Delays In Funding Delay Much Need, Lifesaving Equipment

April 29, 2007

I’m angry right now…. very angry. I’m angry because the actons of lawmakers in Washington DC is putting the lives of our troops at a terrible risk. I’m angry because while they continue to play their political games, our troops are sufferig. I’m angry because every delay, means more soldiers lives put at risk. I’m angry because these people could care less about our troops, to them it’s all a game about which political party comes out on top, and nothing about the safety and well-being of our troops.

Awhile back, I did an article about the Buffalos. The Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles with the v-shaped hulls that when hit by an IED, directs the blast out and away from the passengers in the vehicle. To date, NO U.S. troops have died while riding in one of these vehicles. Just last month at a hearing in Washington DC, lawmakers urged the Army to get more of these vehicles to the warzone as soon as possible. Now, that effort could be delayed as lawmakers continue to battle over the war spending bill. HELLO! Our troops need these vehicles NOW!

According to military leaders in both the Army and the Marines, these vehicles have reducd roadside bombing casualties in Iraq alone, by as much as 2/3. That’s saving a whole lot of lives that might otherwise not be saved. Currently, there are around 1,100 of the vehicles in Iraq. The Army, Marines, Navy, Air Force and Special Ops forces want thousands more. The goal for all branches combined is more than 7,700.

Because of the current battle over the war spending bill, the Pentagon says that there isn’t enough funding to purchase as many as the commanders say that they need. According to General Peter Scoomaker who spoke at the hearings with lawmakers last month, that getting more of these vehicles out on the frontlines, solely based on funding. Speaking for the Army, he said that they not only need the MRAP’s now to provide better protection to the troops, but that it is necessary to stay on a path of developing an even better vehicle, because the enemy continues to adapt their methods of attack. At the hearings, Senators pressed to get more of the vehicles into the frontline.

“We’re buying far too few of them,” said Sen. Bryon Dorgan, D-North Dakota. “If we have that capability, why would we not do everything to mobilize, to move as many of them into the field as is possible?”

Good question Senator, I’m asking the same thing myself. I think may have possibly even come up with an answer to your question…. Because the people we’ve elected to National office, find it more important to continue to play their political “power” games, instead of focusing on the fact that our troops need these vehicles as well as other equipment NOW instead of later, when lawmakers tire of the games.

In January the military contracted to purchase 4,100 of the vehicles from various companies who manufacture them. According to the Army, dollars that have already been approved and in the pipeline are not affected by the battle over war spending that is currently raging in Washington DC. However, that still leaves them short of the vehicles that are needed.

While this battle in Washingron DC continues to rage, Marines out on the dusty roads of Anbar provnce in Iraq, say that these vehicles have more than proven their worth. According to Marine SSG Tim Kessler, Marines were riding in one just this month and took a hit from a roadside bomb. Though the blast blew out a tire, NO ONE in the vehicle was hurt or killed. A few days earlier, another of the vehicles carrying 6 Marines was hit by 2 roadside bombs. Two Marines suffered broken bones, but not one of them died. All of them survived.

“It’s an extremel survivable vehicle. I guarantee it saves lives,” said Kessler, pointing to the scars on the side of the MRAP. He added that had the Marines been riding in a Humvee or another vehicle, they would have all been dead.


60 Responses to “Delays In Funding Delay Much Need, Lifesaving Equipment”

  1. VTSharon on April 29th, 2007 10:32 am

    Why the timetable?

    Congress is telling the president that the American people know a losing game when they see one. The people are sick and tired of sending their children to die in BushCo’s tragic and illadvised war. The people know that continued American occupation has infuriated most Muslims in the Middle East, made the United States less safe by acting as a recruiting poster for al-Qaida and virtually destroyed America’s reputation in the world.

    The people want their soldiers home, now!

