From the Fact Check Desk: Obama’s Army Anecdote

Of course the conservative talking heads are upset, since Sen. Obama’s anecdote illustrates exactly what many critics of the former Secretary of Defense had been saying: Sec. Rumsfeld mistakenly attempted to engage in wars on two fronts by inadequately equipping the armed forces who were putting their lives on the line, requiring that those same forces scramble for decent equipment. How often have we heard stories of relatives of servicemen and servicewomen who’ve had to raise funds to buy necessities for them like body armor, walkie-talkies, flashlights, and the like? Not a proud moment in our history, and one which shows the ineptness of the current administration in planning and carrying out their lust for war.

Tha fact is we have two wars to end.
How is being against the war help us to end them? How is recounting a Captain story help us to end the wars successfully?
Remember, John Kerry and John Edwards voted for the war. Howard Dean did not support the war from the get go.
Can we really afford to elect a president on opposition to a war alone?

This is the kind of fair and unbaised reporting we need MUCH MORE of. A Clinton supporter.

When people talk about the Iraq vote in Congress they overlook the context. Bush set the vote up to occur in October, 2002 before the midterm elections. Those Dems who voted against authorization were targeted by Bush/Rove as being unpatriotic and in many cases (Max Cleland etc.) were defeated. Bush boxed in the Dems. If they voted against authorization, in many cases they lost their seats and/or clout to fight future battles against this terrible president. And also, the understanding of that vote was that the president would still have to come back to Congress before initiating combat.

OMG, a military unit is undermanned and it’s logistics are screw-up. FIRST TIME THAT EVER HAPPENED IN THE HISTORY OF WARFARE I am sure.
No worries, though, it won’t ever happen when a Democrat is CnC. Jimmy Carter and the criminally unsuccessful Iranian hostage rescue and Bill Clinton and the Somalia defeat are proof of that for sure.

“obvious reasons he asked that I not mention his name”
Obvious reasons? What, fear of death squads?
Or maybe fear of verification, or fear of others in his unit calling him on his fictions and embellishments?

Sen. Obama made it sound in the debate, as though they were not given the weapons in Afghanistan. Now apparently, it was prior to departure. Sounds a little different when you get down to it.

A couple of points in response to the CPT’s comments. First, all Army units are subject to the type of personnel shifts he experienced. Soldiers get promoted, reassigned, sent to schools, leave the Army, etc… all the time. That is just the nature of the beast.
Second, if he was stationed at Ft. Drum, he was in the 10th Mountain Division which is a light infantry division. By design, infantry platoons in a light division do not have any assigned Humvees, .50 cal M2′s, or Mk-19s. It is not surprising then that he did not link up with the systems in question until he got to theater or that his unit was not equipped to service or support equipment that they were not designed to service or support.

Jake, that’s just excellent reporting. We couldn’t have asked for more from you.

Obama related the story as though it were current — not four years old.
Shortages of material in 2003 were still a result of pre-2001 funding.

I would like to know who at the Pentagon Barack Obama contacted to discuss this matter in detail. Or did he decide to use a 4 year old anecdote for political gain? A West Point graduate would stand up for his soldiers and make this known to his commanders. I would have understood if he was special forces, but the 10th mountain is trained for the very terrain of Afghanistan. His 4 years at West Point didn’t prepare him for this? I don’t doubt it could have happened, but it is something that would have been addressed in an afteraction report. I think what bothers most with military knowledge is that it was an Army captain commanding a platoon, when most think of lieutenants doing that. Also, that it was said as if it happened last week, instead of years ago. I think this brave young man should come forward and work this out for the good of the military, and not be used as a sound bite by Obama. Maybe Jack Murtha can give up some of his defense appropriation for ammunition.

“Obvious reasons…” You have absolutely got to be kidding me. If he isn’t going to give his name, that story is totally worthless.
Complete B.S., just like Sanjaya…I mean Obama

You never get everything you need, and it bothers good officers. But we have one anecdote here, expanded into a quite broad assertion. One always hears that the plural of “anecdote” isn’t “data”. I guess that plural is “campaign rhetoric”.
Don’t get me wrong: the broader point may well be true. Both Afghanistan and Iraq were badly managed early on, and it’s certainly not clear that things have improved in the former. However, proving that there’s a single-source firsthand anecdote behind Sen. Obama’s broad assertion is only the first small step in verification.

There was a shortage of up-armored Humvees in 2003? OMG, get right on top of this, I can’t believe this story is just now seeing the light of day.
You’d think it would have been newsworthy in the leadup to the 2004 elections or something.

Is anyone actually comparing this story to what Obama said? If this report is true, then the story Obama told was wrong. He said nearly 40% of the Lieutenant’s (he was not a Captain at the time!) platoon went to Iraq. Tapper says that soldiers were transferred to different units in pairs and the lieutenant did not know where 5 of the 15 went. Obama said “they didn’t have enough ammunition,” making it sound as if the lack of ammunition occurred in theater. But Tapper reports that the ammo shortage occurred before deployment during training back in the U.S.–a problem–but a far, far cry from lacking ammo in a battle. But the real question is this–if Obama can accomplish so much, why hasn’t he at the very least introduced legislation to better equip the military? Because organizational schools are not his strong suit?

Jake…did it occur to you that by not releasing his name that your story is no better than Obama’s? Until we know his name, consider this story unverified. Seems many posters here were happy to overlook that.

To the person above who says Obama told the story as if it was current; that is not true. Reread the quote. He was using the story as an example of how the decistion to go to war in Irag in 2003 diverted attention from Afghantistan. He was not making a comment on the surge or on recent; he was talking about the dismal and distracting decision for war in Iraq in 2003. Undeniably a valid point on his part.

