60 Minutes: Troops Don't Have Enough Armor

60 Minutes is reporting in their lead story that troops are using plywood and sandbags to protect their vehicles.  They're also stripping old Iraqi tanks for armor.  Troops are using walkie talkies from home so they can call each other for help.

The incompetence level of this administration is staggering.  Essentially, the Pentagon failed to plan for a long occcupation, something almost anyone with common sense could have predicted.  And our troops are paying for it with their limbs and lives.  

This story needs to get a lot of play.  Everyone needs to call their local stations and write their local papers to make this an issue on the day before the election.

Update [2004-10-31 20:13:15 by patagonia]: Here is a link to the story (thanks to Craziel).

•  60 min going after DOD

  it's pretty scathing.  at one point reporting: "the humvees don't have armor because the DOD did not plan for a long war in Iraq."

  definitely hope lots of "folks" are watching it.

  by throwlikeagirl on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 04:47:15 PM PDT

  •  "Folks"?

    definitely hope lots of "folks" are watching it.

    Isn't that Shrub's endearing term for terrorists?

    by frisco on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 05:09:14 PM PDT

    •  i think it is his term for everyone

      i have also seen him address 'mericuns as "folks" when demonstrating his understanding of what they want. that was the reference....

      by throwlikeagirl on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 05:18:52 PM PDT

      •  Merkins

        Bush calls upon his fellow pubic wigs.

        by bobcatster on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 09:09:52 PM PDT

  •  It was a powerful piece....

    Parents of deployed soldiers said their sons and daughters in Iraq asked them to buy them equipment they badly needed that the military won't supply them.  Families are going to local stores and buying for their sons and daughters:

    --Body armor
    --Computers
    --Night vision goggles
    --Radios, non-encrypted, easily monitored by the bad guys (that use the Family Service frequencies that mom and dad use on ski slopes, hunting trips, and in the mall)
    --Global Positioning Systems

    And, the military in Iraq and in the US does not have enough BULLETS!  Holy Crap!  They went to war without enough BULLETS!?  No one remembered to plan for BULLETS?!

    by Jackson on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 08:45:05 PM PDT

    •  As Randi Rhodes says

      we did remember the hoods and dog leashes, though.

      by Smallbottle on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 09:50:35 PM PDT

    •  On the bullets, it gets even worse

      The ammunition for the M4/M16 series rifles and the M249 SAW (a light belt-fed machinegun) is only produced in a few plants in the world.  The US has one factory, Great Britain has one, Belgium, Germany, and France control one in Belgium.  That last factory does not sell to the US due to the recent unpleasantness between our countries.  The British and American factories cannot keep up with the demand.  So we buy whatever the Israelis can spare.  Their factory is the smallest of the lot.  However, since it would be politically bad for us to be killing arabs with Israeli bullets, we ship the Israeli bullets back to the US to train with.
      That's right, people.  We spend extra money to ship bullets here FROM the middle east and then we ship bullets from here TO the middle east.

      by soonergrunt on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 11:03:24 PM PDT

      •  Maybe we just say we do...

        by Asak on Mon Nov 01, 2004 at 01:10:20 AM PDT

•  Lack of armor for vehicles, lack of body armor...

  ... for troops.

  But Halliburton got their money.

  by Bob Johnson on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 04:48:01 PM PDT

  •  On the mark

    That statement couldn't have hit more dead center.  The other fact that the Amercian public has been shielded from is that the troops were sent out severly under equiped.  It was NOT the supplemental $87B that prevented this.  It was this unbelieveably incompetent administration's haste coupled with poor advice followed that is causing our boys and girls to come back dead or permanently wounded.

    But (Bush's) God forbid we deny Haliburton a penny...

    I hope every one of these fuckers is frog-marched into their 8'x8's that they have so richly earned.  And I hope that when Bush meets his maker, he will finally and at last have to be accountable for his sins.

    $

    by joby on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 05:28:38 PM PDT

    •  "When Bush meets his maker..."

      Do you mean when he has to explain all this to 41 and Bar at Thanksgiving?

      by perro amarillo on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 08:02:36 PM PDT

  •  No, not lots of armor for vehicles

    I just got off the phone with my nephew. He's a Lance Corporal with the 3/4 (Marines). He was among the first to enter Baghdad during the invasion and recently returned from his second tour, during which he was one of the Marines to go into Falluja.

    He tells me that his Humvee still had no armor. His unit loaded up the Humvee with sandbags, but that was not as good as armor. Some of the Humvees did have armor but he said that it was a wimpy steel plate that was not any use and they still backed it up with sandbags. Fortunately there's a lot of sand there, I guess.

    by MarkInSanFran on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 05:43:51 PM PDT

    •  Same thing with a friend of mine

      High school buddy was in Afghanistan for a while. They didn't have armored trucks, sothey covered the floors with extra kevlar vests and sandbags.