  2. Terri on April 29th, 2007 10:37 am

    The only thing that’s a recruitment tool for al-Qaeda is people such as yourself and the politicians that you support, who continually embolden them with your defeatist attitudes. You people disgust me. Your willingness to endanger our troops disgusts me. Your attitude and the attitudes of your lap dogs in DC make me want to puke.

  3. VTSharon on April 29th, 2007 10:48 am


    You are clearly ignoring not only the media (which is fine), but information provided through military and government channels and elsewhere. There is absolutely no credible debate any longer that the occupation in Iraq is fueling a surge in terrorist activities - much like the Israeli occupation in the West Bank fuels Hamas and Islamic Jihad. At some point, it is important that you at least accept that which is clearly recognized (like the approval rating for Bush), whether you like it or not, and focus the debate on that which is arguable. Otherwise, you do serious disservice to your readers who come here for the information you provide.

  4. CommanderMom on April 29th, 2007 10:51 am

    Ok that’s 2!

  5. Terri on April 29th, 2007 10:56 am

    When al-Qaeda say themselves that the continual defeatist attitude from the Democrats and people like you, emboldens their cause, then I have to take that seriously. How much fucking clearer can it get than that? Information provided through military and government channels is saying absolutely what YOU refuse to hear. We provide that information on a daily basis here and we clearly point to our sources, FROM the military.

  6. CommanderMom on April 29th, 2007 11:17 am

    Yep Terri, that about covers it! Guess some still refuse to dare to listen to Ranger Vic! (and everyone/ everything out there.)

  7. sue on April 29th, 2007 11:20 am

    Terri you go girl!! I find it rather amusing that VT talks about me not having anything of substance to say!! WOOO HOOOO!! I’m with you C-Mom!!

  8. VTSharon on April 29th, 2007 11:28 am

    Let’s see. Is it possible that al-Qaida is playing politics, too?

    Terri, I find it fascinating that you readily dismiss information that you find objectionable, regardless of the source, but embrace information that supports your cause from anywhere it is made available, even where the information comes directly from the “enemy.” Indeed, you regularly reject info provided from the NY Times and Washington Post, but embrace information provided by al-Qaida! Simply astounding!

    BTW, a National Intelligence Estimate, discussed in the NY Times last September, concluded that the occupation in Iraq has greatly increased the incidents of terrorism and recruitment of terrorists. The estimate is prepared, by the way, with the assistance of spy agencies closely inline with our military.

    Finally, I note that whenever you resort to an f-bomb, the crux of your argument is on the verge of imploding. May I assume such is the case vis-a-vis your comment above?

  9. CommanderMom on April 29th, 2007 11:36 am

    So have ya thanked a vet, yet, today, VT?

  10. sue on April 29th, 2007 11:50 am

    Richard, quite frankly I find it astounding that this is the first time that Terri has actually lost her temper with you. It becomes increasingly difficult to keep a civil tongue in ones mouth when dealing with a raving moron. Which of course everyone here knows you are. The reason that your info from the NYT and the WP are suspect is that it is a proven fact that they have a political agenda, have no qualms about making up their info and post false info regularly, just to support that political agenda. This is hardly the kind of source you would really want to be quoting.

    The significance of the “enemy information” that Terri was talking about is that THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT IT. If you don’t understand that fact then YOU are ignoring the facts.

    And speaking of ignoring the facts, you are so quick to point out people here “ignoring the facts” but when they are presented to you, when they are laid out for you time and time again YOU Richard, are the one who blows through your hole ad nauseum, refusing to face them, not any of us.

    You Richard have no crux to your argument other than your hatred of this country, the people in the military and any one who supports them. That is the crux of your WHOLE argument.

  11. VTSharon on April 29th, 2007 11:59 am


    Amid all the handwaving in your comment, I notice you conveniently overlook addressing the point of discussion: the occupation is increasing the incidents of terrorism and is proving a successful rallying cry for recruitment by al-Qaida.

    BTW, even your new source of “reliable” information - al-Qaida - regularly states as much! Gotcha!

