Troops with no weapons.

[samuel]

Senator Obama stated he talked to an officer in Afganistan that stated that his platoon which should have numbered 39 but was only 24 because part of it was sent to Iraq,could get weapons from the taliban easier than they could from their commander&chief. Rush Limbaugh is asking for proof.I would like to see proof myself. sam.

[two-70]

wow

[troy2000]

Sounds like he garbled the story to me...

[mym1a]

I have some friends who were in vietnam they tell me that it was very common for the guys in the rear to have the best gear, but no ammo or rifles wow? yeah i would like to hear that from the actual vets. if its true we as citizens need to make a big stink out of this!!!

[samuel]

I have met a lot of Saigon commando,s, they always had good equipment,but I had what worked.If it is true Obama should prove it and it should be made into a big stink.If it is untrue Obama should be made into a big stink. sam.

[GlockMeister]

Me thinks it's just Obama trying to get something positive back, back for all the flack he's gotten for what he's said in the past in regards to the war in general. It's probably about as true as what the New York Times is saying about McCain, just about a month after endorsing him. What a joke. Why endorse someone than a month later try to smear him in the press? In both stories, let's see some proof. Not just here say.
And in this Obama story, did he give a soldiers name? Oh wait, let me guess it too was anonymous. lol

Did anyone here the comment his wife said, I guess twice, because it was in the speech she was reading and she must have used the same speech twice? Don't know if she wrote it or what, but she had to have read it before hand to approve it.

Anyhow, I guess in this speech she gave, she said that for the 1st time in 45 years, she was actually had something she could be proud of as an American or something to that effect. I'm not sure what it was that was the only thing to make her proud to be an American in 45 years. They never said what that was.
But seriously, she never watched T.V. or listened to a radio for 45 years? In her mind or eyes, the U.S. and Americans are so bad there was nothing else that makes her proud of the country her husband wants to be President of and the same one she'll represent as the First Lady if he wins the office? What a crock of S_ _ T

They (Fox news,CNN, etc.etc.etc.) every channel I saw it on, said that since it was said during the nomination process that it more then likely won't hurt her hubby, but had it been said during the general election, it more then likely would have hurt his chances if not ruined them.

[mym1a]

Originally Posted by GlockMeister

Me thinks it's just Obama trying to get something positiveback, back for all the flack he's gotten for what he's said in the past in regards to the war in general. It's probably about as true as what the New York Times is saying about McCain, just about a month after endorsing him. What a joke. Why endorse someone than a month later try to smear him in the press? In both stories, let's see some proof. Not just here say.
And in this Obama story, did he give a soldiers name? Oh wait, let me guess it too was anonymous. lol

Did anyone here the comment his wife said, I guess twice, because it was in the speech she was reading and she must have used the same speech twice? Don't know if she wrote it or what, but she had to have read it before hand to approve it. I hope your right glock??

Anyhow, I guess in this speech she gave, she said that for the 1st time in 45 years, she was actually had something she could be proud of as an American or something to that effect. I'm not sure what it was that was the only thing to make her proud to be an American in 45 years. They never said what that was.
But seriously, she never watched T.V. or listened to a radio for 45 years? In her mind or eyes, the U.S. and Americans are so bad there was nothing else that makes her proud of the country her husband wants to be President of and the same one she'll represent as the First Lady if he wins the office? What a crock of S_ _ T

They (Fox news,CNN, etc.etc.etc.) every channel I saw it on, said that since it was said during the nomination process that it more then likely won't hurt her hubby, but had it been said during the general election, it more then likely would have hurt his chances if not ruined them.

[rick343]

Yo Mama Obama is full of sh*t. It's typical dem rederick and lies. He said a capt. gave him the info, capt. who, where did he get the info. Nobody questioned the story or him for authenticity. Those dem pigs will say and do anything to get what they want. You should know that by now.
I'm a retired first shirt and know for a fact when our troops go in country, they are equiped with the latest and greatest of equipment and all the ammo they can carry.
Take anything that spinless coward says with a grain of salt, they are all liars.

