Got feedback on the new design? We're Listening! Send us Feedback

Pentagon to probe delays of gear to Iraq »

Posted by: STONERS 5 months, 3 weeks ago

8.8

Scale of 1 to 10

Read: 28

Propped: 111

Comments: 35

Click Prop It to Raise Score

Prop it

An investigation into allegations the Marine Corps delayed sending blast-resistant trucks to Iraq also will examine whether the Marines were negligent in delivering a laser to divert drivers and people from checkpoints and convoys, according to a memo obtained by The Associated Press.

Read Full Story at news.yahoo.com

Join the Discussion

+ Add Comment

Comments So Far: 35

0%
STONERS5 months, 3 weeks ago

"The dazzler emits a powerful stream of green light that stops or redirects oncoming traffic by temporarily impairing the driver's vision. Without it, troops have to open fire when warning signals are ignored or not seen."

Reply
6 Replies
- 0%
  hyperbola5 months, 3 weeks ago
  
  There are far more serious problems than traffic lights!
  Department of Malicious Falsehoods
  Politics â;; The next time you see a report from Pentagon Public Affairs characterizing the reporting of a journalist or commenting on some question from a political debate, remember the source, and treat any words offered with suitable skepticism.
  ... I talked this morning with two friends who led rifle platoons in Afghanistan. Both confirmed to me that they did, at times, use captured or found weapons or ammunition. One relayed the story of mounting a Soviet 12.7mm heavy machine gun (the equivalent of a U.S. .50 caliber machine gun) on his HMMWV because it was too difficult to get the spare parts needed to fix their G.I. (government issue) .50 cal. Another told me....
  http://politics.propeller.com/story/2008/02/28/...
  Reply
  5 Replies
  - 0%
    injest5 months, 3 weeks ago
    
    "... I talked this morning with two friends who led rifle platoons in Afghanistan. Both confirmed to me that they did, at times, use captured or found weapons or ammunition. One relayed the story of mounting a Soviet 12.7mm heavy machine gun (the equivalent of a U.S. .50 caliber machine gun) on his HMMWV because it was too difficult to get the spare parts needed to fix their G.I. (government issue) .50 cal. Another told me...."
    Hyper, dude, seriously, you ought to change your name to gullible.
    A "Rifle Platoon" is "light Infantry" 3 key words here are "light", "rifle" and "platoon"
    Light Infantry "walks" their equipment is based on them "walking" meaning they have to "carry it" therefore their weapons are "light weapons" not "heavy weapons"
    
    Reply
    4 Replies
    - 0%
      injest5 months, 3 weeks ago
      
      The M2 "heavy machinegun" weighs 83.6 lb by its self 127.6 LB with tripod WITHOUT ANY AMMO. Each round is easily Â¼ LB, that's 200 lb for 500 rounds.
      Not even Rambo could carry that load for 5 miles walking, hence Heavy weapons are not issued to "Rifle Platoons", This is a real basic simple FACT.
      Rifle Platoons are made up from "Squads". Rifle Squads and Weapons Squads. The Weapons Squad is the one with the machinegun, know as the M249 SAW (SAW means S quad A utomatic W eapon, see how that works?) it weighs 15.6 LB much easier to carry than a M2 .50 cal.
      
      Reply
      3 Replies
      - 0%
        injest5 months, 3 weeks ago
        
        HMMWV are not issued to "Platoons" They are issued to Companies and above.
        Now, could a "Rifle Platoon" acquire HMMWV's w/.50 cal's? yes
        Are parts for the M2 hard to get? No more difficult than getting parts for anything manufacture in 1941 to 1945.
        Could troops "acquire" DShKM 12.7 HMG? Yes.
        In fact you could say "Acquiring" Taliban weapons, all weapons, is a priority.
        It works like this, kill the Taliban and take their weapons. This strategy reduces the number of Taliban and the number of weapons they have.
        Hyper, dude, seriously, you ought to change your name to gullible.
        
        Reply
        2 Replies
        
        lovermanComment removed: User banned.
        