  12. Flag Gazer on April 29th, 2007 12:08 pm

    These vehicles are amazing - I read two blogs by the men who use them and they trust and believe in them.

    It saddens and sickens me to see anyone play with lives via a political football as is happening to our troops now.

  13. Terri on April 29th, 2007 12:13 pm

    Believe what you will Richard/Sharon/CF, as Sue said, you conveniently overlook and ignore any information provided to you, if it doesn’t agree with your agenda. Run and play with your multiple personalities at OneUtah or Wave of Queer.

  14. VTSharon on April 29th, 2007 12:23 pm


    Thank you. I’ll take that as confirmation that you do, in fact, agree that the occupation is increasing the incidents of terrorism and is proving a successful rallying cry for recruitment by al-Qaida.

  15. Terri on April 29th, 2007 12:31 pm

    Actually no I don’t agree with that at all whatever the hell your name is. What I agree on is the stance I’ve already stated that you and your like are emboldening the terrorist activity by your continual garbage.

  16. VTSharon on April 29th, 2007 12:41 pm

    So, Terri, are you stating that the occupation has in no way led to an increase in the incidents of terrorism or proved a successful rallying cry for recruitment by al-Qaida? Interesting!

    BTW, I and most others do not find this point of discussion to be garbage. Rather, it is a dead serious issue that should be discussed, considered and analyzed while moving forward in Iraq and Afghanistan. To suggest the point is garbage is to again deny reality.

  17. Terri on April 29th, 2007 12:46 pm

    I’m stating that the yellow-bellied politicians and the idiots who follow them are what is emboldening al-Qaeda. The same yellow-bellied politicians and their followers who want to do nothing more than turn tail and run like the cowards that they are. The only thing that is garbage is what is spewing out of their and your mouths.

  18. VTSharon on April 29th, 2007 12:58 pm

    You missed your calling as a politician, Terri, or as a political spokesperson. You have remarkable stamina in refusing to address direct points. But the ensuing handwaving speak volumes in and of itself.

  19. Terri on April 29th, 2007 1:08 pm

    Sharon/Richard/CF/Dick or whatever your damn name is, you can continue to live with your head up Harry Reid’s ass as far as I’m concerned. Quite honestly, we’ve provided tons and tons of information to refute everything you continue to spew, yet you fail to acknowledge or address any of it, but instead attempt to find reason to ignore it and continue with your garbage. You’re a waste of time….

  20. VTSharon on April 29th, 2007 1:13 pm

    The occupation is leading to increasing incidents of terrorism and proving a successful rallying cry for recruitment by al-Qaida.

    Yes or no? No need to tell me where my head is or engage in flailing handwaving as, quite frankly, it is beneath you. Just answer the question. The statement is either true, or not true.

  21. brat on April 29th, 2007 1:17 pm

    “NY Times and Washington Post” quoted as VT’s source. If that wasn’t so sad, it would be funny….(Sorry Sue, I really AM trying here..I am trying so hard that this is all I will say….honest!)

  22. Terri on April 29th, 2007 1:18 pm

    I’m stating that the yellow-bellied politicians and the idiots who follow them are what is emboldening al-Qaeda.

    How much clearer can I make my point?????

  23. brat on April 29th, 2007 1:19 pm

    NO! It is NOT true btw….just ask the 85% or so who live in peace in their neighbourhoods. Oooooops.sorry, I forgot myself..Gone!!!

  24. Terri on April 29th, 2007 1:20 pm

    Oh, PLEASE feel free to elaborate more if you wish Brat.

  25. CommanderMom on April 29th, 2007 1:26 pm

    Can I take that as a “no”, VT? That you have not thanked a vet, today, nor lately?

  26. Terri on April 29th, 2007 1:31 pm

    Probably so CommanderMom…. remember he/she/them/it is too busy speaking out against our troops to thank any of them or a Vet.

