Rodham identifies weaknesses for insurgents to exploit

[Riscalculator]

Identifying your weaknesses for your enemy to exploit is dumb, treasonous, and may increase fatalities, and the frequency and severity of wounds.

Let me clarify and summarize; it is treason disguised as the right to freedom of expression.

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Health/story?id=1489733
__________________________________________________ ___________
The lack of adequate armor has been a hot topic during the war in Iraq. In 2004, a soldier confronted Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld during a Q&A session in Iraq about the issue. The question turned out to be planted by a journalist. Recently, Howard Dean, former presidential candidate and president of the Democratic National Committee, called for Rumsfeld to resign.

The Defense Department and Army said that they needed more time to acquire the armor and that publicly discussing issues of body armor aided the enemy — claims that Clinton dismissed as out of hand.

She said it was now incumbent on the president to stand up for the men and women fighting overseas in Iraq and Afghanistan.
__________________________________________________ _____________

Of course she would dismiss the claims of mil experts. They refuted her political criticism of the current admin, as she trys to establish her opposition to the Republicans in anticipation of the 2008 elections.

The three important questions are:

"Who has mil experience and expertise in armor?"
"Who has political motives and ambitions?"
"When will traitors like Moe Howard Dean, Clinton and Rodham-Clinton be held accountable?"

[2pac Shakur]

Originally Posted by Riscalculator

"Who has mil experience and expertise in armor?"

The Pentagon. Look what they had to say:

A secret Pentagon study of 93 Marines who were killed in Iraq found that 74 died after they were hit by a bullet or shrapnel in the torso or shoulders — areas unprotected by the armor most are issued.

I don't see any report of any soldiers killed by Hillary Clinton. Maybe your privy to something you'd like to share?

Originally Posted by Riscalculator

"Who has political motives and ambitions?"

Everybody in DC. Including, but not limited to, former Halliburton CEO Dick Cheney. Did you have a point there?

Originally Posted by Riscalculator

"When will traitors like Moe Howard Dean, Clinton and Rodham-Clinton be held accountable?"

Just as soon as we find Saddam's WMDs. How's that?

[Riscalculator]

Originally Posted by 2pac Shakur

The Pentagon. Look what they had to say:

I don't see any report of any soldiers killed by Hillary Clinton. Maybe your privy to something you'd like to share?

Everybody in DC. Including, but not limited to, former Halliburton CEO Dick Cheney. Did you have a point there?

Just as soon as we find Saddam's WMDs. How's that?

The story I posted was sharing of what Hilary said, and what the mil experts said were irresponsible and dangerous comments by her.

Re-read the bolded items. That was the intent of bolding them. Apparently, you interpretted bolding as ' ignore this important stuff '.

The enemy actually kills US soldiers. But traitors like Hillary aid their cause by identifying weaknesses in armor, etc.

No army has ever been fully prepared and fully protected. Simple facts of war. WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, Gulf War I & Gulf War I-continuation were all fought without complete body armorment, fully protective helmets, etc.

The same criticisms can be levelled at auto manufacturers for not implementing all possible devices to prevent death or injury in accidents. And similar criticism is possible for thousands of other risk situations.

We actuaries can calculate some of those risks, which are insurable. Hence, we Riscalculators are fully aware of the hypocrisy of these criticism by Bill & Hill. And the mil experts identify the revelation of weaknesses as aidng the enermy.

WMD have been found; sarin gas found over a year ago. Gas chambers, torure chambers used to torture people, rape women, disfigure critics of the Baathist regime. "M" = mass = more than one person injured. Thus, gas, torture chambers qualify as WMD.

Clear now?

[2pac Shakur]

Originally Posted by Riscalculator

The enemy actually kills US soldiers. But traitors like Hillary aid their cause by identifying weaknesses in armor, etc.

No army has ever been fully prepared and fully protected. Simple facts of war. WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, Gulf War I & Gulf War I-continuation were all fought without complete body armorment, fully protective helmets, etc.

Wait a minute.
Is our shortage of body armor a secret that should never be discussed, or is it a simple fact of war? Would you like you're cake and to eat it too?

Originally Posted by Riscalculator

The same criticisms can be levelled at auto manufacturers for not implementing all possible devices to prevent death or injury in accidents. And similar criticism is possible for thousands of other risk situations.

Quit talking about faulty auto manufacturing.
Al Qaeda might be listening, and they will exploit that.
Some auto executives said so.