Senator Obama is the best thing that could happen to this great country in many years.

Scott Beauchamp isn’t a captain…

Good reporting and excellent story.

As a prior military service member, you are not supposed to talk to the media about anything that has to do with the war, and I mean anything! Unless it is cleared through your chain of command, some may argue that it is not true, but it is an unspoken rule, believe me I know

I’m not sure why this soldiers identity should be guarded. He contacted the Senator’s people. This sounds to me like another New Republic shielding for the fake Baghdad Diarist stories.
My husband is one of the mirade of soldiers defying this story. He’s also active duty, a MSG (Master Sargeant) in the Army. I believe him over Obama and a nameless source.

Note to conservatives against Obama: Denial is not a river in Egypt…

Doug,
How is Obama going to ensure that our soldiers have sufficient training prior to going to battle? If, heaven forbids, a war starts, is Obama going to wait to do anything until troops have been trained? Basically calling a timeout.
Obama will give our troops new equipment, aromor, etc? So you mean he’s going to fix all the red tape associated with the DoD’s complex procurement process?
It’s amazing how you Obama supporters think this man can magially snap his fingers and everything is fixed. He offers nothing new, unless you think higher taxes and more government control of your life is new. Not sure how a tried and true 1960′s liberal is going to fix things in Washington.

The timeline of this story is irrelevant. WHAT IS RELEVANT IS THAT OBAMA DID NOT MAKE IT UP!!! That is what Obama is being accused of.

So the anecdote is from 2003.
Maybe, JUST MAYBE, things have changed in Afghanistan since then.
In less than four years, we went from the Battle of Coral Sea to the Battle of Okinawa.
In less than four years, we went from the Battle of Kasserine Pass to the River Elbe.
In four years, we went from Fort Sumpter to Appomattox.
A lot can happen in war in four years. One would think that a progressive would rely on the latest news, and not past history, to shape opinions.

Thank you for actually speaking to the Captain. He is illustrating a problem the military has always had to face. I was a division officer on a destroyer from 1995 to 1997. A division officer is the Navy equivalent of a platoon leader in the Army or Marine Corps. I can only respond based on my experiences and in the interest of full disclosure, I never saw combat.
1) It is not uncommon to have sailors rotate in and out of your division. Sometimes you are undermanned and sometimes you are overmanned (rarely). That is a challenge of the position, and one of the reasons you are commissioned and trusted with responsiblity at an early age. My department head would have had no time or interest to listen to me complain about this. It is a part of the job that you must deal with, period. If you don’t believe me, call a flag officer and ask him/her to verify.
2) Sailors are assigned to other ships, schools, or their enlistment ends. This happens weekly. It would be a logistical nightmare to time every sailor’s stay in the division to the same date so that you would always be fully manned.
3) We trained for over a year before we deployed to the Persian Gulf as part of a carrier battlegroup. We were told we may be part of a response to the Khobar Tower bombings – that would be considered combat by many. We trained during that year without our Harpoons, periods of time without our Sea Sparrows, limited 5 inch rounds and .50 calibre rounds. We didn’t use our CIWS and our most of time trained without our two helicoptors on board. In fact, we sat idle at sea for long periods of time to save fuel but keep our optemp up. Did our gunnersmates, fire controlmen, operations specialists, etc. suffer from a lack of ammunition for training? Doubtful and they would have known exactly how to use them if needed in the Persian Gulf after we got our deployment upload and went operational. Senator Obama made it seem as though they didn’t have ammunition in Afghanistan. That is misleading.
4) As for the Humvees I will defer to the captain’s judgement. I will say some parts for equipment are always scarce, and again, a management problem for the division officer. Procurement is something all junior officers must learn, and their NCO is an excellent source for that training. He was supposed to have four, he got three and one was down. I would be on maintenance night and day to get the down one up. I commend the captain for improvising and getting the Toyota. That is what he is supposed to do and he should receive a commendation for that action.
My concern is that Senator Obama’s first instinct is to use this anecdote to condemn President Bush and score political points. As a sitting Senator, he should have notified the Chairman of the Armed Services Committee and attempted to determine if this is anecdotal or systemic. They should have contacted the Secretary of Defense and Secretary of the Army to determine if this is a legitimate problem that must be addressed immediately. The Senate is designed to provide oversight and why is Senator Obama doing this? Use your current position to investigate Senator not make accusations in a debate.
Additionally, it concerns me that his first instinct is to accept this story as fact without any curiosity. As a former division officer I was immediately skeptical and started asking questions in my mind. We need to resolve this now and not play politics.
It is easy to criticize decisions when you don’t have the responsibility or accountability for those decisions. Don’t complain Senator and don’t wait until you become President. You have the ability right now to do something about this. What are you waiting for?

I don’t buy it. I think it’s yet another lie told by the immoral low-life Obama. I don’t believe a scumbag like that can unite this country. We deserve decent, moral, honorable people — and Obama’s extremism is anything but.

If we could complete the Civil War in 4 years, then what does it say that the strongest military in the history of the world can’t finish the job in Afghanistan in 4 years? Either it’s an unwinnable war, our military is incompetent, or maybe, just maybe, we’ve taken our eye off the ball in Afghanistan.