  27. VTSharon on April 29th, 2007 1:32 pm

    “[al Qaeda's] portrayal of America and the West as an aggressive and predatory force waging war on Islam not only continues to resonate among large segments of the Muslim world but also continues to undermine our own efforts to break the cycle of recruitment and regeneration that sustains al Qaeda and the militant, global jihadi movement it champions.”

    The RAND Corporation, February 18, 2006.

  28. Terri on April 29th, 2007 1:35 pm

    Ya might as well save it for someplace where the people are shallow-minded and not able to think for themselves pal. By the way, did you happen to watch the video that I just posted? It says something different.

  29. VTSharon on April 29th, 2007 1:45 pm

    Brat didn’t like my earlier references so I provided another. You continue to offer irrelevant spin, Terri. How’s about a putting a little meat on the bone.

  30. CommanderMom on April 29th, 2007 1:50 pm

    Oh fer cryin out loud! Would someone just bring me the whole darn flock of sheep, Pleeeze..Neeeed more cotton!oh and some Motrin, too…VT just gives me a headache, and a huge pain in my ARSE!

  31. Terri on April 29th, 2007 2:01 pm

    Perhaps you should take some time to read, really read the things that Anthony and I have written here on the blog Sharon/Richard/CF/Dick. How easily you discount facts right in front of your face. There’s several hours worth of reading here for you, if you’d open your eyes for a change and really read what’s here.

  32. CommanderMom on April 29th, 2007 2:03 pm

    VT, You my friend, are the only one doing any disservices, here. You know who ALL we listen to, and consider, the ones in the real know! And you must surely know, by now that YOU and your ilk, cannot change our minds, here, nor other places. So I think it very plain to see, just what it is that you are after. And it is very disrespectful, to say the least!

  33. VTSharon on April 29th, 2007 2:04 pm

    Yes, Terri, I did see the video - it is an old video, BTW, that has been floating around the web for quite some time now. But, in the spirit of cooperation, I will take whatever this one person said as true. So what? What he is saying in the video has nothing to do with the fact that the occupation is harboring continued resentment toward America, increased terrorist activity, and providing a rallying cry for recruitment of terrorists.

    BTW, watching the three gentlemen who also appear on the video role their eyes as your boy speaks begs the question as to what their eventual response is which, perhaps conveniently for your position, is absent on the video. Care to try again?

  34. Terri on April 29th, 2007 2:09 pm

    So what? Yet you expect us to take the garbage you spew forth and blindly follow you and believe what you say? Forget it buster, you’re wasting your time and energy here.

  35. CommanderMom on April 29th, 2007 2:13 pm

    yep couldn’t help but notice The Rand Corp, dated FEB. 18, 2006, VT quoted.

  36. sue on April 29th, 2007 2:18 pm

    Richard your condescending tone is so beneath you. And please stop flailing your hands. We all see you and know who and what you are. You don’t have to draw any more attention to yourself. Perhaps if you would like any of us to address you seriously, you might like to behave in an appropriate manner to be out in public.

    You have no idea what Brat was talking about, nor Terri, nor Commander Mom, nor even me for that matter because you are challenged Richard. We can all see the obvious. You are the only one who cannot see it. I am wondering Richard, what will it take for you to join the real world?? What information BEYOND the piles that have been very eloquently laid at your feet here and on ASP? What would convince you that you are mistaken? You fail to accept any ideas that do not mesh with your own even when faced with piles of back up. And all you do is employ cliffy’s little pat tactic. NOT Answer the question and deflect to something else and not accepting the answer given because it doesn’t match your juvenile thought process, and then belittle the person that gave you the info. Really Richard. Tisk Tisk. I will repeat myself once more. Grow up Richard. If you can’t behave like an adult and play nice, why don’t you just go back and play with yourself in your little playpen over on OU and Waves of Fear. Your personas really are boring to every one.