      It worked well enough that when an insurgent blew up a brick of C4 underneath him he suffered only a temporary loss of hearing in one ear.

      by Darth Cheney on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 07:13:20 PM PDT

    •  I just diaried how John and his Marine buddies

      feel about the war and how they are going to vote here.

      You might find it interesting...

      by MarkInSanFran on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 07:52:21 PM PDT

•  tip jar

  McCain criticizes the Pentagon for spending too much on Pork instead of properly supplying our troops.  It's about time some of the republicans came out and started making some noise about how our troops are getting killed because of the cronyism.

  by patagonia on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 04:48:18 PM PDT

  •  good job

    recommended

    by Bob on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 04:59:19 PM PDT

  •  But but but

    Kansas really needs a new battleship!!!

    by emjaycue on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 05:35:34 PM PDT

    •  And Alaska

      ...needs a new boondoggle.

      National Missile Defense next year: $10 Billion. I wonder how many sets of body armor that would buy?

      by Olds88 on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 09:28:09 PM PDT

  •  War profiteering, gouging, corruption on

    the grandest scale.  It's worse than Vietnam because there is only one company getting most of the bookoo.

    People have got to get the message THIS TIME.

    by blksista on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 05:38:04 PM PDT

  •  Apologies

    I am sorry, but McCain is dead to me.

    I don't want to say he is a world-class panderer per se, and lord knows, his experience in Vietnam still boggles my mind, but I am tired of watching him getting all Integrity on us and then goose-stepping next to Bush.

    McCain had a choice. And he chose Bush ... publicly and enthusiastically.

    Actions speak louder than words. Courage in the past doesn't excuse cowardice in the future.

    Time for another hero.

    by Bald Peanut on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 07:23:08 PM PDT

  •  Uhh, not so fast

    McCain gets good press and this "60 Minutes" piece was one more example.  They made it look as if McCain and Winslow Wheeler are singing the same tune when that is not true.

    Winslow T. Wheeler
    Spartacus Tells All
    http://www.counterpunch.org/wheeler10302004.html

    (snip)
    ...The same senators stripped $2.4 billion out the defense bill's accounts that supported military training, weapons maintenance, spare parts, and other military "readiness" items (just the things soldiers need most) to help pay for the pork.  This was done just as the first American casualties were coming home from the fighting in Afghanistan, some of them in boxes Senator, John McCain (RAriz.) gave an excellent speech railing against all this and then stood quietly by as the Senate voted to add another $387 million in pork to the defense bill.  The Senate's self-described "pork buster" was nothing more than a "pork enabler."...

    There's more and his book looks as if it's worth reading.
    

    by Marie on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 07:28:32 PM PDT

    •  McCain mentioned Tax Cuts & War

      From Kerry-Edwards Online Forum

      PLEASE NOTE:

      One reason McCain gave:
      This is the first time in the middle of a war, that we have had tax cuts.

      Oh gosh, now who just had another round of tax cuts, don't tell me, uh...
      Must've been Clinton, huh?

      by lawnorder on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 08:46:23 PM PDT

•  Unbelievable

  I'ver heard Kerry speak about this many times on the stump.  But it's another thing altogether to see actual footage of Humvees getting blown up.

  by DowneastDem on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 04:53:06 PM PDT

•  Up now

  60 Minutes - In Harm's Way

  by Craziel on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 04:53:13 PM PDT

•  McCain

  is such a fucking weasel. He only speaks truth when it makes him look good. The rest of the time he has his nose in Bush's ass.

  by Omar on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 04:53:57 PM PDT

  •  Oh, if I could only be ultra-snarky, just now...

    ....but, heck, you've probably all seen the photos of mccain and the shrubettes, so I'll just leave it to your imaginations ;-)

    "It's about America"

    GOTV

    by understandinglife on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 05:11:17 PM PDT

  •  McCain has to stand like a dolt next to Shrub

    and half-heartedly speak words of great praise.  He's a Republican.  If McCain had endorsed Kerry when he wanted to- which was probably during the primaries- he would have been discredited as a popular idiot many months ago.  

    Standing next to Bush allows him to occasionally stab him, from close proximity, at key moments.  

    The day the SBV for Bullshit ad broke, McCain, with one statement, pointed out that it was false, it was wrong and it was the Bush campaign behind it.

    That was the turning point- and it played out exactly how Kerry and McCain planned it in their private "vp discussions".  If McCain hadn't been a Bush supporter, it wouldn't have worked.