______________________________
I'm your huckleberry

[nathangdad]

Probably untrue but we must realize the
senior military could have set this story up
as a strange psycho-play for more support
for their lost cause in the sand. Remember
Vietnam and the psycho-tales of the senior
military as the war lengthened in time.

This could be a little one act play in a performance
designed point blame fingers later on and Obama
might have an unwitting participant.

The great lesson of military history from Vietnam
on has been to distrust those in top command.
Do not even credit them with rational thought as
their overall performance fails to produce results.

[Windwalker]

I want to see proof!

[rick343]

Not only do I want to see proof, I want to see the officer that told him that and the officers name and unit.

___________________________
I'm your huckleberry

[mym1a]

Originally Posted by samuel

I have met a lot of Saigon commando,s, they always had good equipment,but I had what worked.If it is true Obama should prove it and it should be made into a big stink.If it is untrue Obama should be made into a big stink. sam.

if he is telling BS storys I agree.

[samuel]

Originally Posted by nathangdad

Probably untrue but we must realize the
senior military could have set this story up
as a strange psycho-play for more support
for their lost cause in the sand. Remember
Vietnam and the psycho-tales of the senior
military as the war lengthened in time.

This could be a little one act play in a performance
designed point blame fingers later on and Obama
might have an unwitting participant.

The great lesson of military history from Vietnam
on has been to distrust those in top command.
Do not even credit them with rational thought as
their overall performance fails to produce results.

Lets just declare defeat like the liberals want and come home.When they come over here maybe you can talk them to death.Where do you get your history,AlJazeera? sam.

[JBS]

"If you are not willing to place yourself in harms way to protect others;then you have no business passing judgement on those who are."

Originally Posted by nathangdad

Probably untrue but we must realize the
senior military could have set this story up
as a strange psycho-play for more support
for their lost cause in the sand. Remember
Vietnam and the psycho-tales of the senior
military as the war lengthened in time.
This could be a little one act play in a performance
designed point blame fingers later on and Obama
might have an unwitting participant.
The great lesson of military history from Vietnam
on has been to distrust those in top command.
Do not even credit them with rational thought as
their overall performance fails to produce results.

Ya' know, I almost got pissed at this crap...but I didn't. I did find pity for you, though.

[samuel]

JBS:Its pathetic ain't it.And it just goes on and on. sam.

[nathangdad]

It is not defeat we must declare. It is failure we must realize.
Failure to own up to the fact that it was a Bush administration
lie that lead us into a national disgrace. Failure to plan. Failure to consider options. Failure to admit we are often our own worst enemy.
But mostly it is the failure to admit failure that keeps it going
and, for those of us who care about conservatism, the sad reality
that like Vietnam the current war and its association with conservatism
will move the nation to the more liberal stance endangering further
our freedoms under the second amendment.

The Bush war policy and "spying on Americans" legislation is the
greatest gift to liberalism since Barry Goldwater's presidential
campaign against Lyndon Johnson.

[samuel]

Originally Posted by nathangdad

It is not defeat we must declare. It is failure we must realize.
Failure to own up to the fact that it was a Bush administration
lie that lead us into a national disgrace. Failure to plan. Failure to consider options. Failure to admit we are often our own worst enemy.
But mostly it is the failure to admit failure that keeps it going
and, for those of us who care about conservatism, the sad reality
that like Vietnam the current war and its association with conservatism
will move the nation to the more liberal stance endangering further
our freedoms under the second amendment.

The Bush war policy and "spying on Americans" legislation is the
greatest gift to liberalism since Barry Goldwater's presidential
campaign against Lyndon Johnson.

It goes on and on!!! Even when we are winning,we are failing, losing, defeated!Every time such garbage as this is repeated by the liberals,more soldiers die.People like this are only trying to demoralise the troops and win elections no matter what it costs.And it costs soldiers lives.And personally,I am not nearly smart enough to run the war.This man is according to him.I believe he only aids the enemy. sam.

