Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Yet Another Reason To Fire/convict Rumsfeld  
User currently offlineTedTAce From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (9 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 1529 times:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9524109/
Soldiers still waiting for armor reimbursements
Pentagon fails to figure out how to pay back troops' personal expenditure

This is ANOTHER NATIONAL F-ing DISGRACE!! The fact W. ALLOWED this IDIOT to ignore a congressional/Federal LAW is AMAZING!! Impeach Bush too!!

24 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineFalcon84 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (9 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 1514 times:

"This is Clinton's fault!'

Signed

Anyone who served in the 90's
Anyone who doesn't have the balls to blame current leadership.


User currently offlineANCFlyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (9 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 1505 times:

It's no secret I don't like that dictator Dumsfeld.

As to how to do it, well, hell . . . . Military Finance could have set up a reimbursement code - similar to what they do for travel documents . . . soldiers file a voucher including a receipt for the armor they purchased . . . soldier gets paid from that account. Done in 30 days. This is ridiculous.

What is also ridiculous:

Quoting TedTAce (Thread starter):
Impeach Bush too!!



Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 1):
Anyone who served in the 90's

Just  stirthepot  you two . . . .has nothing to do with the subject . . .


User currently offlineFalcon84 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (9 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 1499 times:

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 2):
Just you two . . . .has nothing to do with the subject . . .

Why do you think I included that statement? (cue...smartass)  Big grin


User currently offlineMrniji From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (9 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 1502 times:

Quoting TedTAce (Thread starter):
This is ANOTHER NATIONAL F-ing DISGRACE!! The fact W. ALLOWED this IDIOT to ignore a congressional/Federal LAW is AMAZING!! Impeach Bush too!!

I fully agree!!! (with the hope that my friend ANC won't deny me in future  Wink )


User currently offlineLTBEWR From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 13195 posts, RR: 15
Reply 5, posted (9 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 1492 times:

I think it is disgusting that ANY soldier in combat has to buy any of their protection. It should be supplied to them who need it without them having to buy it and get reimbursed. If they did have to buy on their own, then they should be reimbursed within a week of getting it. Rumsfeld ought to put his pressure on the number monkies in the Pentagon to get this done immediately. I am quite sure on his visits all over the world, he has a protective jacket on provided without hassles by the Pentagon. I would also demand that other companies be contracted under license to rush production of these vests ASAP. I am quite sure there are plenty of unemployed citizen garment workers throughout the USA who can do this work.

User currently offlineANCFlyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (9 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 1491 times:

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 1):
Anyone who served in the 90's
Anyone who doesn't have the balls to blame current leadership.

I did both, I guess I'm screwed huh!  wink 

Quoting Mrniji (Reply 4):
fully agree!!! (with the hope that my friend ANC won't deny me in future  wink 

No worries Subin . . . thumbsup 


User currently offlineKBOS From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 430 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (9 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 1486 times:

for some reason, I'm willing to bet the checks to Halliburton go out in a timely fashion......


I don't care if the sun don't shine, I do my drinkin in the evening time when I'm in Rhode Island
User currently offlineSATL382G From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (9 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 1471 times:

You guys need to do some more digging....

This appears to be a classic case of Congress making a law but failing to provide the funds to make it happen.

Let me give you some background. When Congress parcels out the money they tell the agencies exactly how that money can be spent, i.e. so much for operations, so much new construction, so much for new equipment, so much for personnel, etc.

So by law DoD cannot simply move money from the operations account to the personnel acct. Congress intends for that money to be spent a certain way and, by God, if you screw up and spend it for something other than intended you go for a nice long holiday at Ft . Leavenworth.

Along comes Joe Smith a taxpayer, voter, and parent of a GI. He writes his Congresscritter and demands that his son gets armor. "No problem!" writes back the Congresscritter "We'll make it a law that DoD has to provide the armor or reimburse those who purchased their own!! That'll fix it!!" Voila! Congresscritter becomes a hero in his district. But what he fails to tell Joe Smith is that he doesn't have the political will/capital to either reprogram DoD funds (so the DoD troop actually buying it/doing the reimbursement doesn't go to Ft. Leavenworth) or appropriate new funds just for the armor.