    He's on our side.  Really.  He's a mole.

    by blue florida on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 05:12:18 PM PDT

    •  McCain

      Actually, I think that McCain is on his own side.  But he is an honorable enough man to speak his truth when it starts to choke him.  I think McCain wants to run in 2008.  It'd be a hell of a lot easier for him to do that if Bush gets elected this time.  I actually like McCain; he has more than once criticized this administraton, and if he'd agreed to run as VP for Kerry, there would be no doubt of the outcome.  I just wonder who he will cast his secret ballot for?  America now or himself in    2008?  

      by elveta on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 05:50:12 PM PDT

      •  My personal opinion ...

        McCain has no chance of getting out of the primaries.  I am personally liking him less and less and I think the same is happening from the other side. That kiss Bush's ass stuff doesn't come across as independent to me.

        by Schmoopdawg on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 06:33:32 PM PDT

      •  Really? I think a 2nd Bush term

        would make him LESS likely to be able to run in 2008.  The neo-cons would, by then, have cemented themselves as THE Republican power structure.  McCain, since he's a lousy puppet, would have no chance.

        If Bush loses, then he DOES have a chance in upcomng elections, because the Republicans would be in the market for a new direction.

        by blue florida on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 09:51:55 PM PDT

        •  I think this is right

          The people that pull the strings don't want the most likely to get elected as their candidate,  they want the one that is closest to their agenda that is able to get elected.  

          If Bush fails then they will be looking at someone like McCain who is much more appealing to actual conservative Republicans and swing voters.  If Bush succeeds they'll try someone just as radical in 2008.

          I also agree with the idea that it is better to have McCain in the Bush camp.  Every single thing, no matter how clear the fact based nature of it, that is said against Bush by anyone not a strong Republican is simply dismissed as partisan politics.  Or the spokesdrones simply hint it is a politically motivated lie.  With McCain they can't really do that, not yet.  If he gets too far out of line they will start saying that he is just making his own play for president in 2008 and nothing he says can be trusted either.

          by Eric in Dublin on Mon Nov 01, 2004 at 02:22:17 AM PDT

      •  Just how old is he going to be again?

        Won't he be in his late 80s?  Another run by McCain is pretty unrealistic at this point.  

        by Asak on Mon Nov 01, 2004 at 01:39:49 AM PDT

  •  McCain

    I think that McCain genuinely believes that he and certain other key figures in the GOP can pick up the pieces after a Bush loss and reform the party back to platforms of fiscal conservatism and protection of civil liberties.

    McCain also knows that he cannot lead this reformation if he was to be unsupportive of Bush in the election cycle-the results of that path would lead to and immediate focus of the blame on him as they looked for a scapegoat. He'd be blamed for the Bush loss and would be rendered 'radioactive', a final FU from Karl & Co. before they get booted out of power.

    So McCain has to wallow through this crap to preserve his legitimacy as a leader in the GOP. It's his own personal year in hell, and he's doing to to save face with the GOP so, if their is a power struggle, he's credible.

    Don't get me wrong-personally, I view him as an odious neoconservative who wants an aggressive foriegn policy with a balanced budget, something that can only really materialize through massive cuts to social services. I don't think McCain is simple in any way, however, and I think he's more shrewd in the ways of in-party politics than we give him credit for.

    by Fragamemnon on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 06:31:04 PM PDT

    •  He is making a mistake

      I haven't met a repug that thinks McCain is on their side. They trash him every chance they get. I point out that, if he's such a loser, why was he trotted out in the convention and they say, aw shucks, just politics. I then point out that the Democratic convention featured folks like Ted Kennedy and other people that have been labeled as "left wing", so don't tell me that both parties are just "playing politics". That, naturally, wins the argument and they always say I am a brilliant guy. Then, sadly, I wake up.

      by wunderwood on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 07:07:37 PM PDT

    •  I live in Az

      and McCain lost any chance at my vote.  In the past he has had a statesmanlike moment now &
      then (Swifties, finance bill, etc.) but now all he sees is 2008 (it's the mirage, sucker) and he
      decided to settle for polititian. Should have done the right thing and publicly split with
      Bush before the convention.

      by nargel on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 11:18:29 PM PDT

•  Question

  Does anyone know if 60M kept this one secret? Their promo was about Arnold and behind the scenes at SNL.

  I'm wondering if they wanted to control the Rethug spin by holding the story and just running it without advanced word?

  McCain was either punk'd or he and Powell have decided to stick a fork in BC two days before the election.

  by bcb on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 04:56:25 PM PDT

  •  Saw zero 'heads up' on this story...