  37. CommanderMom on April 29th, 2007 2:28 pm

    Yeah, guys, think it’s just still so sad soo sucky, for him.

  38. Terri on April 29th, 2007 2:42 pm

    Hey by the way….. I’m going to try Richard/Sharon/CF’s tactic for a moment, so forgive me. Did ya’ll listen to the song by Mark Leland? It rocks!

  39. VTSharon on April 29th, 2007 2:46 pm

    As I stated previously, RAND was mentioned because Brat rejected the NYT and WP. One trap that I notice each of you gals tend regularly to fall into is the “attack the messenger, not the message” philosophy. The message, generally accepted now by everyone, is that the occupation is leading to increasing incidents of terrorism and proving a successful rallying cry for recruitment by al-Qaida.

    The fact that not a single one of you even try and refute this statement but, instead, spend countless comments attacking the various messengers - e.g., me, the NYT, the WP and now the RAND Corporation - just firms in my mind that the statement is true and, moreover, each and everyone of you know it is true.

    Now, how’s about a little meat on the bone by way of response. Attack the message, not the messenger, if you can.

  40. sue on April 29th, 2007 2:57 pm

    You mean like you do Richard?? Maybe we are just not bothering any more because you don’t listen any way. Maybe we just like playing with a twit.

  41. Terri on April 29th, 2007 2:57 pm

    “…The message, generally accepted now by everyone, is that the occupation is leading to increasing incidents of terrorism and proving a successful rallying cry for recruitment by al-Qaida.”

    WRONG, not everyone accepts that, sorry. Not every Iraqi, as evidenced by numerous articles on this and other MilBlogs, not every American, not every Coalition partner, as evidenced by the numerous articles here and on other MilBlogs. You just happen to ignore that information, as usual.

  42. CommanderMom on April 29th, 2007 3:04 pm

    Hey gals, would it be too mean to make up an alert roster for all those naysayers that do not support, “don’t need our soldiers’ help”, whether it be a natural disaster, terror attack, or?

  43. CommanderMom on April 29th, 2007 3:06 pm

    Doh! :0 Ouch that might hurt!

  44. VTSharon on April 29th, 2007 3:07 pm

    Sorry, Terri, but you are straying again. The numerous articles, etc., that you refer rarely, if ever, address this particular topic.

    Look at it from pure Boolean logic - it is possible for an Iraqi to express a positive attitude at the occupation but, at the same time, acknowledge that the occupation is leading to increasing incidents of terrorism and proving a successful rallying cry for recruitment by al-Qaida.

    In other words, referring to articles that state nothing about the message does little to refute the message. In a similar vein, merely pointing out your rejection of polls does little to refute the fact that Bush enjoys an approval rating among Americans that is in the low 30th percentile, at best.

    Care to try again?

  45. Terri on April 29th, 2007 3:08 pm

    Might not be a bad idea CommanderMom….
    “These people DO NOT want your help” and make sure all the troops have that information.

  46. Terri on April 29th, 2007 3:10 pm

    Sorry Sharon/Richard/Dick/CF you’re straying again…. this topic has nothing to do with Bush’s approval rating.

  47. CommanderMom on April 29th, 2007 3:10 pm

    If you are talking about sidesteppin, VT…learned it from the best of ya,(over there) Thanks.

  48. VTSharon on April 29th, 2007 3:10 pm

    “Hey gals, would it be too mean to make up an alert roster for all those naysayers that do not support, “don’t need our soldiers’ help”, whether it be a natural disaster, terror attack, or?”


    Be careful when you use double negatives. They can be tricky at times and lead to nonsensical or, at best, ambiguous results.

  49. Terri on April 29th, 2007 3:11 pm

    Might wanna take your own advice there Dick.

  50. CommanderMom on April 29th, 2007 3:13 pm

    Exactly Terri~was trying to come up with a catchy title, hehhe

  51. VTSharon on April 29th, 2007 3:15 pm

    Why Terri, thank you. But, as you can imagine, I typically always take my own advice, as it is generally the best advice available!

