During the Democrat debate on Thursday 21 February, Senator Barack Obama made the following stunning claim:
OBAMA: I heard from a Army captain who was the head of a rifle platoon, supposed to have 39 men in a rifle platoon, ended up being sent to Afghanistan with 24 because 15 of the soldiers had been sent to Iraq, and as a consequence they didn't have enough ammunition, they didn't have enough Humvees. 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. Now, that's a consequence of bad judgment, and, you know, the question is, on the critical issues that we face right now, who's going to show the judgment to lead?
First, the “captain” in Mr. Obama’s example was a lieutenant in 2003 when the “events” supposedly occurred. But there remain a couple of obvious questions:
When I was a Marine, we were taught to “task organize” our units for the mission at hand. If the mission of the platoon in Mr. Obama’s example was to guard the water bull at Camp Swampy, it is possible that they were perfectly task organized for the mission. What was the mission of the platoon in Mr. Obama’s example? Better yet simply ask, was the platoon used commensurate with its capabilities - whatever those capabilities were and irrespective of the TOE? If not, did the captain use the chain of command to highlight the problem or did he save those matters of life and death for members of his platoon for five years so that he could discuss them with national political campaign figure? What was the COC’s response and when was his platoon finally wiped out by the misuse?
Also, if another Army platoon’s mission in Iraq was to clear houses block by block in Faljujah, might that more troop intense mission require the 15 soldiers from Mr. Obama’s example?
If a platoon is task organized with fewer personnel than the TOE calls for, all other things being equal, wouldn’t the amount of ammunition per man increase? Or did the same irresponsible loons who sent an infantry platoon into harm’s way with too few soldiers also neglect to give them ammunition?
“…it was easier to get Taliban weapons than it was for them to get properly equipped by our current commander-in-chief.” Is there anyway in George Washington’s America that that statement can be true? If so, every politician in Washington DC needs to resign, everyone of them – TODAY.
What has Mr. Obama done to ensure the troops get the equipment and personnel they need? Hasn’t he voted against funding the war?
Someone is lying. The best case for America would be if it were Mr. Obama, because let’s face it, America trusts the military far more than greasy politicians. I believe that Mr. Obama is trying to destroy that trust for a couple of votes.
The problem here goes well beyond the ignorance and political opportunism Mr. Obama. The fact that there has not been a single voice from anyone on the hill challenging Mr. Obama’s wildly inaccurate and misinformed statements indicates a total lack of understanding of our military in Washington DC. The only group of people more clueless about our military than politicians it seems is the media who also have failed to ask a single question about Mr. Obama’s supposed conversation with “a Army captain who was the head of a rifle platoon.”
Call out Mr. Obama and demand some proof of these scurrilous accusations.
1 comment:
"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." That tells me that we were kicking some serious Taliban ass. Where did all those weapons come from? Dead and captured Taliban and AQ would tend to leave stacks AK-47's, RPG's, IED's,etc, laying around. In 2004 congress demanded to be informed what was being done to catch Bin Laden. In a closed door and secret breifing with 37 members of the House they were informed that the US was tracking Bin Laden's cell phone calls and had been for several years. The news broke that day at 2pm on the news wires. It had taken 2 hours to be leaked. Politicans wishing to embarass the White House, Bush, and Cheney, can't help themselves. When I hear these same politicans criticize Bush's efforts I wonder how many of our troops they have killed to win political elections. Today congress will not re-authorize parts of an act that allows us to monitor phone calls, cyberspace transmissions, etc, of suspects we need to monitor. How many troops, contractors, and citizens may die as a result? Obama's comments about inadequate tools for our troops rings hollow. If Obama or Hillary win this election our troops need brought home right away. Neither are fit to be a C-in-C. That is why I am voting for McCain. He will get after those that have declared war on us. I don't want my nephew in Afghanistan with linguini-spined politicans running the show based on yesterday's polls. They will tell the world our secrets for political favor and put a bunch of our troops in harm's way. McCain leaves a lot to be desired but is our best chance to prosecute this war and win it. Obama makes up a story about arming our troops when his colleages are leaking strategic and tactical secrets to the enemy then blames the existing C-in-C for a failing mission. If Osama or Hillary are elected I will back every effort to bring my nephew and his buddies home asap. They have proven that getting and holding political office is more important than protecting this country and our troops. The Griffin.
Post a Comment