    ....think your speculation is accurate...but, maybe some saw something prior to the show???

    by understandinglife on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 05:12:32 PM PDT

  •  Not a secret

    Anybody who knows guardsmen, or who reads their blogs, is aware that there just isn't enough armor to go around.  You see people taking up collection to pay for their relatives.  There's even a bill in Congress that the Pentagon is opposing, which would have the DoD reimburse soldiers to buy their own armor.

    by silence on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 05:22:18 PM PDT

    •  donate here...

      There is a collection being taken on dkos: Amanda's Armor

      by harleyg on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 08:41:36 PM PDT

  •  They got people to watch

    by the tempting Ashlee Simpson exclusive footage... all while the real story was lead about the troops.  

    And to think that when I saw the 60 Minutes promo I said, "It's three days before the election and one of, if not THE, top newsmagazine is hyping a story about Ashlee fucking Simpson... I can't believe it!"

    Boy was I surprised when I actually watched what they realy were showing.  Actual news and reporting.  Holy shit, color me shocked.

    by emjaycue on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 05:39:16 PM PDT

    •  Bait and switch.

      Brilliant strategy. And the kind of people who actually care about Ashlee Simpson are just the sort who need a good hard dose of the facts before Tuesday.

      by commanda on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 07:53:53 PM PDT

  •  Why no promos

    I noticed that to. The answer is obvious ... football games are broadcast to our forces in Iraq. Can't let them know what's going on.
    

    by midgettd on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 05:48:14 PM PDT

•  Double Post

  Sorry, you posted this as I was writing mine.

  by rezen on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 04:59:00 PM PDT

•  Flak Catcher

  It was excruciating watching the designated military flak catcher admit that "yes" they should have better equipment and that there was nothing they could do about it.

  by rezen on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 05:03:15 PM PDT

•  Everyone- Spread this story and diary.

  We cannot let this administration get away with this.  I hope Kerry hits this hard tomorrow.  Watching this story made me feel sick.  I realized once more how terrible this administration is.  It reminded of me of when al franken was talking about all this.  It made him so mad that kids his sons age were dying because of incompetence.  He got choked up and started to cry.  I felt like that tonight.  

  by meader6 on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 05:05:01 PM PDT

  •  They've been hitting the key issues today...

    Some of General Wesley Clark's comments released earlier today:

    "Vice President Cheney should be ashamed of himself for his last ditch efforts to mislead Americans about John Kerry. George Bush and Dick Cheney turned their back on our troops by attempting to cut their combat pay while our troops faced enemy fire on the front lines in Iraq and Afghanistan.

    They turned their back on our troops when they sent them into combat without the body and vehicle armor they needed, and then opposed reimbursing families who were forced to buy their loved ones this needed body armor.  

    "The Bush administration has neglected our troops and used them.  

    http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/releases/pr_2004_1030.html

    I imagine tomorrow [or later this evening -- they have definitely put the 'rapid' into 'response'] KE04 will be all over this.

    by understandinglife on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 05:16:49 PM PDT

•  Armor for vehicles and more explosives

  More explosives are missing, far, far, FAR more, than they thought.

  So damn them for badly protected vehicles.

  Sorry for being a diary whore.  I just thought it was timely that the article came out in MSNBC.

  by Plutonium Page on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 05:10:34 PM PDT

•  Rathergate Rathergate Rathergate

  That'll be the Repub response, I ga-ron-tee.

  by JDRhoades on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 05:13:29 PM PDT

•  Simply amazing

  I just finished watching the "60 Minutes" segment on the problems with our not ensuring that our soldiers are properly equipped.  I am ready to throw up.
  I was in a position where I worked with Brigadier General Byrne a few years ago, and I want everyone to know that you saw in his face was a tormented man having his guts ripped by forces that he has no control over.  He is a professional who has spent his life doing everything he can to protect the welfare and best interests of soldiers he served with.  I wanted to cry for him.

  How can a Republican Administration, with a Republican controlled Congress, ever be forgiven for what they have done by sending our Armed Forces into combat with out the supplies and equipment they need to succeed?  Pork barrel spending?  I don't believe so!  These are crimes committed by our elected and appointed officials against the citizens of this country!

  As Al Franken frequently says (and with good reason): "Have they no shame?"

  I am duplicating my comments on this subject here; there is another diary about the same subject at http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/10/31/195425/32#9

  by tangocharlielima on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 05:17:39 PM PDT

  •  Sorry I Called Him a Flak Catcher

    I could see the agony on his face.  He knows that men and women are dying for a few inches of armor.  This is the second time today I've watched uniformed military thrown to the press wolves by this administration for problems not of their making.  It breaks my heart that our Commander in Chief has so dishonored the superb weapon that is the US military.

    by rezen on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 05:27:17 PM PDT

  •  One additional comment

    BG Byrne is the only person with enough guts, courage, or whatever you want to call it, from the Army National Guard, the Department of the Army, or the Department of Defense to speak to "60 Minutes" about this matter.

