Latest Diablo 3 News
DiabloWiki Updates
Support the site! Become a Diablo: IncGamers PAL - Remove ads and more!

And they Democrats are anti-military

Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by SirKnightmare, May 1, 2005.

  1. SirKnightmare

    SirKnightmare IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2003
    Messages:
    656
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    346
  2. IDupedInMyPants

    IDupedInMyPants Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2003
    Messages:
    2,522
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Let's not generalize unfairly. Republican'ts aren't against the troops, they're against humanity in general.
     
  3. Johnny

    Johnny Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2003
    Messages:
    9,101
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Humvee armor costs money.
    Living Soldiers cost money.
    Dead soldiers cost no money.


    And there we go.
     
  4. AeroJonesy

    AeroJonesy IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2003
    Messages:
    12,940
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    467
    Unless I'm mistaken, this article makes it sound like the republicans wanted to get more money for the Humvees.

    edit: According to the Seattle Post-Intelligencer in December, 77% of Humvees in Iraq were armored. Granted that number's a bit old, but it's not like there aren't any armored Humvees over there.

    second edit: I do believe I'm mistaken, I think that amendment meant $213 million on top of the $743 million the White House wanted.
     
  5. maccool

    maccool IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2003
    Messages:
    3,904
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    165
    Evan Bayh and Ted Kennedy are Republicans now? I didn't know that. See, I was confused by the D after their names in the article.
     
  6. Steve_Kow

    Steve_Kow Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2003
    Messages:
    2,860
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Does anybody know what the military wants? I recall reading somewhere that the military commanders tend to prefer unarmored or lightly armored humvees over the armored versions because they are quicker and more agile--which is the role they're supposed to fill. For heavily armored, yet slow, troop transport they use APC's.
     
  7. Johnny

    Johnny Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2003
    Messages:
    9,101
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Humvees arent exactly burning through town at 150 km/h when they get ambushed and destroyed.

    It doesnt matter how fast or agile the car is if its slowly moving through a city on patrol and in one of the thousand windows they pass someone is waiting with an anti-tank rocket launcher. However due to the cars over all light weight compared to a tank then some extra armor could save lives..

    Speed and agility certainly wont save them from homemade land mines either.
     
  8. Steve_Kow

    Steve_Kow Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2003
    Messages:
    2,860
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    That's certainly a good point, but its possible that the solution isn't to upgrade the Humvee (resulting in an end result that is half assed armored [compared to a APC or tank] and half assed speed wise) the military might be better off to scrap them entirely and use pure armored vehicles. If that's what they want.
     
  9. AeroJonesy

    AeroJonesy IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2003
    Messages:
    12,940
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    467
    If you've got heavy armor plating (which can add from 1000-4000 pounds of steel) on the sides of your doors, they become harder to open. Factor in all the gear a soldier is wearing, and you spend more time while stopped getting in and out of the vehicle.
     
  10. Johnny

    Johnny Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2003
    Messages:
    9,101
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Or give me the humvees. Im all for scraping the weak vehicles and using only tanks and combat vehicles. Didnt the goverment spend millions on some special APC. strayer or whatever it was called. Put those into good use.

    I promise if the city was being patroled by Tanks and combat vehicles then the troublemakers would stick to bugging police and civlians as they should.
     
  11. dantose

    dantose IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2003
    Messages:
    2,935
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Not every mission requires armor. Patrols do.

    The nature of this conflict doesn't have much need for unarmored vehicles. That doesn't mean that they have become worthless however.

    Not every fight will be against this enemy.
     
  12. Module88

    Module88 IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2003
    Messages:
    5,722
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    466
  13. jimmyboy

    jimmyboy IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2003
    Messages:
    2,551
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    165
    MONEY. If Humvee armor lobbyists can't pay, then they don't get the vote.

    Drug lobbyists paid, they got the vote to bar foreign drug imports. Religious lobbyist paid, they got "Justice Sunday." Medical lobbyist paid, they're getting the vote on limiting medical malpractice claims. Wallstreet paid, they're getting social security reform...

    You get what you paid for.
     
  14. IDupedInMyPants

    IDupedInMyPants Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2003
    Messages:
    2,522
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    And let's not forget that oil lobbyists paid. They got 1,574 and counting dead Americans, with 12,000+ and counting American casualties.
     
  15. jimmyboy

    jimmyboy IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2003
    Messages:
    2,551
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    165
    Well, I do know that British Patroleum and several domestic oil companies are making a "killing" at the moment. Price-Gauging anyone?

    Nonbelievers - just take a look at their latest earnings report and compare it with past income statements and you'll know what I'm talking about.

    What a "kowinkidink."
     
  16. llad12

    llad12 IncGamers Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2003
    Messages:
    6,189
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    466
    I recall reading an editoral in my local hometown newspaper condemning our Oklahoma Senators, Inhofe and Coburn, for voting against that amendment.

    It was clear from the editoral's viewpoint that the overriding reason for their vote was political ... i.e., the amendment was sponsored by two Democrats: Kennedy and Bayh.

    They considered it despicable that our Senators would put politics above the safety of our troops.

    I agree ... without reservation.
     

Share This Page