The company that runs maintenance at Walter Reed Army Hospital was founded by an Irmo man?
The company that maintains Walter Reed Army Hospital?
The COMPANY? That maintains Walter Reed ARMY Hospital?
I’m starting to understand this. Privatization and outsourcing strike again.
The Army would not have allowed this to happen to its own soldiers.
Related Posts
The Army would not have allowed this to happen to its own soldiers.
ARE U KIDDING ME???????????????
Regardless of who is running the place the ARMY is in charge. The same army run (until recently) by Donald Rumsfeld and company. The same army who has as it’s commander in chief one George W. Bush.
Brad as a journalist it’s ok to be critical of the government institutions, including the army. Don’t dodge and weave on this one. Lay the blame where it belongs: WITH THE ARMY!
God and the soldier
All men adore
In times of war
But no more
For when war is over
And all things righted
God is neglected
The soldier slighted
I wish I could give the original author credit, but I’ve forgotten who first wrote this. If I recall correctly from my public school days, though, it was written shortly after the Revolutionary War. It really doesn’t matter though. The sentiments are as true today as they have been throughout history.
One could just as easily quote Kipling’s “Tommy.”
“A thin red line o’ ‘eros when the drums begin to roll…”
There’s nothing new here with the VA-Walter Reed scandal; it’s just more of the same that I saw for over 26 years while on active duty and every day since I retired.
Bud, THE ARMY answers to its civilian masters: YOU the American public as represented by the people YOU elect. Of course, that “YOU” is is a collective term for all of us.
The electorate all wants something for nothing, as long as they personally don’t have to pay for, and this desire includes a top notch military. So the electoral message to the pols is: don’t spend a penny more than you have to on Joe. “Nothing’s too good for the troops, and that’s just what they’ll get.”
It’s only news now because the eyes of some of the public are on the military (for reasons that have mostly nothing to do with love of the troops). Ten years ago Walter Reed could have collapsed into a total heap and the overwhelming number of our fellow citizens wouldn’t have batted an eye. Most of ’em still today “don’t give a rat’s…”
This is truly one of the worst indictments of th emilitary we could see. And, here’s a hint for all the haters: these facilities have been crumbling for more than just the past 6 years.
Military pensions and benefits have been declining and failing to provide, or more accurately, fulfill promises made to their men and women for decades.
In the richest country in the world, with the budget the military has, there is no excuse for Burger Kings and Taco Bells in Iraq while valiant soldiers wait to lie in filth at facilities all over the country.
But, to lay this all at the feet of one man or party, is laughable.
There is no company “running” Walter Reed Army Medical Center. IAP is a base operations contractor who works for the garrison commander who is part of the installation management command.
You should get an interview with the garrison commander at Fort Jackson and find out how the government operates.
Ummm….Brad, do you have any actual story or link to support your rant?
Brad’s done the impossible. He’s united bud and Lex on the same issue.
Guess I’ve just done Brad’s job for him and found the story in The State (a rather disreputable rag that I usually don’t consult):
Walter Reed contractor has roots in Irmo
The company in charge of maintenance at the embattled Walter Reed Army Hospital was founded by an Irmo man.
IAP Worldwide Services took over the hospital’s maintenance Feb. 4, said spokeswoman Arlene Mellinger. The Walter Reed scandal erupted two weeks later…..
Now I’m fully aware of Brad’s extreme pro-government ideology but this is just ridiculous! This company just took over the maintenance contract 2 weeks before the brown stuff hit the fan and our man Brad wants to blame them for all the neglect and mismanagement of the past several decades??!! Puhleeeze!
The real story here (typical of the media to describe this as ‘scandal’) is the underfunding of the Veterans Administration.
Some things should remain under the authority of the government, like taking care of the military before, during, and after their service. It’s promised to them when they sign up, for gosh sakes.
But, I can see privatization working in certain instances. I’d sure like a shot at investing my SS taxes in a private account, instead of using it to fund entitlements and failing education initiatives.
A government hospital can outsource the landscaping and janitorial services and still be a government enterprise. The same is true for outsourcing any and all other functions. It is still a socialist hospital, operating on a different model than some other socialist hospital, which might use slave labor.
10% of the rooms being subpar at a therapy wad in Walter Reed angers us because it is not what we expect it America.
In the socialist medical systems of Europe, the worst of Walter Reed is their norm.