    For those of you that have no military experience, that, in all likelihood, signaled the end of his career. That goes a long way in my book.

    I have only once before seen a commander demonstrate the conviction and moral courage to put their career on the line like this and say what needed to be said.
    

    by tangocharlielima on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 05:35:38 PM PDT

•  60 mts..

  Thanks for heads-up. I will plan on watching it now.

  by jeeves on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 05:18:45 PM PDT

•  Wow CBS has an article from"The Nation"

  http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/10/31/opinion/main652488.shtml

  Titled : Even Republicans Fear Bush

  part of the article....

  Former Republican members of the U.S. Senate and House, governors, ambassadors, aides to GOP Presidents Eisenhower, Nixon, Ford, Reagan and George Herbert Walker Bush have explicitly endorsed the campaign of Democrat John Kerry. For many of these lifelong Republicans, their vote for Kerry will be a first Democratic vote. But, in most cases, it will not be a hesitant one.

  by jigsaw68 on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 05:32:10 PM PDT

  •  Two suggestions

    1. This should be a Diary on it's own merits.

    2. Has anyone contacted Nancy Reagan and requested that she either announce she will not vote for Bush or, even better, that she will vote for Kerry?  I'd say that that type of announcement at ~ 3pm EST, 1 Nov 2004, would be rather effective. And, if anyone has the motivation to do it, it is her and she could justify it by saying simply 'I am trying to save the party my husband dedicated his life to -- the Republican Party.'

    by understandinglife on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 06:15:49 PM PDT

    •  It is now a diary of it's own

      doubt Nancy would say anything.... but her slience speaks volumes.

      by jigsaw68 on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 06:55:31 PM PDT

      •  Thank you (n/t)

        by understandinglife on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 07:33:22 PM PDT

•  a 400 billion dollar budget!!!

  and you can't supply proper body armor for 150,000 troops BEFORE they go to war WITHOUT asking for 60 BILLION ADDITIONAL DOLLARS???

  by leif on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 05:44:22 PM PDT

  •  No wonder

    No wonder John Kerry opposed the request for 86 billion dollars - it was probably all going to cheney's cronies instead of soldiers who needed things like armor.

    by seby1689 on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 05:53:25 PM PDT

  •  EXactly! Where the f^#k is the money?

    Where is the taxpayer money allocated for the Defense Department budget? We need to demand---DEMAND---demand to know where the money to defend our troops has gone! This is an outrage! No  wonder our troops are demoralized! This is a shameful dishonor. Families having to raise money to protect their loved ones who are fighting the war. I didn't realize BushCo had made troop protection a faith based initiative! Shameful    

    by maggiemae on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 09:18:20 PM PDT

•  What's the demographics on 60 minutes viewers?

  it sorta seems like the median age for 60 minutes viewers was a bit high, I guess. But, I might be wrong.

  by RBH on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 05:53:43 PM PDT

  •  I don't know, but

    it was right after the Steelers - Patriots game!  I think a lot of fans just left the TV on for 60 Minutes.

    by Sanity on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 07:09:29 PM PDT

  •  Old and decrepit

    And impotent.  The demographics of 60 Minutes (and the network news programs) skews towards middle-aged and elderly people. You can tell from the advertisements -- it's all pharma ads, all the time.  They're pushing arthritis drugs, blood pressure meds, and my personal favorite -- drugs for erectile dysfunction.

    by Paul in Berkeley on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 08:21:21 PM PDT

    •  Paul...please!

      It's not the body, it's the mind!

      I'm in my mid 50's and watched SNL last night, with Eminem performing Mosh. Today read the local paper, hung out on dkos, worked the phones for Kerry GOTV. If you're in Bizerkeley, Ca. you should know better than to make these types of generalization. I don't take ANY meds, much less those you mention.

      The huge profits made by the pharmaceutical companies allow them to advertise on a large number of programs. Their profits allow them to spend billions on advertising but they can't afford to reduce prices to the public. That's addressed in the Kerry plan.  

      Do you also buy into the old adage:

      Age and treachery will overcome youth and exuberance?  Some day you may be middle aged and elderly yourself!

      by maggiemae on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 09:37:42 PM PDT

•  Criminal Negligence

  Bush&Co is guilty of criminal negligence.  Wonder how all those families that bought the extra gear for their husbands and sons are going to vote?  If Bush is re-elected, and I'm not thinking he is, but if he is, the great majority of the US deserves what it gets, and don't want to hear a single one of them complaining!  

  by elveta on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 05:58:07 PM PDT

  •  Oops!