In the end what it comes down to is DoD has to figure out a way to buy everything it had planned to (and that Congress intended and expects it to buy) plus the new requirement for armor on the money that was originally appropriated without body armor included. I'm not sure what pot of money the body armor comes out of but it could come down to a choice between buying MREs or body armor, or tents vs. body armor, etc. Essentially swapping one item of personal equipment for another.

If Congress really intends for the troops to have armor they need to reprogram the money for it when they enact the law that requires the armor. Otherwise they'll be lengthy delays while the bean counters at the Pentagon try to keep themselves out of jail for misappropriation of funds.

regards
SATL382G
retired military logistician


User currently offlineTedTAce From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (9 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 1462 times:

Quoting SATL382G (Reply 8):
military logistician

 scratchchin  Sounds dangerously close to 'military intelligence'
Nice insightful post, as usual SAT  Smile


User currently offlineSATL382G From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (9 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 1448 times:

Quoting TedTAce (Reply 9):
Sounds dangerously close to 'military intelligence'
Nice insightful post, as usual SAT

Actually "logistics" is one of things that the military does well.... In the Big Picture anyway... it's what everybody was screaming for a few weeks ago in NOLA... Folks just didn't know to call it logistics, but they sure wanted it...

And don't get me wrong -- I'm not defending the slowness of getting the armor/reimbursements. I just want to make sure folks know that people can go to jail in these situations for trying to do the right thing and the Congresscritters will let it happen for their own political benefit. And there are "sharks" in the water right now waiting for somebody to screwup with the new, post-Katrina, spending limit ($250,000) on gov't credit cards.

I used to hold one of those damn cards and I couldn't give it away. There was always somebody in the unit trying to get me to buy something or buy something in a way that was going to get me a visit to the brig. Had to be real careful.


User currently offlineNoUFO From Germany, joined Apr 2001, 7966 posts, RR: 12
Reply 11, posted (9 years 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 1390 times:

Apparently, it's not only body armour soldiers have to buy out of their own pockets. I met one soldier who even had to buy spare mags for his submachine gun (his main gun, the other he had was his 9 mm pistol, which he said was pretty much useless). He only had one spare magazine.


I support the right to arm bears
User currently offlineANCFlyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (9 years 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 1385 times:

Quoting SATL382G (Reply 8):
I'm not sure what pot of money the body armor comes out of but it could come down to a choice between buying MREs or body armor, or tents vs. body armor, etc. Essentially swapping one item of personal equipment for another.

It would come out of O&M . . . at least on the Army/Air Force side . . . however, that would be for purchases made by the DoD, not for reimbursement of personal funds spent by the soldier. That generally comes from P&A (Army)/MILPERS (Air Force). You're quite correct in that one 'color' of money can't be spent to cover a short fall in another 'color'. DoD regulators are pretty strict about that.

Congress, having Appropriated the funds, would have to 'color' the money accurately when it's Authorized for expenditure. By the way, that's two different Congressional committees. . . . Appropriations and Authorizations . . . then of course, they'd have to give it to the DoD. If they appropriate it, but don't authorize it - which I suspect to be the case - then it's still not really there. If it's not 'colored' properly it isn't really there. It is not at all unusual to Appropriate much more than is actually Authorized.

O&M covers a whole host if expenditures . . . spare parts, tents, office supplies, kitchen gadgets, bandaids, on and on. P&A/MILPERS covers solely pay and allowances, including base pay, housing, rations, hazardous duty pay, travel pay, etc. . .

One of the most frustrating things to attempt is to get the DoD to "recolor" money. Once the money is 'colored' O&M or P&A/MILPERS, it stays that way. Often, one branch of service will find itself in need of more MILPERS and have an excess of O&M and another will find itself in the reverse situation - in that case the funds may be 'traded' between the services . . . but still, that money must remain 'colored' as it was Authorized for spending. Trading money is relatively easy within a smaller unit (Divisional for instance), but becomes quite the complicated nutroll between services.