The whole crux of this issue is that the story has not been verified. A retelling of the same story to a different person without any basic fact checking does not constitute verification, it merely “verifies” that the storyteller can tell the same dubious story twice in a row. The story as told to Tapper is not the same story Obama told during the debate. It is disingenuous at a minimum, if not an outright lie. Not to mention that the logistics chain in the early going was very much an issue and brought up many many times in 2002-2004.How is this story relevant today? From my perspective, it’s relevant because it reveals to me that Obama is not ready to be CinC nor does he have the staff in place to provide him with accurate information and advice. It smacks of political opportunism and as such is bunk.

So he wasn’t a Captain, who didn’t run out of ammunition in theater so he wasn’t forced to use captured weapons, whose platoon may have been understrength because of normal turnover but certainly wasn’t because platoons are ‘split’ against Army policy, so… even though the circumstances were misrepresented, and even though the anecdote was not representative of any actual circumstances reported by any other units… yeah… it “checks out”.

Anyone who is commenting and has never been in the military, you got punked!

Adapt, overcome, improvise. One Lt. out of how many? anecdote? Wonder what the gunny has to say about this situation?

ABC “Fact Checks” by Quoting Same Unamed Source as Obama

How, exactly, is it “verifying” anything by simply asking the same source if his story is true? This isn’t the testimony of one source verifying the testimony of another source. This is two people reporting the testimony of a single source!
No one i…

If the Captain, a West Point grad truly feels like he and his men were put in harms way unnecessarily then he has a moral and ethical obligation to step out of the shadows and tell his story. Obviously he considers his career more important than his men’s lives or he is a lair/exaggerator.
Were any of his men inured or killed because of these issues? Did they prevent them from accomplishing their mission? what were the consequences of these “problems.” How many units were affected similarly? We can’t get answers from somebody hiding behind the cloak of anonymity

Thank you for doing what reporters are supposed to do by running the facts down.
Hats of to you on this reporting.
This is the way it’s supposed to happen.

By the way Bag Jobs post of: Feb 22, 2008 3:22:50 PM
is correct.
Duty, Honor, Country

I can certainly understand why the captain would want to remain anonymous, given the scurrilous charges (“phony soldier!”)thrown at any military person who dares to disagree with ol’ pimple butt.
Not that that will save him from the mob’s wrath, based on recent experience.

Not enough ammo for training?
Too few vehicles?
Not enough small arms in the field?
Clearly, the solution to this is increased funding for the military. No amount of retreat from Iraq is going to solve problems such as these: The Clintons advised for years that the military was capable of fighting two major wars at the same time. What went wrong?
I’m glad to see Obama throw his support behind this, and hope to see the military restored to it’s pre-Clinton glory.

Platoon leaders in the Army are First or Second Lieutenants, more often than not in their first duty position. While they are usually full of vim and vigor they are just as frequently lacking in knowledge of the larger picture.
Every military operation has what is known as the Main Effort, i.e. the essential part of the operation. To ensure the success of the endeavor, commanders will “weight the main effort,” giving priority of supplies and ammunition often pulled from units not directly involved. This happens, oh, every day or so. The good Captain’s part in the operation may have been secondary or follow on, and thus his soldiers were pulled to be placed where the commander thought them more necessary. Similarly the vehicles and ammunition to train with.
Additionally, resource allocation is conducted far below the President’s level. Division commanders often reallocate based upon their intent for execution of their assigned missions. Units often have large portions of their training ammunition given to someone else without explanation.
Resourceful officers and noncommissioned officers figure out how to complete their missions with limited resources; they do not use their experiences as anecdotal evidence for political campaigns. Similarly, we should expect politicians to be better informed of the workings of the organizations they seek to command, and place blame, if any, at the appropriate level.

If Sen. Obama cares so much about the dearth of equipment that our armed forces have to struggle under, why does he consistently vote against funding their efforts? One cannot support the troops, decry their lack of equipment, then attempt to de-fund them…

This doesn’t add up a US Army rifle platoon consists of 36 men not 39 if this captain doesn’t know this and wants to be anonymous then perhaps he is not who he claims to be.
“though for obvious reasons he asked that I not mention his name or certain identifying information.”
Well where I come from it’s illegal to impersonate an officer.

With all these supply problems as identified by the Captain can anyone explain how there’s far fewer deaths in Afghanistan of our troops than in Iraq? One would think that the Taliban would have surrounded our troops especially in ’03 and ’04 when they were much stronger if this was a real problem. Maybe do a story about Obama’s cocaine use since he obviously has some mental issues.

This was four years ago.
Obama made it sound like this was a routine event just a month ago.

WOW…if this really is true, then somebody better fire Rumsfeld

Breaking News, The US Military just ran out of High Speed Missile Wax!

As a former Infantryman (11C) I find this story to be on very thin ice. Those of you who say that the military can’t talk about the war are full of BS. The only thing you can’t do is criticize the Commander in Chief while in uniform. If you want to run to the media and blab about how horrible the war is,you have the freedom to do that, that is your right. The fact that the Captain doesn’t want to release his name sounds fishy. If he were a true leader and these “facts” were accuratte he has the duty to come forward and speak his mind to prevent them from happening again.

What are you Americans whining about? Every war is like this.
My grandfather fought on the Finnish side in WWII when Finnish soldiers developed the Molotov Cocktail as an anti-tank weapon.
Sometimes they had to climb up on Soviet tanks to make a difference.
You take what you have and you kick ass, that’s what wars are like.
Welcome to the real world.

Good job of fact checking the blogosphere.
Maybe some of the rightwingers would be better served to just join the military and see for themselves the struggles our soldiers face, instead of attacking people who tell the truth about it.

Joe: “There is nothing more embarassing to true patriotic Americans than the unhinged screechings from the radical fringe who dont have the guts to grab a rifle and fight for the war they always wanted, and instead grabs pompoms and cheers for more carnage from the sidelines.”
Joe, unless you’re writing that from the front lines in Afghanistan, you’re a hypocrite. And not a bright one either.