    What I meant to say is that I don't want to hear anyone who voted for Bush complaining.  

    by elveta on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 06:02:45 PM PDT

    •  yeah but

      How many of these people live in a Coulter/Rush/O'Reilly fantasy land where the reason their kids don't have body armour is because Kerry consistently voted against military appropriations.

      Every time the lack of equipment or the $87B is brought up the fact that this bill was passed anyway and the troops still don't have enough equipment should be hammered home.  

      Kerry voted against this because he thought it was a bad bill full of cash handouts to Bush/Cheney pals and it looks like he was right.

      by Eric in Dublin on Mon Nov 01, 2004 at 02:52:53 AM PDT

•  Here I go again!

  The blood of every single American who has died or been wounded, maimed, in Iraq is on Bush's hands; but if he is re-elected, that blood is also on the hands of the dimwits who vote for  him.  Wow!  I'm getting so radical!  Me, who came from a nice rep family!  I don't believe my parents are rolling over in their graves -- they were smart, they'd be right with me!  

  by elveta on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 06:10:10 PM PDT

•  My friend JV

  He was one of those guys that joined the Army after high school about 4 years ago for  Two years. He was fortunate enough to spend those two years washing tanks at Ft. Knox in Tennessee. About six months ago he got called back up. Now he is in Iraq and said the equipment is not in great shape because spare parts are tough to come by.

  I thought spare parts? Come on we don't have spare parts to keep our equipment going? Since, sand, heat, and explosives tend to deteriorate their machinery it should have been part of the plans. How incompetant can these people be. It is the symptom of not planning for a long war which I can't believe they did not expect.

  Please keep JV in your prayers. He is a great guy that signed up because he can't afford college. He was going to vote for Kerry before he left. Hopefully he was able to cast his vote and get it in on time.

  by nater1979 on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 06:13:19 PM PDT

•  Col. David Hackworth...

  Has been saying this for awhile now. And this is a guy who knows  whereof he speaks.

  www.hackworth.com

  http://www.sftt.org/cgi-bin/csNews/csNews.cgi?database=Hacks%20Target.db&command=viewone&op= t&id=75&rnd=466.5401076363146

  http://www.sftt.org/cgi-bin/csNews/csNews.cgi?database=Hacks%20Target.db&command=viewone&op= t&id=68&rnd=767.8007649410572

  http://www.sftt.org/cgi-bin/csNews/csNews.cgi?database=Hacks%20Target.db&command=viewone&op= t&id=39&rnd=405.86186881858254

  by JDRhoades on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 06:21:22 PM PDT

•  A personal story

  I'm an attorney for a particular city.  I was asked by someone in the police department of that city to check on the possible liabilities of sending old body armor to the troops in Iraq.  The police dept. would throw them out anyway.  I hear this is already going on in other cities and towns and their police departments.  The troops would use the old armor inside their vehicles for some protection.

  This is an absolute disgrace.  Whenever I hear that $87 billion crap from the righties, it makes me ill.  The troops never had the armor to begin with, pure and simple.  How does Bush support the troops again?

  by Dr Van Nostrand on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 06:22:37 PM PDT

•  Arnold

  You guys miss the obvious. They hype Arnold to get middle america interested in watching. Then air the military piece first. Good planning by CBS.

  by Rev on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 06:38:07 PM PDT

  •  I guess

    but the Arnold puff-piece is making me want to throw something though the TV screen

    by mimi9 on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 07:30:46 PM PDT

•  Last minute CYA

  Honestly, I took today's 60 minutes with an increased level of sadness. The MSM has given this administration a massive free pass - out of fear. The Cable news networks are so far gone that it is not even funny. This media conglomeration has to stop - bottom line.

  by Rick22 on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 06:41:49 PM PDT

•  I find myself

  becoming increasingly militant.  I have always been rather pragmatic in my worldview and a firm believer in people getting the government they deserve, but I have to declare, here and now, if that asshole Bush is elected and a draft is instituted, I will scream, "I told you so, don't whine!" every time one of the Republican sheep bemoans the fact their child is destined for Iraq.  

  Cruel, I know, but I don't have the tolerance for idiocy I once had.  

  America, if you vote for George Bush, don't you DARE make a sound when your drafted child is in a uniform and on a plane to Baghdad.  

  by lightiris on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 06:44:25 PM PDT

•  scratching my head

  Am i the only one wondering where the hell $400bn goes?

  How much can armor possibly cost that they can't divert a few million to protect the troops.

  I'm sure Halliburton is getting exactly what they are owed though.

  by mlafleur on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 06:51:46 PM PDT

•  if this makes you mad...

