PDA

View Full Version : Another ***k up


Rigs11
08-05-2007, 11:47 PM
How much more do you righties need? Seriously...

Weapons given to Iraq are missing
30 percent of arms are unaccounted for, GAO estimates

The Pentagon has lost track of about 190,000 AK-47 assault rifles and pistols given to Iraqi security forces in 2004 and 2005, according to a new government report, raising fears that some of those weapons have fallen into the hands of insurgents fighting U.S. forces in Iraq.

The report from the Government Accountability Office indicates that U.S. military officials do not know what happened to 30 percent of the weapons the United States distributed to Iraqi forces from 2004 through early this year as part of an effort to train and equip the troops. The highest previous estimate of unaccounted-for weapons was 14,000, in a report issued last year by the inspector general for Iraq reconstruction.

The United States has spent $19.2 billion trying to develop Iraqi security forces since 2003, the GAO said, including at least $2.8 billion to buy and deliver equipment. But the GAO said weapons distribution was haphazard and rushed and failed to follow established procedures, particularly from 2004 to 2005, when security training was led by Gen. David H. Petraeus, who now commands all U.S. forces in Iraq.

The Pentagon did not dispute the GAO findings, saying it has launched its own investigation and indicating it is working to improve tracking. Although controls have been tightened since 2005, the inability of the United States to track weapons with tools such as serial numbers makes it nearly impossible for the U.S. military to know whether it is battling an enemy equipped by American taxpayers.

‘No idea where they are’
"They really have no idea where they are," said Rachel Stohl, a senior analyst at the Center for Defense Information who has studied small-arms trade and received Pentagon briefings on the issue. "It likely means that the United States is unintentionally providing weapons to bad actors."

One senior Pentagon official acknowledged that some of the weapons probably were being used against U.S. forces. He cited the Iraqi brigade created at Fallujah that quickly dissolved in September 2004 and turned its weapons against the Americans.

Stohl said that insurgents frequently use small-arms fire to force military convoys to move in a particular direction -- often toward roadside bombs that target troops and vehicles. She noted that the Bush administration frequently complains that Iran and Syria are supplying insurgents but has paid little attention to whether U.S. military errors inadvertently play a role. "We know there is seepage and very little is being done to address the problem," she said.

Stohl noted that U.S. forces, focused on a fruitless search for weapons of mass destruction after Baghdad fell, failed to secure massive weapons caches. The failure to track small arms given to Iraqi forces repeats that pattern of neglect, she added.

The GAO is studying the financing and weapons sources of insurgent groups, but that report will not be made public. "All of that information is classified," said Joseph A. Christoff, the GAO's director of international affairs and trade.

In an unusual move, the train-and-equip program for Iraqi forces is being managed by the Pentagon. Normally, the traditional security assistance programs are operated by the State Department, the GAO reported. The Defense Department said this change permitted greater flexibility, but as of last month it was unable able to tell the GAO what accountability procedures, if any, apply to arms distributed to Iraqi forces, the report said.

Iraqi security forces were virtually nonexistent in early 2004, and in June of that year Petraeus was brought in to build them up. No central record of distributed equipment was kept for a year and a half, until December 2005, and even now the records are on a spreadsheet that requires three computer screens lined up side by side to view a single row, Christoff said.

The GAO found that the military was consistently unable to collect supporting documents to "confirm when the equipment was received, the quantities of equipment delivered, and the Iraqi units receiving the equipment." The agency also said there were "numerous mistakes due to incorrect manual entries" in the records that were maintained.

The GAO reached the estimate of 190,000 missing arms -- 110,000 AK-47s and 80,000 pistols -- by comparing the property records of the Multi-National Security Transition Command for Iraq against records Petraeus maintained of the arms and equipment he had ordered. Petraeus's figures were compared with classified data and other records to ensure that it was accurate enough to compare against the property books.

In all cases, the gaps between the two records were enormous. Petraeus reported that about 185,000 AK-47 rifles, 170,000 pistols, 215,000 pieces of body armor and 140,000 helmets were issued to Iraqi security forces from June 2004 through September 2005. But the property books contained records for 75,000 AK-47 rifles, 90,000 pistols, 80,000 pieces of body armor and 25,000 helmets.