“I might suggest those on the blogosphere upset about this story would be better suited directing their ire at those responsible for this problem…”
You mean people like Barack Obama who voted against funding the troops?
And btw, who confirms a story by talking to the exact same source, the National Enquirer? Ever heard of corroboration? Did you, for example, consider talking to someone else in the 10th Mountain Division who participated in the Task Force Warrior deployment? No? Journalism 101, baby.

I am a student of History. I remember that General Patton, a hero of the American Army in WWII’s victory slapped a soldier for complaining. Some say its a soldier right to complain.
Given the US power, perhaps Senator Obama can send Robots to fight in several regions, let alone give the troops everything. If he was so worried about Troop safety why did he not vote for the funding increase?.
It proves Obama will be the weakest CNC not setting an example of courage for his troops. The question is not the strategy on the war, many agree its wrong. But one cannot let down the brave troops or highlight one soldier’s compliant to take advantage of the anti-war rhetoric.
To kill these bad guys who are hundreds and tens in number you do not need a million people. You need a smart 15 who can outsmart them. Sometimes, for the sake of costs, the military has to make the best use of the situation, not complain. But that’s something that the most liberal senator with no record on earth will not know.
Good Luck America. I guess God has taken a vacation and will not bless us until he is back!. Vote Obama. Vote for American failure.

Jack Tapper ended his “Fact Check” by saying:
“I might suggest those on the blogosphere upset about this story would be better suited directing their ire at those responsible for this problem, which is certainly not new. That is, if they actually care about the men and women bravely serving our country at home and abroad.”
But it is the brave men and women and their families who live and breathe the military life every day who are raising these serious questions about the reality of the story. It isn’t political, we just don’t want to be misrepresented, or our commander in chief.
It is the Congress who attaches the earmarks making a Denfese Spending bill anything but…as an Army wife I don’t blame the Pres for passing what is not truly troop funding but rather the Congress and politicians for playing games.
Earmarks have no place in a Defense Spending Bill.
Also,Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said today of Obama’s assertion:
“I find that account pretty hard to imagine.
“Despite the stress that we readily acknowledge on the force, one of the things that we do is make sure that all of our units and service members that are going into harm’s way are properly trained, equipped and with the leadership to be successful.”

Mr. Tapper -
You have verified that Obama’s campaign talked with a US Captain and that the Senator’s story is supported to some extent by the Captain’s story.
Did you call fort Drum to talk to other members of the Captains unit at the time? Can anybody at Fort Drum or anywhere else verify the Captain’s story?
What is the standard of an infantry platoon’s training that may be called normal prior to deployment overseas? Have you talked with any other officers of higher rank within the Captain’s Battalian as to the state of their rediness? Would a higher officer’s opinion, perhaps the CO of the battalian, carry more weight than a Captain or LT?

It’s amazing to read the alleged military people in these comments screech for even more money from the federal trough. The defense budget is sucking down over 400 billion, if that’s not enough to buy enough bullets and gear, then maybe we should spend that money better rather than simply dumping more money on the worst money managers in the Federal Goverment, the DOD. And what possible relevance does the defense budgets of the Clinton administration matter on this? The drawdown in funding started in the first Bush Administration. The current Administration has had plenty of time to ratchet up resources to handle current deployments. Bush started this war, he is reponsible for it’s problems. PERIOD!

Thank you for your efforts at old-style journalism. I’m glad you took the time to do this and were able to confirm the veracity of Obama’s claim. I think it will be interesting to see how many of these conservative bloggers who questioned the story will link back to your account which supports it. (None, I suspect.)

We DON’T know if the actual story is true or not. The facts were not confirmed only that there is a story (which may be BS)

Speaking as a Canadian, I can say our servicemen and women in Afghanistan do not have attack helicopters, nor heavy lift helicopters, we use American helicopters is those cases. Nor do we have our fighter jets stationed over there, we use American attack aircraft to assist when needed. However, as part of the NATO support we have the only tanks over there, 20 Leopard 2 A6M which is often times used to support American servicemen and women in their duties, just as our new long range heavy artillery is also used to support Americans when the need arises. Afghanistan is supposed to be a NATO effort and neither country has it all, however, it is only the American, British, and Canadians who do the fighting over there. The Europeans have refused to do any of the fighting or dying. Yet I find something wrong with this story. Why? Because our media, and I’m sure yours, are over there dying to report on a story just like this. They’re right there with the troops and yet why didn’t one of those guys over there hear those whispers from the troops themselves? It just doesn’t add up for me.

Man, judging from the anger on the right over a Presidential candidate actually talking to an active-duty member of the military – rather than Bush, who only talks to the “commanders on the ground” (whatever that means) – it must really suck to be a Republican. I mean, facts are such a pain in the butt!

This is what good reporters do: check the story. Thanks for checking the facts, and writing about this clearly. Excellent job!
We get enough spin from the jokers on the left and the jokers on the right in the comments and campaign spin rooms!

Lots of idiots here saying things like, “hey, that’s what war is like. remember WW2?” and “hey, they only used a few Taliban weapons, so they were not really underequipped” or “hey, this was like 2004, things are different now.”
These idiots miss the point. We owe our soldiers the proper equipment. PERIOD. Our founding fathers used muskets, but that doesn’t justify equipping our modern soldiers that way. Out soldiers should not have to suffer in 2008 the same way as our grandfathers more than 60 years ago if we can help it.