  Watch Soldiers Pay tomorrow nite on IFC.  The stories are even worse.

  http://ifctv.com/ifc/what?CAT0=45&CAT1=6066&TZ=ET&TB=4&CLR=blue&AID=9247

  Private contractors getting $300K per year, while soldiers have to write home for body armor and gas masks.  Soldiers ordered to loot homes for what they need, while Haliburton contractors walk around in leisure suits.

  It's an awesome and disturbing documentary by David O Russell (who made Three Kings).
  

  by eshap on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 07:23:24 PM PDT

•  And on another network

  Bush was looking very bad in an interview with Tom Brokaw.

  http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6363855/

  Brokaw: "Mr. President in the opening of his debate, Dick Cheney, your vice president, said that if I had it to recommend all over again, I would recommend exactly the same course of action for Iraq. Even if you knew that there was no storage of WMD in Iraq, even if you knew that the Republican Guard could fade into the north and the west with their weapons and mount a very effective insurgency against us, even if you knew that we didn't have enough troops to secure all the sights in Iraq necessary to be secure at the time, you would recommend exactly the same course of action?"

  Bush got defensive "But, that's easy to second guess. I've never known you to be a Monday morning quarterback like this. Of course we can look back, and history will judge whether we could have done something differently. But you have asked me the question in the context of really should we have removed Saddam Hussein in the first place? And the answer is. Yes, sir. We should've... History will judge whether we could have done things differently after we went into Baghdad. We planned for a lot of contingencies. We planned for major disruptions in oil supplies. We planned for refugee flows. We planned for mass hunger. In a war, not everything goes exactly as planned. But the fundamental question at the heart, to me, of what you're asking, was did we make the right course of action? Did we do the right thing to secure America? And, yes we did."

  I didn't see Dateline, I saw the excerpt later on MSNBC. Even the pundits were surprised he came across that way.

  At a time with so much bad news he should have a better answer prepared that at least makes him sound like they learn from what goes wrong.
  

  by joynow on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 07:48:38 PM PDT

  •  asdf

    What's with the Bush Blink anyway? Does it correlate with new lies he hasn't had time to
    internalize or what.  Saw the Countdown cut from the Brokaw bit and Bush was trying to fly with
    his eyelashes.

    by nargel on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 11:37:16 PM PDT

•  Send CBS your thanks

  for running this story: click on "contact us" at bottom of the page/

  by Ruth in OR on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 08:00:32 PM PDT

•  60 minutes of pointless ticking

  so, the sunday before the election, 60 minutes plays the "lack of armor" story, which is one of the oldest stories about this war, older than Kerry's vote against the $87 billion, though the bush campaign has continually tried to link that vote as evidence Kerry doesn't support the troops. thank you, 60 minutes for being so bold. follow that with an arnold puff piece. then venture into the edgy territory of SNL nostalgia. climax with Andy Rooney's impassioned appeal to "undecideds".

  please tell me I'm not the only person who finds this ludicrous.

  by Miss Devore on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 08:00:35 PM PDT

  •  no, good timing

    I hear your frustration with the media, but that story was actually good timing. A lot of middle Americans watch 60 Minutes, and they need to hear that story 2 days before the election.  Anyone thinking Bush is a stalwart defender of America needs to hear about how he's hung our soldiers out to dry, and they need to hear it 2 days before the election, not 10 months before.

    Look at the progression of stories we've had in the past week:

    1. FBI investigating Pentagon no-bid contracts to Halliburton
       
    2. At least 8 American soldiers killed in Iraq
       
    3. Approximately 380 tons of high explosives left unsecured by Bush Administration, and are now missing and being used against our troops
       
    4. Osama pops up on video tape, looking healthy and dare I say, presidential, taunting Bush for reading about pet goats when the WTC was burning

    This is building to a crescendo!

    by Paul in Berkeley on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 08:27:41 PM PDT

    •  dunno

      if middle america didn't move on Abu Ghraib..

      please admit that andy rooney was ludicrous, at any rate.

      by Miss Devore on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 08:41:26 PM PDT

      •  I'm with you there

        Oh yes, Andy...and his friggin' eyebrows!! Someone needs to send him a woman to help him with grooming!

        by Paul in Berkeley on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 08:50:39 PM PDT

        •  missing the visuals

          for the past two weeks my mysteriously free cable jerry rigged through the vcr won't give me video. so I can't comment on an Andy makeover. ultimately, my point was the complete decline of 60 minutes when they went with the "juice" of bush TANG rather than the Plame-outing machinations they were scheduled to go with.

          and....let's have a memory test on Larry Franklin.

          by Miss Devore on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 09:08:00 PM PDT

  •  That is the essence of television

    The meaningful juxtaposed with the inane and idiotic.

    by Geheimbundler on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 08:53:59 PM PDT

•  It All Boils Down to This...