A military commander involved in the program at the time, speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss the report, acknowledged in an e-mail, "We did issue some items, including weapons, body armor, etc. to new Iraqi units that were literally going into battle."

‘Not much of a choice early on’
But, the commander argued, "there was, frankly, not much of a choice early on: We had very little staff and could have held the weapons until every piece of the logistical and property accountability system was in place, or we could issue them, in bulk on some occasions, to the U.S. elements supporting Iraqi units who were needed in the battles of Najaf, Fallujah, Mosul, Samarra, etc."

The GAO plans to look for similar problems in the training of Afghan security forces.

During the Bosnian conflict, the United States provided about $100 million in defense equipment to the Bosnian Federation Army, and the GAO found no problems in accounting for those weapons.

Much of the equipment provided to Iraqi troops, including the AK-47s, originates from countries in the former Soviet bloc. In a report last year, Amnesty International said that in 2004 and 2005 more than 350,000 AK-47 rifles and similar weapons were taken out of Bosnia and Serbia, for use in Iraq, by private contractors working for the Pentagon and with the approval of NATO and European security forces in Bosnia.
© 2007 The Washington Post Company

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20137021/

Garcia Bronco
08-05-2007, 11:56 PM
I had a tasty burger tonight

Rigs11
08-05-2007, 11:59 PM
keep eating em,they're doing a number on your IQ. Any thoughts on the loss of the weapons?

DenverBrit
08-06-2007, 12:01 AM
Stohl said that insurgents frequently use small-arms fire to force military convoys to move in a particular direction -- often toward roadside bombs that target troops and vehicles. She noted that the Bush administration frequently complains that Iran and Syria are supplying insurgents but has paid little attention to whether U.S. military errors inadvertently play a role. "We know there is seepage and very little is being done to address the problem," she said.

I'm wondering what will be considered 'The last straw.'
Are we there yet??

Rigs11
08-06-2007, 12:08 AM
I'm wondering what will be considered 'The last straw.'
Are we there yet??

It's a setup, the US is giving the iraqis ak 47's. Isn't that what iran uses? How easy is it now for dubya and his cronies to continue the repeated accusations that iran is arming the insurgents?

Crushaholic
08-06-2007, 12:27 AM
The military is the one program the federal government SHOULD be running and they find a way to screw it up. And people want government-run health care?LOL LOL LOL LOL

Bronco Bob
08-06-2007, 12:45 AM
The military is the one program the federal government SHOULD be running and they find a way to screw it up. And people want government-run health care?LOL LOL LOL LOL

When you have someone in the White House who values yes men over
competent, qualified people, you are going to get this sort of thing.
This doesn't mean a competent person in the White House would
have this same sort of problem. The big problem with the GOP is
they have this government doesn't work mantra, so no surprise,
under the GOP the government doesn't work. A self fulfilling prophecy.
Get people in there who have faith in the government and you
just might see the government working correctly again.

yavoon
08-06-2007, 01:10 AM
When you have someone in the White House who values yes men over
competent, qualified people, you are going to get this sort of thing.
This doesn't mean a competent person in the White House would
have this same sort of problem. The big problem with the GOP is
they have this government doesn't work mantra, so no surprise,
under the GOP the government doesn't work. A self fulfilling prophecy.
Get people in there who have faith in the government and you
just might see the government working correctly again.

man thats a frightening use of logic.

TailgateNut
08-06-2007, 09:09 AM
When you have someone in the White House who values yes men over
competent, qualified people, you are going to get this sort of thing.
This doesn't mean a competent person in the White House would
have this same sort of problem. The big problem with the GOP is
they have this government doesn't work mantra, so no surprise,
under the GOP the government doesn't work. A self fulfilling prophecy.
Get people in there who have faith in the government and you
just might see the government working correctly again.


Get a person in the White House who will actually hold his staff accountable for their actions in lieu of someone who give them a vote of confidence after each **** up.
Someone who will actually listen to experts in lieu of people who tell him what he wants to hear.
Someone who is honest in lieu of someone who constantly lies to the american public!
Someone who can speak english and has skills in public and foreign relations, and is willing to negotiate rather than bully his way into the hearts of others.

baja
08-06-2007, 10:06 AM
One senior Pentagon official acknowledged that some of the weapons probably were being used against U.S. forces. He cited the Iraqi brigade created at Fallujah that quickly dissolved in September 2004 and turned its weapons against the Americans.

