It's not a case of adapting quickly - it's a case of not adapting policy period.
Obviously policy on this has been adapted, often radically. I know some of the companies that were ramped up for the armor production, and when the changes took place. In some cases over a year ago. Reporters don't know jack shit about issues of production lines, the delays in production of ballistic steel and special ceramic or composite armor, or any of the real issues. Neither does Sullivan.
Of course, maybe we should have waited another five years or so to invade Iraq. Wait for more troops to sign on, wait for all the supplies to be at top strength, and wait for everything to be perfect. We could have made Saddam to promise not to prepare in the meantime.
As to the notion of using IEDs as bombs under roads....
Hint: These used to be called mines. Don't try to consuse the issue with different terminology.
They aren't mines. True anti-armor mines are not easy to find in Iraq caches. These are explosive charges, sometimes more powerful than existing mines, assembled from old caches of explosives.
Also, you're ignoring where the explosives used in these IEDs came from.
another hint: Not the Syria, Iran or the Oil Ministry building......
If you are talking about the plastic explosives missing from that one depot, no explosives of that type have been found in IEDs to date. Most are made from old shells and other munitions cached all over Iraq in those months prior to the war while the U.S. was wanking uselessly at the United Nations.
Maybe you should sign it "arf." Like many Bowser posts, almost everything in it is inaccurate.
Current Events » in reply to Sullivan says it better than me
"Arf" indeed.
The whole thread (59 posts)
- Rumsfeld makes excuses for administration's incompetence
- Rumsfeld makes invalid excuses for administration's incompetence
- So is the armour adequate or not?
- Once again you prove your ignorance of military history
- Looking like another MSM soundbite attack.
- Meanwhile: 1,276