That’s the really scary part about Walter Reed. Brad and his fellow big-government ideologues never miss an opportunity to tout their vaunted single-payer system which is supposed to make medical care oh-so much better and more affordable.
Walter Reed is the single-payer system in action!! Even worse, it’s one of the premier hospitals in this single-payer system and even then it’s still substandard. Is this really what we want our health care system to be like? Will our entire medical care system look like Building 18 if the ideologues fully get their hands on it?
Walter Reed had about 5% of the patients treated poorly through government bureaucratic negligence.
In England or Canada, such mistreatement is POLICY!
If you are very sick, they just put you on a waiting list long enough so you will die before they have to spend any money on you. That’s how socialism saves money on health care – they deny care.
Health Care & Social Welfare
The Swedish health care system is universal. All residents are covered by a national health insurance. Despite its universal character and high quality, the cost for health care is low by international standards, 7.6% of GNP compared to 14-15% in the United States.
Swedish hospitals are normally run by the county councils In Stockholm some hospitals are in the process of being privatized, with the county council henceforth being in the role of buying services from the hospitals for the benefit of patients rather than being the provider of services. For primary care, patients can choose between attending a county health centre or a family doctor. The family doctor or the doctor at the county health center refers patients to specialist hospital care.
Doctors are trained at several university hospitals throughout the country. These hospitals are prominent medical research institutions, characterized by a strong link between basic research and clinical research and by the integration of research into the health services. Swedish medical research has a strong reputation internationally.
Life expectancy in Sweden is high: 77.2 years for men and 82.0 years for women. Sweden also has the world’s oldest population with 18% of the population 65 years or older.
Sweden has a well developed system of social welfare with care provided for the old, the disabled and infants. More than 50% of all children 0-6 attend various forms of day care. Retirement age is variable between 60 and 70, with the majority drawing their pension from age 65. There is a basic pension, which guarantees security for everyone, and supplementary pension in relation to previously earned income. A person who becomes disabled is remunerated with a disability pension.
Gender equality is a fundamental factor in Swedish society with almost 50% of the labor force being women. Equality refers to parity in relation to all individuals and groups in society. Underlying this notion is the belief that all people are of equal value, regardless of sex, race, religion, ethnic origin or social class. Sweden was also one of the first nations in the world to allow the registration of homosexual partnerships.
The folks who defend our current health care system are living in a world of denial. Health care is already socilaized. But the way we distribute it is why is’s both very expensive and ineffective. That’s why 18,000 people die because of hospital errors in our socialized facilities. The ineffective way we distribute our socialized health care contributes to the low life expectancy. Socialized medicine is a reality in the USA. The sooner people recognize it for what it is, the sooner we can move on to a single payer system that works a whole lot better for all Americans.
Walter Reed is an example of the failures of the Bush Administration, not a failure of socialized medicine.
In America, a few patients die because of errors.
In socialist European and Asian state medical systems, they are killed intentionally, by denial of treatment, stalling, and lethal injection.
Why don’t all you you who want a socialist system start your own, right here in America. Just leave me out of it!
But wait…you want me to pay for your care.
Well, it’s only taken about a day to confirm my assertion that once again “the soldier is slighted.” It is yet again obvious to me that the overwhelming majority of my fellow citizens really couldn’t care less.
Of all the comments in this thread so far, only a very few even mention the plight of poor to inadequate health care for the military (to include veterans). Of those that have, the purpose of the writer has been to use the issue of inadequate military health care as ammunition for whatever other actual point he or she wants to make (criticism of the president, criticism of health care in general, criticism of socialized medicine, defense of socialized medicine, criticism of privatization and outsourcing, criticism of Brad, etc., etc., ad im nausium…).
Where the issue has been mentioned, all but one or two of the writers have shown their complete lack of understanding about the purpose of the military and how it actually operates. Even worse, it seems that almost no one here understands why the military must resort to privatization and outsourcing and how they, the writers as members of the public, are responsible for that. Most seem to think that it’s some sinister plot by rich investors and industrialists bent on war profiteering. (Burn the Haliburton effigy again!)
None appear to understand that the American public (the writers themselves) has forced the military to downsize and reorganize to the absolute bare bones needed to accomplish its primary mission. The demand by the public to redistribute the “cold war dividend” has forced the military to drastically cut forces and manpower. (Force 21, FCS, and other programs and doctrines designed “to do more with less” are all fruits of this same tree, as was the Cheney-Rumsfeld strategy employed in OEF and OIF.) Military units and personnel who had very low peacetime operational rates of employment, especially those that had direct civilian, commercial equivalents were the first to go. This downsizing, which has occurred over the last 15-17 years, not only included base operations and logistics but also quality of life programs and medical functions.