That said . . .

It's been a year. Congress has passed several emergency appropriations/authorizations bill since . . . I still find there to be no excuse.

My Brother, Earl, returned from Iraq some months ago, and finds that he is on alert to go again . . . he contacted me a few days back asking for my opinion on the best Body Armor to buy to take with him as his unit (Navy River Recon unit) still didn't have any.


User currently offlineNWOrientDC10 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1404 posts, RR: 4
Reply 13, posted (9 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 1338 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

"You go to war with the army you have not the army you want"...

Russell



Things aren't always as they seem
User currently offlineThumper3181 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (9 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 1337 times:

Quoting NWOrientDC10 (Reply 13):
"You go to war with the army you have not the army you want"...

Perhaps true but it doesn't do ANCFlyer's bro or anyone else going to war any good.


User currently offlineANCFlyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (9 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 1328 times:

Quoting NWOrientDC10 (Reply 13):
"You go to war with the army you have not the army you want"...

While that may be true in the first several months of ANY conflict, it's a bullshit excuse when we've been at it for three years. I don't buy it, anyone that does is a moron.

And that quote was from Dumsfeld, standing in a tent, in Iraq, when asked by a soldier why the Army was scrounging for metal to uparmor their own vehicles . . .

That answer was bullshit then and it's bullshit now.


User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29832 posts, RR: 58
Reply 16, posted (9 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 1323 times:

Quoting NoUFO (Reply 11):
Apparently, it's not only body armour soldiers have to buy out of their own pockets. I met one soldier who even had to buy spare mags for his submachine gun (his main gun, the other he had was his 9 mm pistol, which he said was pretty much useless). He only had one spare magazine

At least with the M9 magazines, the story is a bit more complicated.

What happened was that in the mid-late 1980's the M9 Beretta was selected to replace the M1911 (mistake IMHO) anyway at that time a contract for spare magazines was issued to Beretta. I want to say that it was a 10 year contract because in the mid 1990's the contract expired and went out to bid. And wouldn't you know it the DOD went with a different company that made aftermarket magazines.

Those magazines have been proven worthless, they have weak springs and the rough finish on the inside held dust that caused the followers to hang up. So there was a big push a year or two ago on some of the gun boards I hang out on (Sorry Johan, I really didn't mean to cheat on you) to send M9 magazines to Iraq. Replacement springs for the crappy ones where also a big deal.

I suspect something similar is happening with 16 magazines, because again there are a lot of really cheap ones out there that don't know up well.



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineNWOrientDC10 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1404 posts, RR: 4
Reply 17, posted (9 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 1315 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting ANCFlyer (Reply 15):
While that may be true in the first several months of ANY conflict, it's a bullshit excuse when we've been at it for three years. I don't buy it, anyone that does is a moron.

And that quote was from Dumsfeld, standing in a tent, in Iraq, when asked by a soldier why the Army was scrounging for metal to uparmor their own vehicles . . .

That answer was bullshit then and it's bullshit now.



Quoting Thumper3181 (Reply 14):
Perhaps true but it doesn't do ANCFlyer's bro or anyone else going to war any good.

You'se guys are equating me with the Honorable Sec'y of Defense (as he would be referred to in the military). I was quoting what he said.

Personally, It sounds like Mr. Rumsfeld doesn't care about the troops. He is, after all, a Defense Seceratary. Maybe he has better things to do than making sure that the troops have what they need. I remember that "You go to war with the army you have not the army you want" remark. I can't help wonder if he was having a "pow wow" with the troops because he was told to by his boss.

Say what you must about Pres. Bush, at least he spent Thanksgiving dinner with the troops two years ago. He seemed to be happy to spend time with the GI's.

The old frump seemed pi#*ed off at having to have an audience with the soldiers. He kinds of reminds me of old man Joe Kennedy, in a way.

