Beating a Dead Horse

This weekend has brought a lot of talk from the Executive Branch of government on military and national security issues. I hate to keep pounding the Obama drum, but I can’t let this one go. During Obama’s weekly radio address today, Obama said,

…all too often in recent years and decades, we, as a nation, have failed to live up to that responsibility. We have failed to give them the support they need or pay them the respect they deserve. That is a betrayal of the sacred trust that America has with all who wear – and all who have worn – the proud uniform of our country.

And that is a sacred trust I am committed to keeping as President of the United States. That is why I will send our servicemen and women into harm’s way only when it is necessary, and ensure that they have the training and equipment they need when they enter the theater of war.

So, I find it interesting that we’re sending in over 20,000 troops into Afghanistan WITHOUT proper equipment.

At a news conference this week in Kabul, Secretary of Defense Gates said, “I heard this on several occasions today, that the equipment is coming in behind the troops and is not here and available for them when they arrive.”

You know, I seem to recall when this happened on Rumsfeld’s watch that the country was shouting loudly in protest at this sort of travesty. Rumsfeld remarked quite honestly that “you go to war with the Army you have, not the Army you want.” What’s different now? The Messiah is in office, so now it’s okay to send our troops into combat unprepared and underequipped?

Gates attributed the delays to “the amount of equipment that has to be brought in and, frankly, the relatively limited infrastructure in terms of airfields and so on of how to get it in here.”

When Gates met with Marines, some complained they didn’t have communications equipment. Others complained about vehicles. And yet, where’s the drum beat of opposition to this “travesty?” Nancy Pelosiraptor (to use the Tygrrrr Express term) even called for Rumsfeld’s resignation because of equipment shortages to our troops.

I just find it disingenuous for the President to publicly state one thing when the reality is quite different as stated by his Secretary of Defense. Maybe fighting a war isn’t as simple as the idiots in Washington think?

7 Comments on “Beating a Dead Horse

  1. Pingback: Flopping Aces » Blog Archive » The Campaigner-in-Chief’s Memorial Day Speech

  2. I have to agree with miss birdlegs in that it is just plain hypocrisy. It’s the same hypocrisy that made President Bush responsible for everything that happened from the second he stepped into the office and allows for Obama to still not take responsibility for anything after five months in office. Absolutely nothing that happened in the first days of the Bush administration was a result of Clinton’s ineptitude, but rather a lack of attention by the brand new Bush administration, ie China and 9/11. Seems some people always seem to have a plethora of apples and oranges served nicely dipped in a bowl of hypocrisy.

  3. The angst about Rumsfeld’s comments had more to do with American’s concern about the wisdom of going into Iraq then his “no sh%#$%t Sherlock” comment about going in with the army you have.
    Just a thought.
    NY-David

  4. C’mon, CJ. They guy was a community organizer. Surely he knows what he is doing.

  5. What’s different now, cj, is hypocrisy!

  6. What’s different now, cj, is the lack of equipment when the Chimp had his brain fart into Iraq and Obama’s sending additional troops to Afghanistan is apples and oranges. The troops in Afghanistan today are so for more equipped than those of yesterday that comparisons between the two are apples and oranges. Notwithstanding, our troops can and always will deserve more than what they have at any particular moment.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.