aegyptos

The officer in charge can request repairs be performed but the decision lies with the maintainance people who are not under his orders. They're all civilians. I experienced this first hand.

Tashah

These aren't tanks being warehoused, these are soldiers being quartered. Somebody's head should roll a mile here aegyptos.

__________________

missypea

The United States government is ultimately responsible. This administration, specifically.

You can follow the chain of command down to the person responsible for scraping the paint, but that doesn't change what it is. This administration continues to screw the troops while spouting off about how valued they are.

__________________
.

If Barbie is so popular, why do you have to buy her friends?

Tashah

Perhaps in the literalist view they are culpable, but not in the mechanical sense. IIRC the General Accounting Office (GAO) is charged with overseeing how US taxdollars are spent. This function of government is staffed by civil servants who are immune from the politics of the executive and legislative branches of government.

aegyptos

Yes, that's right, Tashah.

Missy this has went on as long as anyone can remember. When I served LBJ was the president so perhaps we can say its his fault and the democrat party by extension for letting it happen in the first place. We could blame Reagan and Clinton for letting it continue. We can blame FDR for the potholes in the street outside my window. We could do that with as much authority as you blaming it all on Bush. We could do that but it wouldn't be honest, would it? You can place the blame on Bush even through its not really his fault as Tashah explained but you won't convince anyone that you are anything but a rabid partisan out to score cheap points.

missypea

What in the world are you so angry about? Calling me a rabid partisan because I have an opinion about our troops?

Back off and move on.

WI Crippler

While you can certainly be upset with the conditions that currently exist, lets not pretend that all was rosy before Jan 20, 2001. The Army, as I mentioned before, is regularly at the bottom of the list when it comes to barracks maintenance on its bases. This is something that has always been going on, even prior to this administration. When I first enlisted, and went to one of my training schools, Clinton was still President. I was put into a condemned barracks that was in horrible shape for 4 months(the duration of my time at that particular base). Why wasn't anybody complaining about how they were treating the troops back then? I'll tell you why, because nobody was protesting the administration. Thats where all this "Why are the barracks/Walter Reed in such horrible shape?" cries are coming from. Nobody cared to raise the issue when we weren't at war they disagreed with. If we weren't in Iraq and had captured Bin Laden, and weren't facing a looming recession, I can bet that there would be zero stories about the living conditions on military bases in the media. Maybe in the Army Times, thats about it. You guys are blaming a condition that has pretty much always been an issue for the military, solely on this administration. Is it deplorable? yes. Did it just start happening with Bush? No.

__________________
"What Jesus fails to appreciate is that it's the meek who are the problem."- Reg

missypea

I hear what you're saying WI, but it's not just this story that raises my hackles. It's a compilation of issues regarding our troops and our veterans. This is just one more to add to the on-going list.

It's also that this administration has created such a deep divide in our country using the theme of being patriotic....using terms like "supporting our troops" as a weapon against people who were against the war.

It's just peeling back another layer of deceit.

WI Crippler

I've never considered "Support the troops" as an attack on anybody. I've always considered it a visual/or spoken display of emotional support from some people that appreciate our service.

The people that supported the troops to me, were the people that greeted me when I came back from the war. The people in the community that gave us military discounts. The barbers off base that charged a lower fee for us Marines when we came in for our haircuts. The USOs that were open at airports whenever I had to change assignments. The Patriot guard, that rides to protect the funerals of fallen servicemen from the likes of Fred Phelps. And the schools, churches, and other people from this country that sent me and my fellow Marines, people that they never will probably meet in their life, letters of support while we were overseas. Some of those people might not have a "Support the Troops" bumper sticker, and some of them may. So rather than be offended by the slogan "Support the Troops", why not consider for the moment that prehaps those people are genuine in their support for our servicemembers, and that it has nothing to do with Bush. Those same people would still throw that sticker on their cars, no matter who the president was, because they do care about our safety and well being during a time of war.

1069

You cannot possibly be this naive.
Are you suggesting that the "support our troops" slogan hasn't been used as a club to bash over the head any American who happens to disagree with any facet of the Bush Administration's regime?
When people tried to object to the Patriot Act, what was the response?
"Support our troops!"
When people expressed dismay and horror at the Abu Ghraib debacle?
"Support our troops!"
When people expressed discontent over the increasing evidence that there was never any legitimate reason to go to war with Iraq, other than Bush's personal desire to do so?
"Support our troops! Support our troops!"

Support our troops became synonymous with support George Bush, or else keep your mouth shut.
Well, guess what?
Nobody supports George Bush now, and they're not keeping their mouths shut about it, either.

__________________
Lightdemon: "Is 10 going to outer space or something?"
Jerry: "...yes, 10 is going to outerspace."