Originally Posted by Riscalculator

We actuaries can calculate some of those risks, which are insurable. Hence, we Riscalculators are fully aware of the hypocrisy of these criticism by Bill & Hill. And the mil experts identify the revelation of weaknesses as aidng the enermy.

Actually, you identify anything other than flagwaving as aiding the enemy.

Originally Posted by Riscalculator

WMD have been found; sarin gas found over a year ago. Gas chambers, torure chambers used to torture people, rape women, disfigure critics of the Baathist regime. "M" = mass = more than one person injured. Thus, gas, torture chambers qualify as WMD.

You do realize that even the Iraqi Survey Group (a team full of Bushies) have admitted there were no WMDs? It's time to let go. Admit you were dooped. It's ok. Life goes on.

Originally Posted by Riscalculator

Clear now?

You betcha.

[Abnormal]

A secret Pentagon study of 93 Marines who were killed in Iraq found that 74 died after they were hit by a bullet or shrapnel in the torso or shoulders — areas unprotected by the armor most are issued.

Of course if the entire army were composed of Achilles clones the study would show that a disproportionate number of fatalities were due to heel wounds. If you really want to know how well armor is working, or not working, you have to somehow figure out how many fatalities were prevented by armor.

[r. mutt]

Originally Posted by Riscalculator

Identifying your weaknesses for your enemy to exploit is dumb, treasonous, and may increase fatalities, and the frequency and severity of wounds.

Let me clarify and summarize; it is treason disguised as the right to freedom of expression.

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Health/story?id=1489733
__________________________________________________ ___________
The lack of adequate armor has been a hot topic during the war in Iraq. In 2004, a soldier confronted Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld during a Q&A session in Iraq about the issue. The question turned out to be planted by a journalist. Recently, Howard Dean, former presidential candidate and president of the Democratic National Committee, called for Rumsfeld to resign.

The Defense Department and Army said that they needed more time to acquire the armor and that publicly discussing issues of body armor aided the enemy — claims that Clinton dismissed as out of hand.

She said it was now incumbent on the president to stand up for the men and women fighting overseas in Iraq and Afghanistan.
__________________________________________________ _____________

Is this like the time when the administration claimed we were using inadequately armored vehicles because production had fallen behind, and then it turned out the DoD hadn't even placed the order for additional armor? Just wondering.

As for "aiding the enemy", how does that work? If it came up in a press conference and has already been publicly discussed, is it just the fact that Hillary is talking about it? A strange argument.

I also hope ABC is lying about anyone claiming $260 per soldier is too much. That, of course, would be nuts.

[Real American Hero]

Originally Posted by Riscalculator

"Who has mil experience and expertise in armor?"

While the Army and DoD have the requisite "expertise" in this area, I'm not willing to give them control of criminal justice, or deciding what exactly is treasonous. You seem to have no problem living in a police state. Maybe some knowledgeable posters will be willing to recommend some comfy places to which you may consider relocating.

[Y2Mozz]

[Gandalf]

Originally Posted by Riscalculator

Thus, gas, torture chambers qualify as WMD.

Clear now?

We went into Iraq because we were afraid that terrorists would attack the US with gas chambers and torture chambers?

"M" = mass = more than one person injured.

Not exactly what the lay person would expect. I trust Congressional leaders, our allies, the UN, etc were briefed that hand grenades, which at least meet the definition of weapons, were WMDs, worthy of going to war over.

[Riscalculator]

Originally Posted by Abnormal

Of course if the entire army were composed of Achilles clones the study would show that a disproportionate number of fatalities were due to heel wounds. If you really want to know how well armor is working, or not working, you have to somehow figure out how many fatalities were prevented by armor.

/// A secret Pentagon study of 93 Marines who were killed in Iraq ///

Clear now?

Weren't Dems (not necessarily Hillary-ous Rodham) critical of the disclosure of Valerie Plame's ID? Why then, the double standard in outing the secrets in the Pentagon study, which increases the risk to soldiers, but objecting to revealing the ID of a former covert agent?

2pac: the discussion of the areas of weakness of the armor is the secret that should not have been revealed. Discussion of the problem in general terms is fine, and expected in a free democracy. Please note that bolded items are phrases to focus on, not ignore.

Yes, you are right; we should not talk about dangers inherent in autos any further since it was intended as an analogy.