(BTW: The reorganization of the military that was required because of funding cuts also put vary large numbers of critical, but otherwise low density, wartime-only support functions into the reserves and National Guard. At the time, nobody but the military was complaining about these moves. Everybody was happy to move the funds saved to domestic budget, entitlement programs without raising taxes. These reorganizations are why so many “citizen soldiers” find themselves on nearly full-time duty status today.)
In the end, the situation vis-à-vis the US military, as we now find ourselves in, is a direct result of the American public demanding and receiving from their elected representatives exactly what they wanted. Don’t blame “The Big Green Machine” because it’s had to put its money where it has over the last decade and a half.
Look in the mirror if you want to see who’s actually responsible. Supporting our troops is more than a little yellow magnetic sticker you buy at the 7-11 when you get gas.
It’s funny to watch all the military haters in Congress rant on about what the military has been denied in pay, benefits, and support. These are the people who fight every dime spent on the military. W will get this straightened out, as much as he can or any patriotic person can.
These atrocities occured under W’s watch so he should be the one to “straighten this out”. At least he sent “the army that he has” into war fully equipped.
Brads’ thin veneer of pseudo-analysis and faux-reporting strike again. Never give the mindless masses substance when a sound bite will evoke the correct and desired emotional response in your target audience – the nonthinkers who read The State.
1. These are not “atrocities”, but you anti-military socialists just can’t avoid using words like that.
2. Walter Reed was put into shutdown mode under Clinton.
So yet another government entity is shown to be a failure. Our government, over the last 25 years has collasped…and no one noticed.
Nothing works like it should…and if the public knew the real story of lazy govt employees and government waste…they would puke.
Chris
And they’re UNIONIZED!
Yep, I’m a lazy teacher and I belong to a union. I’m glad no one (other than Chris) has noticed. Fortunately no one knows the real story (other than Chris).
We called to have the road in front of our drive way fixed and it took 24 freakin hours for the City to fix it – lazy bastages.
I saw the police drive by today. Guess he was going for a donut. I’m surprised his car was actually still running.
What’s with these traffic lights? I constantly have to stop for other cars. Who creates these inconveniences?
We mailed a CD of videos of our baby to my mother in law (she does not have a computer) and it took TWO freakin days to get to Florida!
Our tax refund was deposited after a week and a half of us waiting. I guess the IRS officials were busy eating donuts as well.
My mother’s going into her federal office tomorrow (Sunday) to do some work. She had the nerve to take off today. Slackard!
Chris, I see your point.
Randy…govt worker defending govt workers…does not get any better than that.
Chris
Who writes Mike Campbells editorials for the State?
Why the hell would the state want his opinion?
Who thinks the poeple of SC are looking for his opinion?
That Scoppe woman must be behind this
Yes Chris, I’m defending all of us government slackers. BTW, thanks for supporting my slack life with your taxes.
Too bad your 5 minute consultation with Floyd didn’t result in private school choice. Now you’re stuck with us. 😉
Randy,
I can tell you from firsthand experience that the sheer scale of waste is horrendous, even in the military.
Many parents would much rather support your slacker life with vouchers. That way when your slacking really gets out of hand they can hire someone else.
The ones that get me are the state employees that are always grousing in the editorial pages of The State about not getting a raise for the last 200 years, and complaining that their pay is too low. Look, let’s just put the terd on the table: You state employee types will get a raise when I get one. And another thing, if you really believe you’re so badly underpaid, why not seek employment at an establishment that will recognize your talents and pay you what you believe you’re worth? In other words, if you don’t like what we taxpayers pay , then go somewhere else. Hey, that’s what the rest of us have to do when we think we deserve more. It’s a concept…you gotta go with it! Ed
Ed, this article is about federal employees but I doubt that it’s much different for state employees.
Federal Pay: Myth and Realities
By Chris Edwards
Sunday, August 13, 2006; Page B07
We’ve often heard that civil servants forgo higher private-sector salaries in order to serve the nation selflessly. Many federal bureaucrats are indeed hardworking, but new statistics show that they are anything but underpaid.
