U.S. Spending Billions to Stop Iraq IEDs

[Barrett808]

U.S. Spending Billions to Stop Iraq IEDs
By CHARLES J. HANLEY, AP Special Correspondent

BAGHDAD, Iraq - The United States is pouring billions more dollars and fresh platoons of experts into its campaign to "defeat IEDs," the roadside bombs President Bush describes as threat No. 1 to Iraq's future.

The American military even plans to build special, more defensible highways here, in its frustrating standoff with the makeshift munitions — "improvised explosive devices" — that Iraqi insurgents field by the hundreds to hobble U.S. road movements in the 3-year-old conflict.

Out on those risky roads, and back at the Pentagon, few believe that even the most advanced technology will eliminate the threat.

"As we've improved our armor, the enemy's improved his IEDs. They're bigger, and with better detonating mechanisms," said Maj. Randall Simmons, whose Georgia National Guard unit escorts convoys in western Iraq that are regularly rocked, damaged and delayed by roadside blasts.

Lt. Col. Bill Adamson, operations chief for the anti-IED campaign, was realistic about the challenge in a Pentagon interview. "They adapt more quickly than we procure technology," he said of the insurgents.

Casualty charts show a growing problem.

(more)

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060313/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_threat_no1

[The_Casual_Observer]

1. IEDs can be stopped for free.

Get the fuck out of Iraq. Otherwise, spend the whole treasury, it still won't stop them.

[leftchick]

2. well when you misplace 360 Tons of high explosives

the stopping of IEDs will never happen.

[DemoTex]

20. Keep that on the front burner.

Few remember but thee and me . Nearly three-quarters of a million pounds of H-E, lost. Lost by US forces in the early days of our invasion of Iraq. Criminal. Viet Nam was fucked-up, but never this fucked-up.

[leftchick]

27. Viet Nam was fucked up but not this fucked up

that about says it all. :(

[saigon68]

28. The Crusaders are being met with SHOWERS OF FLOWER PETALS

disguised as Mark-82s and Mark 84s

[Joe for Clark]

3. Ain't no experts. It is a fact.

They take CBs that can drive bulldozers - they are our "experts".

It is a mistake to believe the army too much, really.

B*sh is an outright liar, the army is more subtle.

The casualties are the "real deal".

GO to one of those "basic" graduation classes and tell me that is not true.

What a load of shit that article really is. "delayed by roadside blasts" - how about dead.

I will never forgive this "president" for what he did to OUR kids, never.

Those were our kids that died there - OUR kids. Not his, apparently.

Joe for CLark (Or anybody but B*sh)

[kainah]

25. "fresh platoons of experts"

Don't miss the real reason for this "fresh platoon of experts," Joe for Clark.

This is the platoon that will determine the IEDs are coming from Iran and that the only way to "win" the war in Iraq is to go after Iran. That's what this sudden IED fuss is really about. We aren't going to invade Iran, we're just going to bleed on over into it.

[HereSince1628]

29. These fresh platoons are to include naval and air force

personnel who have been forced into ARMY service and given minimal training on IED's. The platoons are to be led by officers from those same services with NO combat training, let alone combat experience.

Talk about being expendable. The Vietnam life-expectancies of 2nd Lt.s produced by OCS was never good, but this is dreadful.

I'm wondering why the Pentagon hates these people so much. After all these folks were once volunteers.

[daleo]

4. They spend billions to defeat measures that cost thousands

The math is against them.

[ThoughtCriminal]

8. Tens of dollars

If even that much. Since they didn't bother to guard the armories while invading, the critical materials were free.

[Barrett808]

17. The writing's on the wall. The GOP lost the war. n/t

[NYC]

5. Billions sounds like a lot of money.

Armor should have been included from the beginning. That shouldn't be part of this expenditure of billions.

And if this is true
..."They adapt more quickly than we procure technology," he said of the insurgents...

what good will the billions do? Why not come up with another idea?

[llmart]

18. What good would billions do?

Why, keep the Repug military industrial complex in business, that's what.

It's not really about the IED's - it's about pouring money into their contributors.

[NYC]

21. Related article about billions in profit to private corporations.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x652884

That link is about the U.K., but Halliburton had record profits, too.

[Rex]

6. You can't defeat home grown innovation and technology.

I thought the military learned this lesson in Vietnam. Or is this a military contractors wetdream?

[HuffleClaw]

7. BILLIONS ????

so... ...which companies will receive this latest bushco. largess? bechtel? halliburton? carlyle? what a crock. 'billions' to combat roadside bombs. a cheap handout to the usual suspects.

[Joe for Clark]

9. The guy is right.

I think it costs us several million dollars to produce a Stryker vehicle. It costs them about 1000 dollars to buy the RPG that can destroy it.

WHo gets the money?? Why would any of us care - -why are we paying millions for a thing that gets destroyed by a thousand??

It seems the world turned upside down.

Joe

[Joe for Clark]

10. That was the song the British played as thet surrendered at

Yorktown - "The world turned upside down"
Joe

[MadMaddie]

11. A month ago there was a report that the military has

been testing a vehicle that is not manned by a soldier...and apparantly in all of the tests it has been successful....Why hasn't it been deployed...