Isn't it about time to get the hell out of there.

I'd like to see this article in the Stars & Stripes

Garcia Bronco
08-06-2007, 10:31 AM
keep eating em,they're doing a number on your IQ. Any thoughts on the loss of the weapons?

I think it's obvious how any of us feel about losing weapons to potential enemies.

TailgateNut
08-06-2007, 10:37 AM
I think it's obvious how any of us feel about losing weapons to potential enemies.

...but for some of "us" it's ok to SELL weapons to potential enemies.
What a fickle bunch!

baja
08-06-2007, 10:40 AM
...but for some of "us" it's ok to SELL weapons to potential enemies.
What a fickle bunch!

Maybe it's better to blow it up and start over.

TheDave
08-06-2007, 11:46 AM
I thought the AK-47 was a Russian gun?

Bronco Bob
08-06-2007, 12:12 PM
I thought the AK-47 was a Russian gun?

Yes, that is interesting that they'd be arming the Iraqis with AK-47s instead of M-16s.

El Guapo
08-06-2007, 12:15 PM
It says in the article that they purchased them cheap from former soviet countries...

and yes, this is solely the republicans fault. ::)

TheDave
08-06-2007, 01:08 PM
It says in the article that they purchased them cheap from former soviet countries...



Missed that... thank you.

Cito Pelon
08-06-2007, 05:28 PM
This is why the Pentagon is leery of giving any weapons heavier than the basics to the Iraqis. The criterion to get out of there is first the Iraqis have to be able to defend their borders and have internal control. But the Pentagon is justifiably scared that those weapons will very quickly be turned against the Coalition forces. Goofy, isn't it?

We'll have to arm them sooner or later, and then watch as Coalition units get shot to hell as they try to leave the country. There will be as much combat as we leave than there was during the invasion. The next President will have to make the decision to arm them, and then watch as his ground forces get shot to hell as they try to leave. And then we're supposed to rebuild their Air Force and Navy after they shoot up our ground forces? That was the plan right? Build a new Middle East with Iraq as the keystone?

The alternative is get out before arming the Iraqis adequately to form a strong central government in Baghdad, then let the Kurds in the north, the Sunni Arabs in the middle, and the Shiites in the south divide the country.

I figure that's how it will turn out. That was always the strongest possibility after the dismantling of the bureaucracy and the military. That opens up the likelihood of the Turks and Kurds going toe to toe in the north, the Shiites in the south banding up with the Persians to take Baghdad, and the Syrians looking to take a piece of the pie and potentially going at it with the Persians.

Ah well, I don't know. It's gonna get hotter there than it already is, that's for sure.

c_lazy_r
08-06-2007, 05:39 PM
I just love how our government "loses" things. Hundreds of thousands of guns, election records, etc, etc.

But if you can't find your W2 from 5 years ago, you are clearly a cheater and liar. It's almost (almost) funny.

Garcia Bronco
08-06-2007, 05:48 PM
I just love how our government "loses" things. Hundreds of thousands of guns, election records, etc, etc.

But if you can't find your W2 from 5 years ago, you are clearly a cheater and liar. It's almost (almost) funny.

Exactly...so WITF would anybody want them running our health care.

Bronco Bob
08-06-2007, 11:37 PM
Exactly...so WITF would anybody want them running our health care.

You think Bush is always going to be in charge of the government?
Or are you buying Gaffney's claim Bush is going to cancel the 2008
elections?

Garcia Bronco
08-07-2007, 12:04 AM
You think Bush is always going to be in charge of the government?
Or are you buying Gaffney's claim Bush is going to cancel the 2008
elections?

dude...government run crap is always like that.

Bronco Bob
08-07-2007, 12:25 AM
dude...government run crap is always like that.

Considering that Republicans will have been in the White House
for 28 of the last 40 years, that's not surprising.

yavoon
08-07-2007, 12:30 AM
Considering that Republicans will have been in the White House
for 28 of the last 40 years, that's not surprising.

what kind of stupendously dishonest stat rigging is that? didnt democrats control congress for 40 STRAIGHT years? I dont know man, u kinda disappointed me in this post.