The Bureau of Economic Analysis released data this month showing that the average compensation for the 1.8 million federal civilian workers in 2005 was $106,579 — exactly twice the average compensation paid in the U.S. private sector: $53,289. If you consider wages without benefits, the average federal civilian worker earned $71,114, 62 percent more than the average private-sector worker, who made $43,917.
The high level of federal pay is problematic in and of itself, but so is its rapid growth. Since 1990 average compensation for federal workers has increased by 129 percent, the BEA data show, compared with 74 percent for private-sector workers.
Why is federal compensation growing so quickly? For one thing, federal pay schedules increase every year regardless of how well the economy is doing. Thus in recession years, private pay stagnates while government pay continues to rise. Another factor is the steadily increasing “locality” payments given to federal workers in higher-cost cities.
Rapid growth in federal pay also results from regular promotions that move workers into higher salary brackets regardless of performance and from redefining jobs upward into higher pay ranges. The federal workforce has become increasingly top-heavy……(MORE)
I deal with government employees everyday. They are slow, have funky flex schedules, and are unable to realize that the private sectors works hard all day…all week and more…not just for a few hours 4.5 days a week.
There is just no one in gov that REQUIRES the staff to work hard, mainly because the executives are doing the same thing!
There are some very good govt workers, and God bless them. But this country is in crisis, and our government is not qualified, nor willing to do anything but spend money in a foolish and inefficient manner.
Chris
I deal with government employees everyday. They are slow, have funky flex schedules, and are unable to realize that the private sectors works hard all day…all week and more…not just for a few hours 4.5 days a week.
There is just no one in gov that REQUIRES the staff to work hard, mainly because the executives are doing the same thing!
There are some very good govt workers, and God bless them. But this country is in crisis, and our government is not qualified, nor willing to do anything but spend money in a foolish and inefficient manner.
Chris
Admittedly there are some good people doing good things in the public sector. But the majority of them seem to think that they deserve more pay when I don’t see commensurate increases in productivity or effectiveness. To tell the truth, they complain about low pay, yet NEVER leave government empolyment…wonder why? Of course it’s because they LOVE the job security and the retirement plans that are afforded to government workers. Let’s be honest…those things are costly, and they are big parts of the reason some don’t get paid as much as people in the private sector. But don’t feel sorry for them, these government workers have made a conscious decision to stay where they’re at, and they are paid plenty. Ed
I should have said they are paid plenty when ALL things (like security, benefits and retirement) are considered. Ed
Chris, Lex, and Ed it sounds like the “grousing” is from some who are unhappy with their jobs. That’s what happens when you live an unfulfilled life chasing the bottom line. Of course I am a lazy government employee who works 4.5 days a week and spends my time whinning about pay raises because my bosses don’t care how hard I work.
I guess if Cheney had outsourced his war to the private sector, we’d be better off today.
Now excuse me while I write up my expense account for my 2 martini lunches and plot ways to bolster my bottom line at the expense of my morality and with little concern for others.
Nicely said Randy. Clearly you are one of the ‘good’ public employees. I detect a slight note of sarcasm however, and I know it’s hard to hear the truth told about most government workers. I honestly expected there to be more vitriol and spewing from government slugs that I have offended by saying the truth…but they haven’t shown up yet. Still and all…factum dictum. Ed
I guess if Cheney had outsourced his war to the private sector, we’d be better off today. – Randy
Nicely said Randy. – Ed
Privitization and outsourcing works, at least for this contractor at Walter Reed.
I need to go way, way back near the top and thank LexWolf for supplying that link. I posted this on my PDA while reading the paper over breakfast at Sunset Restaurant in West Columbia Friday morning. I then got in my car and went to Savannah for a follow-up on my surgery from last week. I got home after midnight.
So thanks for doing that while I was tied up.
Most government jobs are filled by the cast-offs from the private sector.
Who’s supporting the troops, now?
As the military scrambles to pour more soldiers into Iraq, a unit of the Army’s 3rd Infantry Division at Fort Benning, Ga., is deploying troops with serious injuries and other medical problems, including GIs who doctors have said are medically unfit for battle. Some are too injured to wear their body armor, according to medical records.
On Feb. 15, Master Sgt. Jenkins and 74 other soldiers with medical conditions from the 3rd Division’s 3rd Brigade were summoned to a meeting with the division surgeon and brigade surgeon. These are the men responsible for handling each soldier’s “physical profile,” an Army document that lists for commanders an injured soldier’s physical limitations because of medical problems — from being unable to fire a weapon to the inability to move and dive in three-to-five-second increments to avoid enemy fire. Jenkins and other soldiers claim that the division and brigade surgeons summarily downgraded soldiers’ profiles, without even a medical exam, in order to deploy them to Iraq. It is a claim division officials deny.
