Scraps

Bull sh--. The amount of weight added to a tractor by adding armor is insignificant comared to the load in a trailor.

Ever drive any of those trucks? I've driven similar trucks. How about having enough armor to stop a round from an AK-47?

And the reason why it is so diificult to slap some armor on a tractor is?

Humvees? Where did I mention Humvees?

Most of my funding comes from surface ships now. Nice non seqitur.

Tough to up armor a mule. Not particularly difficult to up armor a tractor.

If I had it my way, none of those 130,000+ troops would need the body armor.

The Romans had trains? You learn something new every day.

And how many times in those 20 years were you involved in a counter insurgency where the insurgents primary targets where the supply trucks that you were driving? Maybe you trained for a different war?

Hey BIB, I understand it gets really hot in that armor. Maybe we should do away with all armored vehicles as well. What do you think?

Got any statistics on the relative number of GIs that have died from dehydration/exhaustion as opposed to enemy action?

No, but if I had it my way, 130,000+ servicmen wouldn't be either.

We should do away with body armor. Obvviously the comfort of the GI at the end of the day should be of paramount importance.

I doubt a muslim would find it particularly thought provoking. To them, Mohammed is the prophet, Bush is just an infidel.

Maybe because they haven't even met to discuss the proposal, let alone sign anything.

So if I develop a cocaine addiction can I blame Christopher Columbus? After all, if he hadn't discovered the New World, we wouldn't have all those coca plants being grown in South America or a vibrant drug smuggling industry.

Actually, Rumsfeld fought for it and won it. Bremmer reported to Rumsfeld. I used post Soviet Afghanistan as an extreme. Ironically, the administration seemed come closer to this model prior to the war. That's one huge reason why I was against this optional war. Of course I the Balkans were ever brought up people would simply say Iraq is different. To some extent I agree with this. However the Brits also benefitted from occupying a part of Iraq that stood the most to gain by Saddam's ouster. We similarly had smooth sailing in the Kurdish areas. If the Brits had to deal with central Iraq, I'm not convinced they would have been much better.

I'm not sure the body of experience is really that deficient. We've had models that were successful (Japan, Germany post WW2) and complete failures (Afghanistan post Soviet withdrawal). We have continuing nation building projects (Balkans), and a handle on the history of the region (Lebanon, Syria, Iraq under British rule). In fact is was ba upon these experiences that Shinseki based his estimates. It was pretty obvious that it was going to take a lot of troops, time and money to turn out successfully. Given the history of the region, the role religion plays in the society, the tribalism and anti-Americanism, it was always an iffy proposition.

Why you're so damned smart, why don't you reward yourself with a pickle juice dipped candy bar?

You know its got me wondering now, how would cereal, chocolate candy and ranch dressing taste with pickle juice?

Closer to the pouch variety. It came in something like a 2 1/2 gallon plastic jar and could never go bad. Didn't need to be refrigerated after opening.

Charlie won't blame it on the invasion of Iraq. He'll tie it into the secret CIA plot that brought down the twin towers with radio controlled cargo planes that shoot missiles into building just before the planes crash into the buildings themselves.

Well then its f*cked up. What is the point in going into a war of choice to transform a region if you don't adequately plan to win the peace?

Apparently neither do you Obi Wan.

In what sense? Maybe not, but it appears they had a better sense of what was required than those who are "planners".