Sorry, no sale, still far too many holes in the story. Note also how what Jake tells us the Captain said varied from the way Obama told it. They had to capture Taliban equipment to fight? Not as Jake’s source tells it.
Get back to me when you have some information from some other leaders, Senior NCO and more experienced officers, in that unit to verify.

Thanks to Jake Trapper for following up and researching this before writing his article. It’s appaling how many other news sources jump too quickly, passing along rumors and innuendos without bothering to check their facts first. Kudos to you, Mr Trapper!

“I might suggest those on the blogosphere upset about this story would be better suited directing their ire at those responsible for this problem, which is certainly not new. That is, if they actually care about the men and women bravely serving our country at home and abroad.’
Your’re right, of course. Instead of exercising some healthy, one might almost say “journalistic” skepticism, the next story from a politician will be immediately and uncritically accepted, promise!

Nice place you got here. First time to comment.
Thanks for the background and clarification. I’d still like the captain’s name.
And your info, and the way it is presented here, sounds like a normal occurrence in a war being fought at the far end of a five thousand mile pipeline.
Disclaimer: I doubt that Obama has the “chops” for being chief executive; if matters had been left to his party, the Captain in question would have been operating out of jeeps, without GPS, and without JDAM’s in support.
What your account does not sound like is a systemic failure of the supply system, which is what I think brought most conservative critics (myself included) out of the tall grass.
Carry on.

Actually, Mr. Tapper, your investigation doesn’t really back up Obama’s case. The anecdote was several years old, and the source is so anonymous that it doesn’t give us much confidence.
I suppose most people here would consider me one of those angry right-wing bloggers, but I have done two tours in Iraq. I’ve never been to Afghanistan, but our supply system everywhere is the best in the world. Throughout our wars, soldiers
have always made use of captured equipment. It’s what you are SUPPOSED to do!! Can anyone give me an example of a US unit that lost a single battle in Afghanistan from lack of ammunition?
Adjusted for inflation, the USA spends about a hundred times per soldier what it did in WWII . Exactly what are we skimping on?
Another point – Obama is complaining that this platoon didn’t deploy at full strength? But HE’S THE ONE THAT WANTS TO WITHDRAW THE TROOPS! Isn’t that just a tad hypocritical?

After reading this it would make sense that the captain had men taken to fill out units which were probably used in the invasion of Iraq. Remember he deployed to Afghanistan in the Summer of 2003. As far as up-armored humvees and body armor that Bush has been getting blamed for, When I retired from the Marine Corps September 30 1999, we still did not have up-armored humvees and we had the same flak vests I wore in Desert Storm. Even when my MEU(SOC) was attached to Operations Joint Endeavor (Bosnia)and Silver Wake (Albania)Clinton did not deploy us with up-armored humvees or body armor. My son-in-law served in Iraq in 2003 and did not have up-armored humvees, although when I volunteered for active duty and went to Iraq in 2005 and left in 2006, humvees had recieved numerous different upgrades in my 10 months there. When watching AFN in Iraq I observed some units in Afghanistan with un-armored humvees, probably because IEDS were not the same threat level as in Iraq at the time. Gunny (Ret and Re-RET)

Obama said they had to capture Taliban ammo and equipment in do their job in Afganistan …
The supposed Captain never said that …
so how can the Short answer be : He backs up Obama’s story.
He didn’t and you know it …
BS liberal spin from ABC … I guess it depeneds on your definition of what is is …
so how can Obama because they

Thanks to Jake Tapper for a well-researched and well-written confirmation that Senator Obama was relaying an accurate anecdote. The bit of editorializing at the end was appreciated as well.
To the critics of Obama I’ve got to say you need to tone down the macho and use your brains instead of your … well you get my meaning. This case in particular is one you should think about as nearly all Americans, Democrats and Republicans, agree we were correct to go to war in Afghanistan. However, the Republican party has followed President Bush and his advisers over a cliff into Iraq. We need Obama to sort this out as McCain seems determined to run the war just like Bush.
Obama is the man to set us back on a secure path as a country. I pray he wins in November.

lol..i love how the right wing blogosphere can’t swallow that the military is severely overstretched b/c of iraq.

He made this story sound like it happened last week. It happened in 2003. Nobody had up-armored humvee’s. We didn’t ID the threat. I got back from Afghanistan this time last year. I had plenty. The only time u might not get resupplied is if weather grounds flights. I could go on and on but my brothers on here have pretty much covered it. All this shows is that Comrade Obama is naive as hell on military matters and not fit to be Commander in Chief. I’m sure there was a Centurion invading Gaul, bitching about not enough men or spears.

Mr. “So DO I” Obama is piggy backing on D. Patrick’s words and Hillary’s economic, healthcare and foreigh policies. Now that he has been caught “borrowing” words from Patrick and Edwards, all he can say is “So do I” – agreeing with Clinton’s policies whenever asked about his own at the debate. And that ah..ah..ah.. pauses while answering – how can anybody think he is a good speaker. Just reinforces a lot of people’s claims that he talks from a script and memorization of other people’s speeches. Since voting for W, we have really lowered the standards when it comes to substance.

i’m thrilled to see Obama’s critics wrapped up in this legalistic word parsing. Because it means you’ve got nothing better on him.
See if the general electorate will sit down with you and follow your lengthy technical argument on semantics.
Obama has received more donations from military personnel than McCain has. How about that?

So Obama rehashes an old story from 2003 and suggests the same thing might be happening today?
Is it possible it happened? Yes. Is it all all relevant to the soldiers deployed now? No.
The nitwit Obama should explain why he wants to dash the HOPE of military families who want to see their deployed loved one home safely.