        0%
        hyperbola5 months, 3 weeks ago
        
        Well injest, pretty clear that you did not take the trouble to read the article before replying. You are against better "support" for the troops?
        Reply
0%
GHOSTWHOWALKS5 months, 3 weeks ago

The greatest enemy of the American solder is...The Pentagon.
Reply
2 Replies
- 0%
  Shadowolf5 months, 3 weeks ago
  
  Au Contraire, Ghost...American POLITICIANS are!!!
  Reply
  1 Reply
  - 0%
    GHOSTWHOWALKS5 months, 3 weeks ago
    
    Now I thought that was the same thing. But I'll go by your comment.
    Reply
0%
Shadowolf5 months, 3 weeks ago

Heads NEED to roll if the Corp has been deliberately refusing to properly equip the Marines in the field...
Reply
0%
bizexpert5 months, 3 weeks ago

The investigation into the matter will prove everything, lets hope.
Reply
0%
jordan115 months, 3 weeks ago

I don't count on this 'GOP' so called Justice Dept. to investigate anything properly that would make this administration look bad.
Reply
1 Reply
- 0%
  splitrch5 months, 3 weeks ago
  
  In that case they must all be on vacation (or investigating baseball players).
  Reply
0%
rdy2rck5 months, 3 weeks ago

I'm sorry for broadening the scope of this story and showing anger but I've been reading this kind of crap since the war began.
Pasting scraps of metal on humvees for protection and on and on and now this. Bah.

Reply
0%
getreal15 months, 3 weeks ago

You don't fight a war without guns and protection. They need to bring the troops home and while they are at it let them stay in the military and be the protection at home.
Reply
0%
Shadowolf5 months, 3 weeks ago

SPAM ALERT!!!
Lolita01
Reply
0%
Charlson5 months, 3 weeks ago

Who gets the contracts for these equipment played the major role in our troops not getting what they needed. Follow the money.
Reply
0%
bill29365 months, 3 weeks ago

Maybe the problem comes from those who 'voted for the war before they voted against the war'.
Reply
8 Replies
- 0%
  jordan115 months, 3 weeks ago
  
  The problem lies at the feet of george bush. period. Nobody made him attack Iraq.
  Reply
- 0%
  wtagg5 months, 3 weeks ago
  
  If you are going to blame them any problems, you must give them credit for any of the successes. You can't have it both ways.
  Reply
  6 Replies
  - lovermanComment removed: User banned.5 Replies
    - 0%
      wtagg5 months, 3 weeks ago
      
      My comment was directed at the hypocrisy of his comment. If one group must take the blame, they must be given the success also. I am sure the poster wants to give the republicans the credit for the "surge". The irony is that this was suggested by Murtha back in 04. The administration accused him of being a traitor for suggesting it back then.
      Reply
      4 Replies
      - JohnQPublicComment removed: User banned.
      - lovermanComment removed: User banned.2 Replies
        
        0%
        injest5 months, 3 weeks ago
        
        Loverman, that quote comes from that question about up armored vehicles, not about troop strength as you are claiming.
        Oh and the up armored claim by THAT soldier was bogus as 800 of the 830 vehicles that unit has were already up armored long before his unit was deployed.
        One soldier, identified by The Associated Press as Army Spc. Thomas Wilson of the 278th Regimental Combat Team, a Tennessee National Guard outfit, asked Rumsfeld why more military combat vehicles were not reinforced for battle conditions.
        National Guardsman "Thomas Wilson said to Rumsfeld, quote, 'our vehicles are not armored, we do not have proper armament vehicles to carry with us north,' into Iraq." "according to senior Army officers, about 800 of the 830 vehicles in Wilson's Army regiment, the 278th Calvary, had already been up-armored" at the time of his widely publicized question.
        
        Reply
        1 Reply
        
        lovermanComment removed: User banned.
0%
splitrch5 months, 3 weeks ago

not just at the expense of Military Personnel.
Reply
2 Replies
- 0%
  Teech5 months, 3 weeks ago
  
  Bush and Cheney and their cronies just love to keep that money rollin' in. War is VERY profitable for those cats. So, a bunch of kids have to die to make those guys billionaires. Sh!t happens.
  Military and civilian casualties are no more of a concern to Bush and Cheney than a grain of sand at the beach.
  Reply
  1 Reply
  - 0%
    splitrch5 months, 3 weeks ago
    
    lets not forget all the other forms of corporate welfare they love to dole out at our expense.
    Reply
0%
IRS20075 months, 3 weeks ago

It is such a surprise that more readers have not commented on this story. One would think there are more that 20 or 25 Americans on the internet right now.
Reply
0%
markmawn25 months, 3 weeks ago

Isn't this like the pot probing the kettle's black hole?
Reply
0%
nikkibabe5 months, 3 weeks ago

To Pentagon:
Relief is on the way. The Iraq invasion and occupation will be ended by Easter 2009.
Reply