  The lack of armored vehicles for Guard and Reservists, the failure to secure weapons depots, it all boils down to one thing: this Administration, in its war planning, never dreamed of or planned for sustained guerilla resistance after the main army was knocked out. AND IT'S THE MIDDLE EAST! I MEAN, JESUS, THESE PEOPLE PRACTICALLY INVENTED ASSYMETRICAL WARFARE!

  It's inexcusable.

  by JDRhoades on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 08:21:49 PM PDT

  •  Kidz, Kids, be chillin.

    That 60 minutes blurb was the shiznit and we be bringin it home for JFK Tuesday!!!!

    THink about perception. Think about 19 of our troops sayin NO WAY JOSE, we ain't goin' into dat shiznit.

    What you think that says to their Momz and by extention every Momz across da USA.

    Villiage ijit shippin off for Crawdad real soon.

    by jordanl on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 09:44:46 PM PDT

•  Pentagon objects to families being reimbursed

  No Armor, and Pentagon objects to families being reimbursed for buiyng combat equipment

  Daily Kos :: Pentagon objects to families being reimbursed for combat equipment

  http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/31/politics/31gear.html

  WASHINGTON, Oct. 30 - Despite objections from the Pentagon, Congress approved a Defense appropriations bill this month that includes a measure to allow soldiers, their families and charities to be reimbursed for the cost of some combat equipment for use in Iraq and Afghanistan.

  The provision, sponsored by Senator Christopher S. Dodd, a Democrat from Connecticut, permits such groups and individuals to make claims for up to $1,100 for those purchases made between Sept. 11, 2001, and July 31, 2004. It has been sent to the president and would take effect after he signs it.

  Mr. Dodd said the measure would "reimburse soldiers, loved ones and nonprofit organizations who have dug deep into their own pockets to provide our troops with the equipment their government should have provided them all along

  Defense officials opposed the proposal because they contend it will be a considerable financial burden and could undermine the accountability and effectiveness of equipment used in combat.

  The Pentagon said it "spends millions to test .. equipment"
  Under the reimbursement program, the Defense Department said it "will have no way of knowing what testing personally procured items went through or whether the equipment is effective, adding: "If we buy it, D.O.D. should own it, and it should be put back into the system, but we cannot do that when we can't vouch for its effectiveness.

  How "effective" is plywood or sandbags, Mr. cheapskate ?

  by lawnorder on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 08:52:36 PM PDT

  •  sandbags & plywood?

    obviously "brilliant".

    history is just salivating to record this strategy.

    by Miss Devore on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 09:11:08 PM PDT

•  Here's the money shot

  This is what we need to point out to anyone who is persuadable:
  The Republicans control Congress and the Whitehouse, so this is solely their doing.
  

  Winslow Wheeler, a long time Capitol Hill staffer who spent years writing and reviewing defense appropriations bills, thinks he knows one reason why those shortages exist, after looking at the current Defense budget. Army accounts that pay for training, maintenance and repairs are being raided by Congress to pay for pork-barrel spending.

  Wheeler says $2.8 billion that was earmarked for operations and maintenance to support U.S. troops has been used to "pay the pork bill."

  by soonergrunt on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 09:16:29 PM PDT

•  chillin a little

  heard excerpts from bush brokaw interview. sounded like 2 planets imperfectly communicating.

  brokaw: I'm a serious journalist asking tough questions

  bush: no question we're better off without..saddam.

  by Miss Devore on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 09:59:07 PM PDT

  •  Brokaw was a wuss...

    He could have reamed shrub out, but instead just sat there nodding. At least he looked a little skeptical at times.

    by OnStarboardTack on Sun Oct 31, 2004 at 11:44:33 PM PDT

•  HUMMER

  aka HUMVEE® aka HMMWV.

  Read the specs. Never was intended to survive kinetic force/concussion/overpressure from a large IED (think country awash in ordinance, and now seemingly in the most potent high explosives, RDX/HMX.

  Penetrating the vehicle cage is one thing (that is all that improved plate armor, if mounted to the bottom of the chassis would provide). Sending the entire vehicle airborne, bending the entire superstructure/frame, setting it afire, flipping it is entirely another story. HMMWVs just don't have the mass or "weigh enough" to survive these types of attacks.

  Better start procuring equipment like these, sooner than later. The Israelis deal with this threat continuously and are the undisputed experts in the field of specialized armor, if our leaders and civilians expect non-heavy armor (Abrams) units to deploy to an IED-rich milieu.

  But then again, the "OPFOR" seems to have more than enough "boom boom" now to shred even a MBT (main battle tank).

  Sigh.

  by rgilly on Mon Nov 01, 2004 at 02:24:08 AM PDT