Comments on: Kucinich: Why Is It We Have Finite Resources for Health Care but Unlimited Money for War?

By: AliSilver

AliSilver — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 13:05:09 +0000

@timesr, Methinks Bush Sr. said ‘it’ll go just like when i went in’ …… Because 2 invasions of Iraq, 2 similar outcomes??? What could go wrong? I mean honestly? hehe

By: AliSilver

AliSilver — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 13:04:13 +0000

@timesr, TY Timesr,,, the only mention I ever heard was this military mom on radio. So she must have been misinformed. Kudos to her for filling the heads of ever-how-many listeners with the same disinfo. LOL

By: Sage

Sage — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 02:29:38 +0000

Thanks, timesr. I didn’t have time to go looking as my brother came over for dinner.

By: timesr

timesr — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 01:36:16 +0000

Here is another article that outlines the scope of the Bush administration’s miscalculation of post-war Iraq.

http://www.harpers.org/archive/2004/09/0080197

By: timesr

timesr — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 01:26:48 +0000

@AliSilver, “I thought the ‘body armor’ was a specific new kick butt type that was not CURRENTLY provided by the military. The military issued their own,,,,,whatever that was. Since everything takes forever on a grand scale, the military BUDGET did not allow for this particular item because it was newly invented or newly in wide use.”

Here’s an article that says just about the opposite.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2004-03-26-body-armor_x.htm

As I recall, body armor was supplied to the infantry but not other members of the military. Remember, the Bush administration never anticipated the insurgency, we were going to be greeted with flowers and kisses as liberators.

By: AliSilver

AliSilver — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 23:55:04 +0000

WHOA!
I think I remember this differently.. But I could be wrong. I thought the ‘body armor’ was a specific new kick butt type that was not CURRENTLY provided by the military. The military issued their own,,,,,whatever that was. Since everything takes forever on a grand scale, the military BUDGET did not allow for this particular item because it was newly invented or newly in wide use. So families OPTED to buy them for their loved ones in addition to the ones provided. They were optional. BETTER, but optional. Remember when airbags WHICH ARE SAFE were only on luxury cars and now they are on everything? I think it is that sort of thing. I remember listening to a military mom on a talk radio show talking about how and where to buy them . She said the military would be incorporating them in the future, but they wanted their kids to have them now.

And of course I am NEVER one to defend the govt and their spending, but i think on this one item, that is how it went down.

By: 2fewfactsaround

2fewfactsaround — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 21:46:49 +0000

@timesr,

After all, families were able to buy body armor for their loved ones in Iraq.

I had almost forgotten that shameful chapter from early in the Iraq War. Families having to pay for their loved ones’ armor. Why are Americans so oblivious or simply unfeeling about these things? Politics apparently trumps common decency in today’s America.

By: Sage

Sage — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 19:16:17 +0000

That’s true. Not once have I heard them talk about how dishonest it was to exclude the cost of wars from the budget.

By: timesr

timesr — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 18:02:16 +0000

@2fewfactsaround, “In a true capitalist system, if the contracted company couldn’t do the job it had said it was capable of doing, the contract would be awarded to someone else.”

I think the problem was that the military underestimated the amount of body armor needed, not that manufacturers couldn’t fulfill contracts.

When demand increased, so did supply. After all, families were able to buy body armor for their loved ones in Iraq.

By: timesr

timesr — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 17:51:07 +0000

@Sage,

The GOP is having a heyday with Obama’s budget deficits but never mention that he has included certain items like the cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan in his budget that were off budget during the Bush years. Roughly half a trillion a year. (Even the CBO doesn’t know the actual cost)

Compare that with the estimated cost of health care reform, one trillion over a period of ten years.