Sure there are problems, but from what I could see the system was working hard to upgrade our equipment. Should we have waited until every soldier had an Interceptor with SAPI plates before invading? Should we have waited until every vehicle in the Army is up-Armored. According to Paul Reikhoff we should have. I really would have like to have gone to combat with a hand held death ray. Should we hold off on the next war until we have phasers? Rumsfeld received scorn for his statement: “You go to war with Army you have, not the Army you want.” But the scorn was undeserved. That’s how it works. And credit where credit is due, it’s Don Rumsfeld who has pursued the transformation of the military to maintain technological superiority, to include personal defense.(via NIF)
Monday, October 03, 2005
Armored and Ready
Possibly prompted by last-week's Washington Whine and Sleaze, Marine vet John at Pundits My *ss demolishes the claim that Kerry/Hillary/Gore/Sharpton/Boxer would be a better war President than Bush:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Thanks for the linkage! /TJ
I nearly fainted at the thought of Boxer, Gore, Sharpton or Kerry as a war president. Don't do that, Carl!
Hillary has more testosterone than either Gore or Kerry, but I doubt she would hold faith with the Armed Forces. It would be like throwing them to the sharks.
Thanks for the linkage, from me too! The piece was actually prompted by seeing Reikhoff's name in the AP story on the Early Bird. Which was definitely a whine and sleaze party
You might like today's post too!
http://punditsmyass.blogspot.com/2005/10/army-hit-by-msm-attacks.html
John: Good post; I've linked to it from my post on reenlistment/recruiting.
Post a Comment