The 3,900-strong 3rd Brigade is now leaving for Iraq for a third time in a steady stream. In fact, some of the troops with medical conditions interviewed by Salon last week are already gone. Others are slated to fly out within a week, but are fighting against their chain of command, holding out hope that because of their ills they will ultimately not be forced to go. Jenkins, who is still in Georgia, thinks doctors are helping to send hurt soldiers like him to Iraq to make units going there appear to be at full strength. “This is about the numbers,” he said flatly.
That is what worries Steve Robinson, director of veterans affairs at Veterans for America, who has long been concerned that the military was pressing injured troops into Iraq. “Did they send anybody down range that cannot wear a helmet, that cannot wear body armor?” Robinson asked rhetorically. “Well that is wrong. It is a war zone.” Robinson thinks that the possibility that physical profiles may have been altered improperly has the makings of a scandal. “My concerns are that this needs serious investigation. You cannot just look at somebody and tell that they were fit,” he said. “It smacks of an overstretched military that is in crisis mode to get people onto the battlefield.”
Back when I served, people I knew went to sympathetic doctors and got paperwork to use to fail their military medicals. You can bet that this is still happening. Very sad but not surprising. Those who have medical issues, once they get to Iraq, will not be put into functions they cannot handle. Doctors signing phony medical excuses should lose their licenses but hell will freeze over before the medical profession polices itself. I bet the doc who was issuing steroids to Panther players is still in business.
I’ve learned never to be surprised by the depth of hypocrisy the supporters of this occupation will sink.
Had an invasion opponent posted Dave’s thoughts above then he’d be attacked for “disrespecting our brave heroes in uniform” and virtually run out of town on a rail. Urban legends of spitting on troops would be invoked. The “left’s insidious hatred” of the military would be referenced as fact, instead of some partisan mythology constructed by wingers.
Dave and his ilk will do anything to avoid facing the the ugly realities of this meat grinder.
Abu Ghraib was just a “few bad apples”– low ranking, of course– instead of a continuation of Gitmo interrogation techniques authorized at top levels.
Chaos in Iraq wasn’t the result of failure to plan. It’s just a condition of democracy, according to Rummy.
Sending troops into combat without proper supplies, body armor or armored vehicles was a necessity because you choose “to go to war with the army that you have.”
“No one could have foreseen” sectarian fighting breaking out– except numerous experts on post-authoritarian regimes, the Middle East and other occupations. They were ignored by the chicken hawk, know-it-all neo-cons, of course.
Again, “no one could have foreseen” the overwhelming of military casualty treatment systems as a result of hopelessly naive and blindly optimistic non-planning. Naturally, failing to remedy the system breakdown– years in the making– couldn’t be attributed to the administration in charge.
This may be the very first entirely blameless administration in our history– if you believe the fanatical apologists.
RTH, I hate to sound so cynical but the various high costs (the latest being the poorly cared for wounded) of this outrageous war are really not all that surprising to me. History shows us that wars, especially optional wars, tend to cost vastly more than their proponents initially suggest to the public. Iraq is no different. What really gets me is how the American public has become so overwhelmingly opposed to this catasrophe and yet we still persist. It just makes me sick.
Bud and Rth – What you two dont understand is Americans want to WIN!!!!!!!!!! I personally dont care how much it costs, and while I grieve over every American death, these deaths are honored for all time. Winning is the only solution that is acceptable, damn the costs. My thinking is in the majority and polls prove it. Iraq in general is looking up and even the mainstream media will not be able to suppress the good news. Count on it.
I want to hear bud and the other quitters show us Clinton’s timetable for getting troops out of Bosnia and Kosovo.
And what about those 250,000 Jews and Christians burned out by Muslims in those two states since Clinton’s ill-fated reBalkanization of Yugoslavia?
Or we could discuss how Clinton’s cut and run from Somalia helped Bin Laden recruit thousands of Muslim terrorists..
Dave writes:
*******
Bud and Rth – What you two dont understand is Americans want to WIN!!!!!!!!!!