It has to do with no bid contracts...and whose pockets are getting lined....

These vehicles are intentionally being held back...

[megatherium]

24. Are you thinking of the DARPA grand challenge?

They had a race in the Mohave Desert involving autonomous (unmanned) vehicles (SUVs). The vehicles had to navigate by themselves along a set route of 123 miles. When they did this two or three years ago, none of the vehicles made it more than several miles. But they ran the race last fall, and several vehicles finished. An extremely impressive feat. I have no idea if anything like this is ready to deploy; I have the vague impression that the military is thinking 15 years or more.

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Oct2005/20051012_3025.html

[LynnTheDem]

12. Gee, USA coulda saved billions by 1) not lying us to invasion.

2) after lying us to invasion, by securing the weapons depots (no, rightwingnuts, they're NOT "wmd" and yes, rightwingnuts, Iraq was indeed allowed to have conventional weapons).

3) after lying us to invasion and failing to secure weapons depots, bush coulda ordered all US troops have body armor.

Or is that too fucking hard werk?

[Joe for Clark]

15. Exactly right

Probably worse - FUCKING worse.

Joe

[stillcool]

13. Billions for bombs?...

sounds like they're doing a little creative accounting.

[bemildred]

14. "They adapt more quickly than we procure technology,"

Boy, that just encapsulates it, doesn't it? It's like the smart, weak little rodents against the big, dumb dinosaurs.

[mac56]

16. That right there is a one-sentence defintion of a "quagmire".

nm

[Terran1212]

19. How much do the IED's cost?

[DavidMS]

22. very little

Stopping them requires human intelegence.... nothing better than actualy catching the bomb makers...

Unfortunately Bu$h lied us into war and our best hope is a political solution... Military force will only give us the breathing room to make it a better deal for us.

[Jacobin]

23. Reminds me of King George of England

bitching and moaning about the revolting american colonists using 'primitive' methods of insurgency to defeat the occupying British troops in colonial days.

We are soooo screwed. This quagmire is going to be so much worse than Viet Nam.

George F'ing Bush and the idiots in congress who enabled this godawful mess will go down in history as the biggest morons of the millenium.

[brentspeak]

26. And who's receiving those billions?

War-profiteers used to face angry mobs of American citizens in the old days; now they get invited to Bush's State of The Union Address.

[cliss]

30. I've got some news for George Bush

Most of the money to do this has come from "emergency meausres" which have been quickly approved. There is never any oversight. These "emergencies" are usually for around $70 billion, $92 billion and so on.

Congress quickly approves the blank check, and then the Pentagon turns around and spends it. The problem is, Congress is getting tired of this. They're going to put a stop to it. (we'll see)

We are really running out of money. The $300 billion that's been spent is all from borrowed funds. Not one dime is from current funds. In fact, the cost of this war is not even included in our gigantic deficit.

As I've said before, Rule #1 in the Parasite's Handbook...

[PATRICK]

31. Stupid strategy

Now they are somewhat into the Great Wall mode, the biggest most expensive non solution to a indefensible problem. A lot of money to waste to make us "feel" safer. ironically that was what fighting them "over there" was supposed to be all about.

It was absolutely predictable that going in without a tremendous number in the force would simply turn our men into targets and a testing ground for the insurgents. Unlike Vietnam it was doable with more boots on the ground and immediate handing over of the country to the Iraqis themselves. Or if not, get the hell out.

But no, thinking like the Nazis thought their machinery was superior to Napoleon and repeating the same mistake would offer different results, they thought that they could patrol iraq with impunity and crush all the hot spots. There were several reasons known beforehand why they couldn't even with escalation and brutality. First, Saddam had done that to them in harsher more practical ways. The people were inured and trained and Saddam's own troops had tons of armaments and were utterly held at arm's length from the new infrastructure.

They can only get better. And it truly seems, despite all the tech and education and creativity and desperation(because we ARE showing the world how to beat us), you could throw a trillion dollars at our military geniuses and they wouldn't get it. It was about doing what had to be done, not reflecting on the disaster and slowly making new toys. But again we can't wait to pull out troops and that is not just the pressure from the American polls. The WH NEVER wanted enough troops in there to do the job and they are dedicated to their error. There are several of these self defeating dogmas firmly entrenched. No one can get around them and the constant desire to pleases and comfort themselves with siphoning off more wasted dollars into WH pockets make it hopeless.

Trying to get a strategy out of all these accepted handicaps and self-crippled thinking or non-thinking
is going to be even more pathetic than that well traveled road in Vietnam. Thanks to the Rumsfeld purges a lot of insurgents' lives will be spared by these self imposed internal rules and disastrous mindsets.

And what are they doing on those patrols? Have we stopped or inhibited a civil war? Have our casulaties and numberless Iraqi casulaties prevented WORSE casualties? Have we maintained the sham in the eyes of all concerned? For our own people? It appears they are being wasted to maintain a tight illusion in the WH alone which they cling to like their soiled legitimacy, thrown away out of stubborn disregard for anything but ruling temporarily over oil fields.