I'd better go now. I'm starting to become negative  Sad

Good day

Russell



Things aren't always as they seem
User currently offlineANCFlyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (9 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 1309 times:

Quoting NWOrientDC10 (Reply 17):
You'se guys are equating me with the Honorable Sec'y of Defense (as he would be referred to in the military). I was quoting what he said.

Not at all . . . just expounding on your post . . .

Quoting NWOrientDC10 (Reply 17):
The old frump seemed pi#*ed off at having to have an audience with the soldiers

Trust me when I say there are very few folks at the Five Sided Funny Farm that give a hoot in hell about Dumsfeld. He is, in my lifetime, the worst SecDef the DoD has ever had . . . surpassing even McNamara. Having spent 24 years in a uniform, I think I'm qualified to make that comment.

He's arrogant (worse that I), he's autocratic, he's dictatorial, he does not listen to subordinates.

Most of the Senior Army staff bailed out on him . . . he had to get a new CoS/A from the retired ranks because no one wanted to work for him . . .

He should have been gone long ago . . .


User currently offlineNWOrientDC10 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1404 posts, RR: 4
Reply 19, posted (9 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 1306 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I can't help but wonder if someone got to President Bush to put this beaurocrat in office

Russell



Things aren't always as they seem
User currently offlineANCFlyer From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (9 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 1303 times:

Quoting NWOrientDC10 (Reply 19):
I can't help but wonder if someone got to President Bush to put this beaurocrat in office

I recall that none of us - at least privately - could imagine why this guy got the job . . . you know that feeling of "really didn't see this coming".

I'm glad I'm not there dealing with it any longer.


User currently offlineNWOrientDC10 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1404 posts, RR: 4
Reply 21, posted (9 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 1289 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

"You go to war with the army you have not the army you want"

President Reagan would have fired his a*#

Russell



Things aren't always as they seem
User currently offlineB744F From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (9 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 1265 times:

Quoting NWOrientDC10 (Reply 17):
Say what you must about Pres. Bush, at least he spent Thanksgiving dinner with the troops two years ago. He seemed to be happy to spend time with the GI's.

He spent all of what, 2 hours there? I can't believe people fall for photo-ops and salesmen tactics


User currently offlineAa777jr From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (9 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 1261 times:

Fire Dumbsfeld.

Hire Tommy Franks.

Regards.


User currently offlineNoUFO From Germany, joined Apr 2001, 7966 posts, RR: 12
Reply 24, posted (9 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 1259 times:

L-188,

Well this soldier said he had a H&K submachingun. I really have no idea if he had bought the gun or if H&Ks are a common equipment among U.S. soldiers. He wasn't happy that he had to buy his own spare mags which is something I understood. But on second thoughts: If he had bought a submachinegun of his own choice, he shouldn't be surprised that he has to acquire spare parts. Next time some soldiers throw money together, buy a certain vehicle and expect the DOD to buy spare parts and instruct mechanics.



I support the right to arm bears
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Yet Another Reason To Despise Tom Delay posted Thu Jul 22 2004 23:29:19 by Cba
More Reason To Despise Donald Rumsfeld posted Sun Sep 10 2006 07:52:54 by Tbar220
Another Reason To Bash Fema posted Wed Sep 14 2005 21:33:51 by Tbar220
Another Reason To Leave The UN posted Sun Nov 14 2004 03:45:04 by N6376m
Another Reason To Love Your Dogs... posted Wed Apr 21 2004 20:01:57 by Jamesag96
Another Reason NOT To Trust The Media! posted Tue Jun 6 2006 22:58:47 by TedTAce
Yet Another "What Car To Buy" Thread posted Sun May 14 2006 00:06:49 by Airwave
Another Reason Not To Visit Chechnya posted Fri Dec 16 2005 17:00:45 by Oly720man
Reason To Learn Some English (movie) posted Wed Nov 22 2006 18:49:02 by BR076
Yet Another Beating By LA Police posted Fri Nov 10 2006 22:44:36 by BristolFlyer