The comments on this thread are ridiculous. People in the military are so die hard they don’t even look at the shortcomings and failings of many aspects of the war. I don’t know how you consider Obama unready to be Commander in Chief because he told a story that a Captain in the U.S. Army has told him.
Also, if we’re going to talk about quotes from D. Patrick why aren’t we talking about Clintons plagiarism off of Edwards. Come on people be fair. I’m tired of the inept social beings that infect our world.

Good work on the reporting Jake your doing what the media is supposed to be doing making sure our government is accountable.

I served in Iraq and it was the worst logistical plan I have ever seen. My leadership skills were put to test everyday. I know how the Captain feels. I had 13 troops under my supervision. For most of them it was their first time in the combat zone. They kept asking me questions. Why do we have to wait 48 hours for this? Why don’t have enough of this or enough of that? I constantly engaged our senior leadership but I never complained to our my troops. My job was to bring them all back home alive and that is exactly what I did. Now that I have served my nation on the battlefield I will now serve my nation in the ballot box in Texas.
Obama 08

David Steele:
You miss the whole point of the anecdote. America’s only real enemy is in Afghanistan. That theater has been under supported because of the strategically dumb decision to lie the nation into the Iraq vanity war.
That’s it. We’re talking remedial civics lessons here, not rocket science.
Your personal animosity towards Obama has nothing to do with that fact other than blinding you from it.
That makes you inept, not Obama.
The President’s reasons for going into Iraq had nothing to do with sound geopolitical strategy, but everything to do with his desire to dismantle what remains of FDR’s New Deal to advance the billionare’s club of America’s agenda.
For the life of me, I cannot understand why anyone, including soldiers and exsoldiers, are willing to carry water for a dry drunk idiotic president who went awol from a champaign unit that sheltered the sons of celebrities, billionares and powerful politicians and who doesnt give a rat’s ass about the fate of American soldiers to the extent that he wont attend a single soldiers funeral, other than to the extent it helps or hurts him politically.
Bush has only one goal: undermine the public interest for the purpose of advancing those of billionares. Our system gives enhanced power to war time presidents. The war in Iraq help give him the enhanced political power that he couldn’t get at the ballot box. The man is a liar and a war criminal and he’s used American treasure, lives and soldiers as political pawns.
Obama’s comments simply reinforce all of these points. You shouldn’t get mad at the messenger. Get mad at yourself for being duped by the billionare’s and their wall of conservative media. They ‘ve played you and other like minded folks as chumps.

Some commentators are willfully not grasping Obama’s point. It doesn’t matter that it’s often the case that our military is underequipped, nor does it matter that the Captain in question was in Afghanistan five years ago and that his anecdote may no longer be representative of the facts on the ground currently. Obam’s larger point is that critical resources were in fact diverted from Afghanistan to Iraq – something that never would have happened had he, as an opponent of the war in Iraq, been commander-in-chief.

Without names and cross-examination about what was really said and how it was said I will continue to doubt the validity of this story. I never met one CO or NCO that claimed they had all the equipment they need. To blow off a few enemy rounds doesn’t mean the military was in dire straights. If he had the 4 Hummers I guarantee he still wouldn’t have fit 39 troops in them all. While the Captain had 3 Hummers what other vehicles did he have? Did he have a deuce and a half? What part did he need for the 50 cal? I didn’t see anywhere that the troops ran out of ammo while on combat duty like Obama was implying. All I see here is a he said, Obama said.

Clinton cut the defense budget because the Cold War was over.

I am so sick of Obama followers whineing about how “unfair” everything is. My god, give it a break, nothing is fair and it is only gonna get worse in teh general election… and you know what, the American people arent going to want to hear a grown person cry about how he is not being treated fairly. Get over it

Garriett, do you know for a fact that Jake talked to anyone? I don’t see any names here. Another poster claimed there’s nothing illegal for the Captain to talk to the media so why is it such a problem to use his name?

Know what, Jake Tapper? …I’m starting to like you! :o)

Jake Tapper let us know that Captain’s name that revealed this SECRET information to the enemy. He should be put up on charges of TREASON, and if found guilty suffer the fullest penalty allowable by law.

Pardon me, but it was FDR, a Democratic President, along with an overwhelmingly Democratic Congress that lead us to victory in World War II. The Republicans have been screwing-up all the wars since then.

“Tell America the Captians name”
- camelback
And here we have another member of the pitchfork and torch brigade.

“If our army is under equipped. you can only blame the democrats for cutting funding and trying to sabotage the war effort since the war began. If the Democrats were around during ww2 we would either be occupied by Japan or Germany right now. They were 2 very powerfull enemyies.” Very intelligent post, especially considering that the president during WW2 was FDR who was…a Democrat!

I love the right wing, they find out about a horrible message and want to kill the messenger. It’s treason to complain when you are sent into battle under manned? Better to stick up for Halliburton Bush and further endanger soldiers? They always say “Support Our Troops” at least until the troops ask for more help & then its “Charge our Troops with Treason”. What a sad bunch of hypocrites.

…..Barack Obama doesn’t need to lie… Thats why so many ….. love and respect him ….. and trust him …. with our future….

So let me get this straight.
If you point out that combat soldiers are often forced to train and fight without important pieces of equipment that they are supposed to have, that means you don’t “support the troops.”
But if you call these combat soldier liars and insist that they have all the equipment they need — even when they don’t — that is a sure sign that you “support the troops.”
Just checking.

Jake’s source proves B.Hussein.Obama to be a liar – the unit did not go after the Taliban for the purpose of getting their weapons, but sometimes used those weapons when some were captured.