Garcia Bronco
08-07-2007, 12:35 AM
Considering that Republicans will have been in the White House
for 28 of the last 40 years, that's not surprising.

CONGRESS IS JUST AS MUCH TO BLAME...sorry for the caps

Bronco Bob
08-07-2007, 12:42 AM
what kind of stupendously dishonest stat rigging is that? didnt democrats control congress for 40 STRAIGHT years? I dont know man, u kinda disappointed me in this post.

The administrations run the departments and appoint the heads of the
departments. All Congress does is allocate the money to run them.
If it was up to the Congress people like Gonzales would have been long gone.
Perhaps you should take a remedial civics course?

yavoon
08-07-2007, 12:46 AM
The administrations run the departments and appoint the heads of the
departments. All Congress does is allocate the money to run them.
If it was up to the Congress people like Gonzales would have been long gone.
Perhaps you should take a remedial civics course?

last I checked too congress made the laws. but of course silly things like laws probably don't impact gov't efficiency. now ur just defending ur ludicrously dishonest post.

Bronco Bob
08-07-2007, 12:54 AM
last I checked too congress made the laws. but of course silly things like laws probably don't impact gov't efficiency. now ur just defending ur ludicrously dishonest post.

And appointing Brownie to run FEMA and Gonzales to run the
Justice Department and Rumsfeld to run DOD doesn't affect how
they do their jobs.
Now you are just defending your ludicrous assumptions as to who
controls the day to day operation of the government agencies.

yavoon
08-07-2007, 01:00 AM
And appointing Brownie to run FEMA and Gonzales to run the
Justice Department and Rumsfeld to run DOD doesn't affect how
they do their jobs.
Now you are just defending your ludicrous assumptions as to who
controls the day to day operation of the government agencies.

of course bush is awful, what does that absolve democrats of? is this the democrats plan? bush is awful so give us the keys we'll run it great! mind boggling.

Bronco Bob
08-07-2007, 01:09 AM
of course bush is awful, what does that absolve democrats of? is this the democrats plan? bush is awful so give us the keys we'll run it great! mind boggling.

Well, you'll have to admit that the government was running a lot
more smoothly when Clinton was president. Hell, we even had
a budget surplus, first time that has happened in decades.

yavoon
08-07-2007, 01:24 AM
Well, you'll have to admit that the government was running a lot
more smoothly when Clinton was president. Hell, we even had
a budget surplus, first time that has happened in decades.

there were fewer grossly incompetent ppl probably, but facing some absurdist counterexample isn't gna fool me into thinking the merely bad are somehow good.

Cito Pelon
08-07-2007, 05:36 PM
Considering that Republicans will have been in the White House
for 28 of the last 40 years, that's not surprising.

That's a very strong point that people lose track of. Very strong point.

TailgateNut
08-07-2007, 09:40 PM
That's a very strong point that people lose track of. Very strong point.



Thanks for not quoting the yavoon, I'm sure his comment consisted of: BLAH BLAH BLAH.

...and people do seem to forget the last time the countrys' checkbook was in the "black" was before the dumbasses voted for the dumbass!

L.A. BRONCOS FAN
08-09-2007, 07:34 PM
...and people do seem to forget the last time the countrys' checkbook was in the "black" was before the dumbasses voted for the dumbass!

:yep:

http://www.bartcop.com/bush-death-speak.JPG

L.A. BRONCOS FAN
08-09-2007, 07:41 PM
Weapons given to Iraq are missing
30 percent of arms are unaccounted for, GAO estimates


http://www.bartcop.com/iraq-lost-and-found.gif

TailgateNut
08-10-2007, 01:28 AM
http://www.bartcop.com/iraq-lost-and-found.gif


That's funny, but what's not funny are the sheep who still buy into BushCo. Hook line and sinker!

L.A. BRONCOS FAN
08-10-2007, 01:49 AM
That's funny, but what's not funny are the sheep who still buy into BushCo. Hook line and sinker!

Yep. :yep:

Scary, isn't it?

Reality and the facts have virtually no influence on their thought processes - it's all about blind obedience to the cult of Dubya.