  52. Terri on April 29th, 2007 3:15 pm


  53. CommanderMom on April 29th, 2007 3:19 pm

    HAHAHAha VT, and you’re still disrespectful.

  54. CommanderMom on April 29th, 2007 3:20 pm

    Terri? Please tell me he’s joking with his last comment!

  55. Terri on April 29th, 2007 3:35 pm

    Remember CommanderMom, he’s suffering from delusions of grandeur. They make meds for that, but apparently he’s forgotten to take his.

  56. brat on April 29th, 2007 5:25 pm

    Okay - one more kick at this can…YES VT I do refute your sources, and even more so when you quote AL QUAEDA, or however they spell it…You have got to be kidding me. I refer you back to my comment yesterday on polling. OF COURSE AL QUAEDA will say the Americans are evil demigods. We ARE whipping their arses (good Brit word for you And YES, when you trot out the terrorists as aa source, of COURSE I will denigrate your “messenger”…

    And OF COURSE they will say they are winning the war. THEY are all about control of their people. I COULD quote you numerous sources that tell a very different story, but why should I? I post about the reputable sources every day of the week…WHY should I do your work for you? NOT!!!

    I shall refrain from any easy comments about your proctology needs ;) - but maybe if ya used your eyes and brain?

    Sheeeesh… your behaviour reminds me of the kindergarten playground. IF you find our way of handling the TRUTH so objectionable, so opposed to everything you hold to be true, I have to ask WHY you persist in returning here ad nauseum. Maybe ya think this is sport? Well newsflash - this is NO sport at all. I suggest you go about your business of enjoying your life. The lifestyle fought for by OUR troops…


  57. Terri on April 29th, 2007 5:27 pm

    Well said Brat! I do have to say though that I paraphrased al-Qaeda as saying that the political fighting in America has emboldened them.

  58. sue on April 29th, 2007 8:00 pm


    You repeatedly told Terri she needed to answer your question and that because you didn’t get the answer you wanted to hear that gave you a gottcha. So does that mean because you don’t ever answer anyones questions here, for instance MINE about what the PLAN is, that YOU concede that you haven’t a clue what YOU are talkin about and we all caught you in a gottcha?? HMMMMMMMMMM????

    You come here and state that WE can’t have it both ways. What about you Richard?? HMMMMMMM??? You chide me for having a condescending attitude and say that no one will take me seriously, what about you Richard??? HMMMMMMM???? Do you understand why you get the attitude that you do toward you, and do you honestly believe that ANYONE here takes YOU seriously?? (Just a little tidbit for you. You are so fond of polls, maybe Terri can put up a little poll just to see how many people on this blog take me seriously as opposed to you. I would be willing to risk the embarrassment of knowing that you are more believable than me. How about you Richard? Willing to put your rep on the line and take the vote??) You tell me not to “handwave” yet you are the one on this blog day in and day out jumping up and down and doing ooooo ooooo oooo like Horshak on Welcome Back Kotter just to have people pay attention to you. What is it with you Richard?? What is your problem?? We all know about your issues over there with your “buddy” and we all have tried to be understanding and make allowances for your problem. But you really must stop behaving so childishly. It is now officially old and it is really starting to stink.

    By the way Richard. What Is the PLAN??? How about answering the question. OOOPS!! Gottcha.

  59. Sylvia Johnston on April 30th, 2007 1:17 am

    Sharon, Richard, whoever you are, why do you continue to come here when you are so obviously not welcome? Aren’t there other blogs of like-minded people where you can have little chats about your beliefs? You’ll find no converts here. We support our troops and our leadership. And we will do that until the mission is complete.

  60. CommanderMom on April 30th, 2007 11:02 am

    Right On, Syvia J. Terri, Sue,brat, Flag Gazer, Right on!

Got something to say?