Well if you read why they refused it was due to equipment they needed like armor for their hummers.
I don't think that has anything to do with training this is nothing short of not protecting our soldiers because of poor planning.
I have not seen their actual complains yet, just the second hand accounts retold by family members. I'm not saying they may not have had legitimate concerns for their safety but it should have been dealt with at the unit, platoon, battalion level through the chain of command. Soldiers have some recourse. If their immediate commander was deliberately sending them into an unsafe situation without proper equipment, he or she would have been dealt with. It was wrong for them to call home. That reflects their training.
The military hummer was never designed to be an armored vehicle. They are the main transport vehicle since replacing the old jeeps. They are being retro fitted but everything can not stop until it's completed.
My brother may be in a "safer" area, but he said they have still been shot at while on the road. The humve he was travelling in has broken down. When he was home on R&R last month he said the strangest thing was not having his weapon with him.
As far as Nader goes I believe he's at least being honest and actually has a plan, this doesn't mean he's going to stop the war on terrorism
I found Nader's plan for Iraq, http://votenader.org/why_ralph/index.php?cid=55
Could not find a plan on the war on terrorism. Apparently he do not believe we are at war.
. It means he wants some help because he sees our men dying. I f you want to see what he's tired of just look here.
http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/national/20040909_THOUSAND_GRAPHIC/index_PICTURES.html
Regardless of who you're voting for you should at least know who's dying for America.
I didn't mind getting rid of Saddam I thought it was the right thing to do but only if you're ready for the aftermath which this administration clearly had no idea this was going to end up like this and over a thousand dead soldiers so far.
Here is the updated casualty report. http://www.defenselink.mil/news/casualty.pdf
It shows the actual numbers killed by hostile and non-hostile actions. If any administration could have planned for every possible contingency and not have any casualties I would be highly doubtful. How can you defend against someone willing to blow themselves up? That's how many casualties have been caused.
I remember the exact words that prove my point
"Mission Accomplished" I believed it when I heard it but these words are clearly wrong and I can't remember the exact date but I think it was over a year ago I heard them.
If you are referring to Bush's speech from the flight deck of the USS Lincoln on May 1, 2003, your memory has been contaminated by the propaganda. Bush never said "Mission Accomplished". Here is the transcript.
http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/05/01/bush.transcript/
The sign in back of him read "Mission Accomplished" and was intended for the crew of the USS Lincoln which was returning from the longest carrier deployment in recent history. I watched it. The USS Lincoln is based here in Washington state so the coverage about it was on our local news. BTW, it just left again yesterday for a 4 month deployment.
I know there's a cost for freedom but you need to fight for it like our country did and the you will be rewarded. Where's our reward in this?
My opinion of this war is changing with time and I personally think we're not doing a good job.
I personally don't think changing administrations at this elections would improve thing, it would make things worst. The latest survey of the military seems to suggest the same feeling. My brother told me in his unit of 18 soldiers, 15 were voicing their support for Bush, 3 for Kerry. I hope the final election results are similarly reflected.
____________________________________________________
Mark
-------Original Message-------
From: Jim Lubin
Date: Saturday, October 16, 2004 13:31:43
To: QuadPirate; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [QUAD-L] troops are concerned
At 11:05 AM 10/16/2004, QuadPirate wrote:
River this shows how poorly this war is being run.
I'm sure president Nader will do a better job since he plans on "replacing US forces with a UN peacekeeping force". http://www.votenader.org/issues/index.php?cid=17
I might have to translate that.
Put US forces under UN control so I can say "I withdrew US forces and we are now part of a collation participating in the UN peacekeeping forces"
I don't blame these troops for speaking up and not driving into an ambush unprepared.
I blame the training they received prior to being sent over. The units that left from here had intense 2 months of refresher training before each unit was certified ready to deploy. I say refresher training because every reservist received basic training in addition to the weekend a month and 2 weeks a year. I blame the unit commanders for not addressing their concerns and taking care of their soldiers. I don't see it as a microcosm of how the entire war is being executed.
Jim
IncrediMail - Email has finally evolved - Click Here 
