armored HMMWVs? Nope. Because its not.. what did you call it... required gear.
Please don't argue with me what is required and what it not until you have served during where there is real combat, and not a sporadic event of random bombings.

Given, our generation is a generation of technology, no soldier should be sleeping on any ground.

You have ABSOLUTELY no idea what Military Training is all about do you?
Please, don't argue on a subject you know nothing about. The military motto when it comes to training is "Train how you fight" Guess what? In my 4years with the 82nd Airborne, we never once slept on anything when we were out in the field except... you got it.. THE GROUND.

Yes, I do blame the Bush Administration given that administration is in charge. Not listening toward those that combat for your personal presidential causes is heedless and un-American, not to mention unethical and some how illegal in my view.

So its illegal to make soldiers sleep on the ground? :rofl

This isn't mere assumptions; this is very much proven and factual. If the Bush Adminisration cannot use technology and the money received from congress to protect and bring the military within this generation, what's the use?

While I will agree that there has been a mismanagement of funds for certain. I can hardly agree with you that it is an outrage, or should be considered "illegal" by making soldiers do in combat what they train for every time they go on field training exercises.

Its more horseshit *** Media outrage over something they know nothing about, which gets people who don't know anything other than what the media tells them outraged, when the truth is far from what they know.