Military funding in Iraq
Help is on the way to safeguard military forces in Iraq because the Pentagon has given the green light to purchase mine-resistant vehicles. That’s the implication of the AP clip on July 4. You might think the funding passed by Congress in May really was needed to support the troops right now.
The more likely scenario is that troops won’t start to see Fragmentation Kit #3 which provides armored protection around the Humvee fuel tank for at least a year.It will take 9 months tooutfit all vehicles. That’s based on the “Operation and Maintenance, Army: Justification Book, Vol. I” Fiscal Year 2008 Supplemental Budget Estimates. In this February 2007 document, the Army wrote that the armor for the underbelly of the Humvee, FRAG Kit #4, “is in the early design phase and any successful Proof of Principle testing will require a minimum of 180 days.” Even withan accelerated effortordered by Defense Secretary Gates that might begin installation a year earlier than anticipated, it would be January 2009 before any vehicle in theater has this protection.
Supporting the troops won’t happen by pouring more funds into contracts that won’t be fulfilled for at least 18 months after the money is allocated.
Restricting the allocation offunds in the Defense Authorization bill for the immediate withdrawal of all U.S. troops is the way to support them. Senators Salazar and Allard and all Representatives except DeGette and Perlmutter who voted for the last round of funding need to hear that message from us.
This letter has not been edited.
Hmm...I don't see how resticting funds for better equipment that might be needed in any future conflicts, let alone the one in Iraq if we are so unfortunate to still be there, is showing support of our troops. It sounds to me like that is one sure fire way to get more of them killed and injured.
Posted by Mountain Cat on July 11, 2007 04:50 PMRemember all the talk about the lack of body armor in Iraq? I wonder if Sue was one of those criticizing Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld for sending our troops to Iraq before they had good body armor for better protection. How would it support our troops to make the very same sort of mistake with future service members?
Well, it wouldn’t, now would it?
Sue wrote: “Senators Salazar and Allard and all Representatives except DeGette and Perlmutter who voted for the last round of funding need to hear that message from us.”
No that would not only send the wrong message to those senators but also the very wrong message to our troops by showing a lack of support, Sue.
Some claim that the war is lost, that the surge is not working. Oh, so if the ship is sinking, let’s show support for the sailors by refusing them life vests. Great idea!
Posted by Mountain Cat on July 11, 2007 08:33 PMContrary to the Cat's tirade, I think what Sue Mitrovic is saying is, let's furnish them life vests, not promises that if they don't drown help will be on its way a year or so, when, hopefully, the vast majority of them will be gone. She favors funding for a safe withdrawal of the troops. It's difficult to know what the Cat favors, if anything.
It's easy to say, let's fund everything for the troops. It's a little harder to say, let's take money away from health care, children's programs, environmental disasters like Katrina, homeland security, in order to do that funding. The best way to keep our troops from getting killed or wounded seems obvious.
Posted by Truth on July 11, 2007 08:44 PMMountain Cat said:
"I don't see how resticting funds for better equipment that might be needed in any future conflicts, let alone the one in Iraq if we are so unfortunate to still be there, is showing support of our troops. It sounds to me like that is one sure fire way to get more of them killed and injured."
This notion that Bush would somehow keep the troops in Iraq if the funding was withdrawn, without bullets, food and gas, is laughable. De-funding the war means re-deploying or bringing the troops home.
Unfortunately both sides of the Isle have let that become the frame of the debate. One side out of cynicism, the other out of ineptitude. We need more action in the isle and less of this cyneptiticism.
Posted by Charles B on July 11, 2007 09:12 PMActually, TRUTH, the best way to fund the war in Iraq - which W still claims is the most important issue to US freedom (despite the administration doing almost everything in its power to minimize US freedoms) is to rescind all tax cuts to the wealthy & corporations. Then - use the money from the lower & middle classes to fund "health care, children's programs, environmental disasters like Katrina, homeland security". After all, if this is so critical to this country's welfare, should EVERYONE be contributing?
Posted by Mary on July 12, 2007 06:47 AMLetter writer wants this specific money used to transport the troops home. Good idea. We can use future funds for better equipment and maybe keep the troops home for awhile. Let the National Guard actually guard the nation at home.
Posted by Sharon B. on July 12, 2007 11:19 AM