*******
No Dave, Americans, by an overwhelming majority, want this to end. Winning has long ago become a non-factor in American thinking. That’s because we’ve already lost. So what. Nations lose wars all the time and nothing bad really happens. Both the Japanese and the Germans lost in WW II. Today they are both prosperous nations with life expectancies greater than ours. The south lost the civil war. Good thing too because slavery was eliminated once and for all. The U.S. lost in Vietnam. Now we’re existing peacefully with that increasingly prosperous, benign and united nation.
All this talk of winning is really counter-productive. What is really important is to find the best way to move forward. Let’s not be so consumed with a black and white/ win or lose mentality. That serves only to keep this disaster going with more lives lost in an already lost cause.
Lee writes:
******
I want to hear bud and the other quitters show us Clinton’s timetable for getting troops out of Bosnia and Kosovo.
******
I certainly hope some reporter will ask Hillary that question.
This is typical of the rightwing’s juvenile mindset. Of course, everyone wants to WIN!!!!
This world view derives from a nasty mix of chauvinism, imperialism, American exceptionalism and faulty “sunk costs” logic.
If you phrase the question “Would you rather win or lose?” You’ll get a predictable knee jerk answer that signifies nothing.
But, this isn’t some high school football game. In the real world thoughtful people make decisions based on costs– immediate, longterm and opportunity costs plus the probability of a satisfactory outcome.
Wingers wave the bloody flag and demand that we sacrifice more lives and treasure because we sacrificed x number of people and y amount of monies.
Wingers also simple-mindedly parrot the “fight them over there or fight them here” meme. Firstly, most reliable reports place actual foreign terrorist participation in Iraq at a minute fraction of the overall insurgency. Secondly, Iraq has provided AQ a great recruiting/radicalizing cause for AQ around the world. Lastly, I’ve never quite understood why AQ wouldn’t be able to “attack us here” AND “there.” AQ is hardly a “top-down” organization that can’t walk and chew gum simultaneously. Quite the opposite, actually.
If you’ve been paying attention to accounts of reporting from Iraq then you’d realize that reporters decline to pursue all the “good news” because Iraq is a supremely dangerous country spiraling downward into deadly chaos. What qualifies for “good news” to American forces in Iraq is that they’re not attacked on any given day. Unarmed Iraqi civilians make easier targets as demonstrated by the daily body counts.
Oh, and the polls? USA Today/Gallup poll (4/7) shows 59% of the respondents think that invading Iraq was a mistake. NBC/Wall Street Journal poll (3/5) finds only 27% think that Bush is doing a good job with Iraq. The same poll finds that 67% opposed the “surge.”
What polls were you looking at?
Lee, how many Americans have died in Bosnia and Kosovo in the last year?
I forgot that you liberals don’t really care about the 250,000 Jews and Christians burned out by Al Qaeda in Bosnia and Kosovo since Clinton armed them the Muslim rebels.
All that whining about the poor and oppresses is just phony hot air, and foreign policy is just a diversion from whatever domestic scandal has engulfed Democrats at the moment.
Lee, which domestic scandal are you referring to:
1. Duke Cunningham’s money for votes
2. Scooter Libby’s perjury
3. The Walter Reed Hospital fiasco
4. Abu Ghraib
5. Mark Foley’s solicitation of minors
6. Halliburton’s excesses
7. Enron
8. Alberto Gonzoles lies about federal judge firings
9. Rudy Giuliani’s mistresses
10. Jack Abramoff’s shenanigans
11. The Ohio rare coin fiasco involving Tom Noe
Whoops. All these are REPUBLICAN scandals. I think it’s safe to say that Republicans are far more scandal prone than Democrats.
Ho, hum. Another bogus factoid from Lee. Did you get this from the John Birch Society website, Lee?
Just to clarify: I was pointing out that our presence in the Balkans isn’t costing us nearly the price in terms of dead and disabled Americans as our occupation of Iraq. So why should we be in a lather about leaving Kosovo and Bosnia?
No reason. it’s another apples and hand grenades comparison from Lee.
Lee never gets tired of being a carbuncle on the butt of a discussion.
But, let’s enter Lee’sWorld just to see if his bizarro logic works even his universe.
Lessee, we’ve still got troops in Bosnia and Kosovo. Yet, according to Lee, 250,000 “Jews and Christians were burned to death” there on our watch. Tell me exactly why we should remain there? Should we re-invade? Why hasn’t Dear Blameless Leader been on top of this during the last six years?
Again, Lee’s “logic” doesn’t even work in his own bizarro universe. Sad, really.
BTW, bud didn’t really exhaust the list of Rethuglican scandals. Nice of you to tee that one up to be hit out of the park, Lee.