Obama said:
“”You know, I’ve heard from an Army captain who was the head of a rifle platoon — supposed to have 39 men in a rifle platoon,” he said. “Ended up being sent to Afghanistan with 24 because 15 of those soldiers had been sent to Iraq. And as a consequence, they didn’t have enough ammunition, they didn’t have enough humvees. They were actually capturing Taliban weapons, because it was easier to get Taliban weapons than it was for them to get properly equipped by our current commander in chief.”
The captain disavowed the complete last sentence of the anecdote. Obama’s wording in the first part makes it sound like this platoon didn’t have enough basic ammunition as opposed to specilized ammo. And he makes it sound like the platoon was split up, rather than individuals being reassigned to other units that eventually wound up in Iraq.
But the anecdote checks out? Tapper might be a good writer, but he’s not a magician. Obama more than shaded the truth. He didn’t “let the facts get in the way of a good anecdote.”
Well, they’re in the way now, and Tapper’s article, while it softens the blow, does nothing to dissade objective observers from concluding that Obama is uninformed about military procedure (for example, many military personnel have pointed out that platoons are rarely at 100% strength) and clearly willing to distort the facts for political gain – the precise thing he accuses the current administration of doing.

“But today the party has changed to liberal cry babies who think its politically incorrect to like your country”
And here America, for all of you to see, is what’s wrong with the right wing mindset.
Ol’ Fast Car is indigant because some of us dare to stop waving our flags and chanting “USA, USA” long enough to notice that there are serious problems in this country to tackle.
People like Fast Car can’t grasp that it is possible to love your country, yet see the inherent challenges that we must face as a nation.
It’s much easier for him to take the bumper sticker mentality approach and blindly follow whatever his right wing talk radio masters tell him to think.

Mr. Tapper:
Thanks for the work you did to “source” the story. Too bad you had to ruin it with your remarks at the end.
As for Sen. Obama, now that he has this information, what’s he going to do with it other than use it for election fodder? As a Senator, he could ask for investigations and hold public hearings on the issue of properly equiping our soldiers. He make an effort to change that situation for our troops regardless if he wins the Dem. nomination.

Thank you Jake for investing this story and revealing the truth. There are so many people that wish this was not true but I bet they don’t have family fighting this war that should not be. Have you people ever heard of reporters not revealing their source, it is so sad that you people stoop to such low tatics to try to discredit Obama, and then when you get someone that investagates the allegations that this was not true, the reporter get to the truth now he is a liar. Get a grip people! This sounds like pure hatred!

He tells a good story, he speaks eloquently, he uses inspiring words from the mouths of others (and don’t kid yourselves, those lines were lifted almost verbatim and even with the same inflection)…last night he repeated everything Hillary said just to hear himself say them last. He is a good politician. He is not ready now, not right for America in November.

I’m thrilled to hear the Senator Obama will fully fund the military with the latest and best equipment, not cutting the defense budget, and have our men and women prepared to leap into a fray at a moments notice.
He will fully fund current R&D and maintain our natiion as the strongest, meanest military our money can buy.
I’m sure his supporters are thrilled by this revelation!!

Most candidates wouldn’t throw out a story like that in a national debate without having checked the facts. Obama is only about 100 delegates ahead. A gaffe on a story like that could sink his campaign. Thanks for checking out the story.

West Pointer. Welcome to the real world. Having been a grunt I can tell him you never have all your equipment or men. Does he want stories from Viet Nam, I can give him stories. I am sure guys from Korea and WWII can give him stores too. In this media age people are disappointed when their beliefs meet reality. Close with enemy with what you have and kill him. Unfortuantely troops today can’t close and can’t kill the enemy, because some civilian would be in the way.

Looks like Barak H. Obama can’t say nuttin you won’t support. Each claim kind of gets ‘explained away’, and they are still kind of outrageous. I’d like it better if your source acted like a man and shared his name. And oh, by the way, laying this at GWB’s feet when Congress has to be horsewhipped for every penny is more than a bit lame too. Don’t expect me to click through your particular swamp of bias again – and I am currently planning to vote Obama – I just expect less bias from my sources.

“Thanks for corroborating it.”
He didn’t corroborate it at all he simply repeated the claim without any further proof besides the word of the Captain the Obama campaign sent him to.
Verification of the claims by a party not part of Obama’s Cmapaign or the Captain alone plese.
Anyone can use the source of a claim to write a story. Reporters should look past that but this article doesn’t even bother. It simply claims the story is “true” because the person the politician got the claim from says so.

an unnamed ‘Army Captain’ said…
So, this is all from one source, who may or may not be an actual US Army Captain, who may or may not have served in combat.
But still an under supplied army because congress did not completely fund it or because congress ‘earmarked’ most of the funds to ‘special projects’ which benefit those who contributed to the congressman/ senator’s campaign.
Story not verified.

There have been several ‘military’ men who’ve made spectacular charges of problems in Iraq or which the current military operations and upon investigation some have turn out not to be members of the military and/or their stories have been proven false.At this point, we have an anonymous ‘Captain’ speaking about issues which need to be verified before they are reported as fact. That has not been done, and will not be done, if we cannot confirm the ID of the mysterious ‘Captian’. I certainly don’t believe our military effort or any counties military effort are 100% on the mark all the time. We will have problems, but are these systemic or just isolated. We need to know. BHO, The Messiah, seems to be saying that under his watch there will be no military problems. BTW, he’s voted against funding the military effort in Iraq. Has his vote and other of his ilk, caused this problem?

