[quote name='PittsburghAfterDark']
That said, could you explain something to me? While in office, Bush has cut military pay, military medical benefits, and sent our troops to war with inadequate supplies. How, as a military person, can you defend his policies when he has done so poorly by the troops?
This is a softball. Bush hasn't cut military pay. He slowed the growth of miliatry pay. Benefits are the same for active duty personnel and personnel drawn into active duty. The armed forces were NOT sent into Iraq with less than adequate supplies despite the reports in the press and the underground/leftist belief.
Armored HUMMERS? They aren't the answer. Neither are the Strykers which were/are being brought up faster (New weapon system.) to protect from roadside bombs. The biggest fault of the Army as far as inadequate protection was prematurely retiring M113's which were the Vietnam era APC's. They aren't sexy, they aren't state of the art but they would be much better than an up armored Hummer. However the army brass always wants sexy new weapons systems even if they aren't the best for the job. They have to incease the budgets. That's an organizational fault that's gone back generations.
The flack jacket debate? Flack jackets will stop shrapnel from a flung grenade but won't stop a small arms round. No body armor will stop an RPG-7 which are as common in Iraq as cell phones seemingly are at home. The issue has never been body armor but getting it delievered. It's not uncommon for requistions to take 6 or more weeks even with a light colonel asking for stuff. Again, that's an organizational fault not a NCA (National Command Authority= President) responsibility.
You have no idea how much different morale is under Bush than it was under Clinton. You'll notice I resigned my commission in 1996? That coincided with Clinton's re-election. Don't believe most of what the press coverage is telling you. It simply isn't as accurate as you're being lead to believe.
How do I know? I just got back from Carlisle and teaching a section on Guderian's romp through the lowlands and France in 1940. Morale amongst the troops I encountered was very good. Not the best I've seen but far from the worst.[/quote]
A couple of points:
(1) I notice that you never responded to the point regarding Bush's cuts to military medical benefits. Given that both the Iraq and Afghanistan wars are creating more casualties, don't you think this was the worst possible time to make those cuts?
(2) RE: the flak jackets. The military had months upon months to prepare for the Iraq war, and would have had even longer had Bush given the weapons inspectors the chance to learn there were no WMDs in Iraq. So I don't buy your argument that it comes down to a requisition issue.
Also, are you saying that our troops don't deserve flak jackets because they won't protect them in every single instance? I'm sorry, but if folks like yourself are going to put their lives on the line, I want them to have every single advantage. Rationalize all you want, but flak jackets and armored Humvees provide an advantage that our soldiers in Iraq did not enjoy.