[LarryO1970]

Originally Posted by nathangdad

It is not defeat we must declare. It is failure we must realize.
Failure to own up to the fact that it was a Bush administration
lie that lead us into a national disgrace. Failure to plan. Failure to consider options. Failure to admit we are often our own worst enemy.
But mostly it is the failure to admit failure that keeps it going
and, for those of us who care about conservatism, the sad reality
that like Vietnam the current war and its association with conservatism
will move the nation to the more liberal stance endangering further
our freedoms under the second amendment.

The Bush war policy and "spying on Americans" legislation is the
greatest gift to liberalism since Barry Goldwater's presidential
campaign against Lyndon Johnson.

The media, you know, CNN, MSNBC, etc. are all saying we've lost the war. What they fail to realize and report, is that we are winning the war. Since they are so steadfast against the war and everything conservatives are for, they WANT us to lose... thus, the bad publicity. It is simple, the media is reporting only what their ownership allows... to use the word you are constantly using... only showing FAILURE.

We all hear about the IED's from the American media that kill our soldiers and the mass attacks that kill the civilians... so tell me this, when did you last hear anything about the schools, free society, open markets and the 90% of Iraq living in peace free from the oppression from Saddam and his brothers? It is happening, it is a reality... ask any veteran. If you do not believe our veterans, look to the BBC or foreign reporters who do not have a horse in this race.

We all feel we know how things could have been handled differently but realistically, are you or I privileged to NSA reports on the areas and circumstances in play? The short answer is no.

As for this whole Obama and troops not having guns is bulls**t. As a military member, you do not go overseas without your own rifle and nobody takes your rifle, period. If you feel this was staged by our own military, you are very much confused. This would be poor publicity for them... and you feel they would inflict this kind of wound on themselves? Wow...

[rick343]

You know this Bush hating is going to stop eventually. I just wonder how long you liberal comunists will continue to blame Bush for the whoes of the world. This war could have been where we are today 3 1/2 years ago if the military was allowed to conduct this war like a war and not like a sunday picnic. I blame the loss of our troops on the congress and house for continually disgracing our fine men and women. Threatening to defund the war, and cut off any other necessities out troops needed. I blame every congressman in DC weather dem or republican. I'm pissed !!!!!!!!

_______________________
I'm your huckleberry

[LarryO1970]

Originally Posted by rick343

You know this Bush hating is going to stop eventually. I just wonder how long you liberal comunists will continue to blame Bush for the whoes of the world. This war could have been where we are today 3 1/2 years ago if the military was allowed to conduct this war like a war and not like a sunday picnic. I blame the loss of our troops on the congress and house for continually disgracing our fine men and women. Threatening to defund the war, and cut off any other necessities out troops needed. I blame every congressman in DC weather dem or republican. I'm pissed !!!!!!!!

_______________________
I'm your huckleberry

Let us look at how the troops are supplied.

1. Were the supplies asked for?
2. The S4, (supply occifer or NCO) did they request the supplies?
3. Did Congress approve the supplies? Funny, the Dems control Congress.
4. Obviously, when the Taliban run away, their weaponry is easily obtained... like walking up to it and picking it up. Yeah, a little easier than requesting it.

“They were actually capturing Taliban weapons, because it was easier to get Taliban weapons than it was for them to get properly equipped by our current commander-in-chief.”

Um... the Commander in Chief does not have anything to do with this function. That is what the Congress is for. Again, last I checked, the Congress was in the majority by the Democrats. Ask them why they are failing our troops.

"The captain, who asked not to be identified, said his mounted machines guns stopped working and without the proper parts to repair them the troops were forced to scavenge for Taliban weapons. The captain said he met Obama in 2003 and later told his story to an Obama staffer."

Later, when? What Captain? Obviously, he realizes that he is not authorized to speak with the press and also, realizes what he did is against the UCMJ.

It is obvious that certain "politicians" are against warfare, whether it is in the national interest or not, and will do anything possible to scuttle the effort. We even had those same idiots who were against our entering WWII after Pearl Harbor, same as those today who just chalk up the 3,000 killed on 9/11 as oops, they were in the wrong place at the wrong time, same as the U.S.S. Arizona.

Those same politicians need be pushed out of office as useless in their post and not worth the seat they occupy.