Your comments confirm that you don’t care about the failure of Democrat policies in Bosnia and Kosovo, much less that you are unaware of how bad that failure is.
Bin Laden was visiting his Al Qaeda fighters in the Balkans in 1994, while Clinton was arming them.
The UN keeps track of the hundreds of churches and synagogues torched last year by the Muslim terrorists in Bosnia and Kosovo. They do nothing about it, but you can read their reports.
Here’s an analysis by our US Navy school:
http://www.ccc.nps.navy.mil/si/2005/May/attanassoffMay05.pdf
RTH your analysis of Bosnia went over Lee’s head.
Lee, here’s the delimma you’ve created for yourself. Either the Bosnia policy has succeeded. That would be supporting evidence that foreign interventions can work. But it also means you have to give Bill Clinton credit. Or, the Bosnia policy has produced a holocaust. In that case why doesn’t the current administration do something about it? And why would the ‘liberal’ media ignore something so awful that is occurring on the ‘hated’ Bush’s watch?
There’s no way you can win on this one but it will be fun to watch you squirm.
If Clinton intended for the Muslims to burn hundreds of churches and synagogues, murder thousands of local leaders, and render 250,000 Christians homeless, the his policies in Bosnia and Kosovo have succeeded.
Lee exactly when has did all this carnage supposedly occur? Show some proof that it has in fact occurred. It is a very well kept secret.
Since Bill Clinton repartitioned the Balkans and armed the Muslims in Bosnia in 1994.
Why are you afraid to look it up, study a bit, and get up to speed, before yammering?
Lee, why can’t you just provide a citation or two to support your own argument?
This is a recurring theme with you, Lee. You make some over-the-top statement and then challenge us to support it or disprove it.
It’s tiresome to keep pointing out that it’s YOUR responsibility to support your statements and prove your arguments– not OURS.
Put another way: it’s not up to us to prove a negative, eg. “There were not 250,000 Christians and Jews killedin Bosnia and Kosovo since 1994.”
I’ve just about run out of patience with someone who’s unwilling to demonstrate at least minimal intellectual honesty.
The Naval Report is very interesting but nowhere does it support any a massacres of Christians and Jews. It suggests that Bosnia may be trending Islamist. That’s no surprise and isn’t attributable to Clinton’s policies.
As a parallel, do you think that Iraq will do anything but turn Islamist whether we leave next year or in a decade?
Hurl, I cited the UN and news reports that 250,000 Jews and Christians have been driven out of their homes by Muslim terrorists in Bosnia and Kosovo. Thousands have been murdered.
Try reading more slowly for increased comprehension.
If you want to deny this “little” Islamofascist holocaust, go fetch us the official numbers you believe, and tell us why you dismiss this level of tragedy.
Lee, thanks for the tip on reading comprehension. Unfortunately, there has to be some text to read. You’ve made a statement.
That’s not a citation. In no way is that proof of your allegation. Even a sixth-grader in a failing public school understands that logic.
That cumulative record of your posts above is a bitch, isn’t it?
According to Christian relief organizations, the number of Christian and Jewish refugees from the pograms of the Muslims in Bosnia and Kosovo now number 290,000.
http://www.christian-aid.org.uk/indepth/9904koso/kosovo.htm
What scale of Islamic atrocities does it require to trigger the sympathy and shame of liberals?
RTH, are you a Muslim?
March 18, 2007
Iraqis: life is getting better
Marie Colvin
MOST Iraqis believe life is better for them now than it was under Saddam Hussein, according to a British opinion poll published today.
The survey of more than 5,000 Iraqis found the majority optimistic despite their suffering in sectarian violence since the American-led invasion four years ago this week.
One in four Iraqis has had a family member murdered, says the poll by Opinion Research Business. In Baghdad, the capital, one in four has had a relative kidnapped and one in three said members of their family had fled abroad. But when asked whether they preferred life under Saddam, the dictator who was executed last December, or under Nouri al-Maliki, the prime minister, most replied that things were better for them today.
Only 27% think there is a civil war in Iraq, compared with 61% who do not, according to the survey carried out last month.
Since the US began getting aggressive with Muslim terrorists last month, US casualties have fallen by 87%, bombing casualties by 80%, the economy has jumped 25%, and 1,500 terrorists have been killed or captured.
– ABC News, 3/15/2007
The BBC poll demonstrates the effect of the lying anti-American news media in disconnecting the perception of failure from the reality of American victories in Iraq.
