XPost: alt.politics, talk.politics.misc, alt.fan.j-garofalo   
   From: stderr@mail.com   
      
   Bill wrote:   
   >   
      
      
   > I don't think the biggest question is whether Rumsfield lied or not, or   
   > whether the Democrats would have done a worse job, etc. The main issue is why   
   > have not the trucks been up-armored? Apparently 90% of the 5,000, or so,   
   > medium weight trucks in Iraq have not been up-armored. WHY?   
   >   
   This sort of armour has only recently become viable. Even now it is   
   rather dodgy.   
      
      
   > The American economy produces many millions of cars and trucks a year. Surely   
   > it could have produced 4,500 medium weight armored trucks over two years. So   
   > it is not the laws of physics as Rumsfield claimed.   
   >   
   Of course it really is. Rumsfeld knows what he is talking about. The   
   IEDs have literally flipped main battle tanks. Those things weigh about   
   60 tons. How do you armour a humvee against that sort of threat?   
      
      
      
   --   
   Opening her own letter Dorothea saw that it was a lively continuation of   
   his remonstrance with her fanatical sympathy and her want of sturdy   
   neutral delight in things as they were—an outpouring of his young   
   vivacity which it was impossible to read just now. -+George Eliot,   
   "Middlemarch"   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)