Lee here are the actual numbers for March through the 19th compared to January, 2007 (which was a really terrible month).
American soldiers killed:
March 53 (2.8 per day)
January 83 (2.7 per day)
Here’s the source:
http://icasualties.org/oif/
Injury figures are not yet available for March. So how do these numbers show a reduction in American casualties? Or is this a RIGHT wing media phony good news story? So much for the liberal bias in the mainstream media.
Lex, I don’t think you want to get into a battle of the polls. I’m not sure where that one you cited came from but it runs counter to everything else I’ve ever seen on this. But even that poll shows that 1 in 4 Iraqis has had a family member killed during the conflict and 1 in 3 knows someone who’s fled the region. Read through these results form the Brookings Institution. It paints a very bleak picture of Iraq and what the people there think of the U.S.
Whoops, forgot the link:
http://www.brookings.edu/fp/saban/iraq/index.pdf
Or here’s another one from the USA Today/CNN/Gallop
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2004-04-28-poll-cover_x.htm
An excerpt:
BAGHDAD — Only a third of the Iraqi people now believe that the American-led occupation of their country is doing more good than harm, and a solid majority support an immediate military pullout even though they fear that could put them in greater danger, according to a new USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Poll.
You warmongers need to understand something and understand it now: The world has no use for our involvement in Iraq and little by little the American people are coming around to that view. To suggest the media is biased on Iraq is just an act of denial. If anything the media has softened it’s presentation of Iraq. It really is far worse than the MSM conveys.
The poll link I posted was old. The new poll is actually even worse:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2007-03-18-poll-cover_N.htm
% of Irais who said things are good:
2005 – 71%
2007 – 39%
% who expect things to be better for themselves in 1 year:
2005 – 64%
2007 – 35%
% who expect things to be better for country as a whole:
2005 – 69%
2007 – 40%
Yesterday’s Washington Post admitted that the private contractor to whom maintenance had been outsourced at Walter Reed had only had the contract for 3 days before their big news story which blamed run-down buildings on “privatizing”.
The government unions had fought the contract’s implementation, delaying work on Walter Reed by 3 years. The VA had laid off 360 workers on their budget schedule, even though the private contractor was not in place to fill those jobs.
If what Lee is saying is correct then we have a great example of how a public/private venture can work together to screw things up. The VA lays off workers but the private contractor failed to fill the jobs. Another nice piece of governing by the Bush Administration.
Bud, Do you really think USA Today or CNN have ever published a straightup poll? It would be impossible for them to do it. PM Maliki stated yesterday that sectarian violence is way way down, and the remaining violence are AQ nutcases. But then again, you, sitting in Columbia you know more than he would, right? Nancy Pelosi sits in San Francisco sipping her husband’s wine and she thinks she knows all about Iraq, so why not you too?
Dave, given the 100% failure of the right-wing war-mongers to get anything right why should anyone believe anything they say? Maliki is just a boot-licking puppet of the Bush regime and he’d say anything to stay in favor. But I don’t have to read polls to know the situation in Iraq is very bad. The DOD publishes casualty figures for American soldiers and they are running about the same as they have for the past 6 months. And independent reports indicate the number of civilians killed is running about where they were in January. Of course short-term lulls have occurred before so even if that’s the case it means little.
But just for the sake of argument let’s assume you’re right and the violence is indeed down. That doesn’t change my opinion of the war. We should be planning to leave by a date certain regardless. It makes no sense to continue in Iraq indefinitely.
I will say this though, the Dems have been a disappointment in getting our folks home so far. But at least they’re trying to do the right thing.
The contractor did not “fail to fill the jobs”, in all of 3 days they ran the place before the bogus news story broke.
The Post admits that the VA refused to approve they hiring any of the 87 replacement workers they proposed.
Smells like another case of a union messing over our soldiers – a union of government workers, surely hardcore Democratic Party voters.
Nothing will change the opinion of those who oppose the war, because their opinion is not based on facts, but on their personal hatred of President Bush.
They want America to fail in Iraq. They hate it that we have killed 15,000 terrorists, and that the troop surge in its infancy has already decreased attacks by 80%. They cannot stand it that this administration has stopped over 150 terrorist attacks on America, after their clown, Clinton, had a pro-Muslim policy which encouraged attacks.
They will always be miserable, because they have such a hard time finding anyone worse than themselves for comparison.