I’m just wondering how exactly Obama’s story checks out.
This Captain’s story was related as something happening currently not 5 years ago. Obama related the story in a manner that made it seem that the 15 troops in this Captain’s (then LT) platoon were specifically stripped to be deployed to Iraq. They weren’t. It was an effect of the Army’s normal rotational policy.
Obama makes it seem as if the troops were denied their basic weapons and ammo. They weren’t.
Did they get all the training this guy wanted? No. Do troops ever get all the training a good officer wants? No.
This is life in the military. How exactly is Obama going to change that?
In short this is exactly what I said this morning. Obama took elements of truth and presented them in a way that turned them into a lie.
A number of people have pointed out that you are deleting large number numbers of comments on this subject. Hopefully this one will survive.

The comments on this story are baffling. First, the hawks go crazy saying the story wasn’t real. Then when the story is confirmed, they want to go after the source and have them tried for treason. So, the point of the story is lost while everyone goes after the source? It’s okay if there’s a problem as long as no one says anything? Mystifying.

Well done, Jake.

It is clear that Obama exaggerated at the least.
From this interview you can clearly see that there was no need for our guys to “capture the enemy’s weapons so they could fight”.

Obama misrepresented the story totally, CNN just called him on it a few minutes ago. He’s not trustworthy and If he wins, I am voting Republican, at least you the what the lie is….

Re Ragin’ Dave’s comment “It’s CONGRESS who appropriates money for military supplies. But in your mind, it’s the president and the pentagon who’s at fault for not supplying this guy and his troops? ”
——
The DOD has a budget that is more than the COMBINED budgets of the other 23 major military powers COMBINED. We don’t spend $500 Billion on the military –we spend closer to $900 Billion/YEAR if you included Veterans Administration, DOE Nuclear programs,etc. Even Russia and China only spend around $50 Billion per year.
Maybe Ragin Dave thinks Bush and the Republicans should steal another $3 Trillion out of our Social Security and MEdicare accounts — as they’ve done in the past few years?
Although how that is in the NATIONAL Interest –vice the interest of Cheney’s Big Oil Buddies — escapes me.
Hopefully, the people of this country are finally waking up and realizing that right wing traitors in our midst — people who sent 4000 of our soldiers to their deaths on a lie done to promote the financial agenda of special interests — are a bigger enemy than Al Qaeda. At least Al Qaeda doesn’t stab us in the back while waving the flag.

Folks, Any soldier who tells “war stories” is a BUM to begin with. If Obama doesn’t believe we have enough soldiers, or equipment, to complete the mission, then Obama needs to talk to the Secretary of Defense. I served over 7 years in combat and Frankly speaking, Obama would be the last person I would talk to concerning military operations. Obama is what we call a “WANABE.” We have the bravest military people on earth. We have the most outstanding military leaders on earth. Sure, we have a FEW poor performers like this Captain who sang his song to Obama, but overall, our military is the best in the world.

Don,
Are you saying we should invade Pakistan, a nuclear power? Because that’s where AQ is running free. If you want to get them, you have to go and get them and that’s where they are. But I forget, Obama the strategist said he would invade Pakistan.
And the problems with Anaconda were with our reliance on local forces to provide the anvil to our hammer. It had nothing to do with equipment, or at least that wasn’t the deciding factor.
Any other ideas?

Went to Nam 3 times. No surprises in this story. What does “support the troops” really mean? More taxes for better health care for Vets? Right. Tax cuts so Paris Hilton can hire someone at $8/hr to take care of her little purse doggie.

“”You know, I’ve heard from an Army captain who was the head of a rifle platoon — supposed to have 39 men in a rifle platoon,” he said. “Ended up being sent to Afghanistan with 24 because 15 of those soldiers had been sent to Iraq.”
They were sent to Iraq before he got to Afghanistan? lol.
“And as a consequence, they didn’t have enough ammunition, they didn’t have enough humvees.”
wat would tat have to do with infantry men being sent to Iraq?
“They were actually capturing Taliban weapons, because it was easier to get Taliban weapons than it was for them to get properly equipped by our current commander in chief.”
THey had to kill Quartermasters to get bullets for teir M16s so they instead killed Jihadis to get their AKs and Shavivs?
Har dee har har. Obama didn’t say that right, and you are covering up for his profoundly misleading statement. Just like th epress used to do for Bush.

They Swift Boated John Kerry…
They Swift Boated a covert CIA agent, Valerie Plame…
They swifted boated a 7th grader, Graeme Frost…
Now, they’re swift boating an Army captain for stating that his men didn’t/don’t have the proper equipment to protect themselves.
What a bunch of un-Patriotic, heartless bastards.

Iraq Veteran here…. Look, the point of the anecdote is that we have diverted our attention from Afghanistan. Does anyone deny that?
Ok, I assume not. Let’s not get stuck in the weeds on this issue. He took information provided to him by some officer… which COULD have been a Captain.

Don’t be surprised!
Everything about this guy is fake.
lie. 1/2 truth. and deception!

This story (that’s what it amounts to) doesn’t add up. First, you don’t split infantry platoons by individuals to deploy. We haven’t done that since Vietnam. You don’t split a platoon at all. And 10th Mountain Division? One of the most well equipped units in the Army, but its a LIGHT infantry division trained/equipped for mountain warfare. Meaning, its not going to have a lot of heavy weaponry prior to deployment because it doesn’t need it great quantities.
Second, the 15 or so men that left the platoon in “ones and twos” sound more like they were conducting a permanent change of station, meaning they WERE MOVING TO OTHER UNITS THAT MIGHT OF DEPLOYED TO IRAQ. Holy crap, the ignorance of the media of their own military and how we function, operate, and maintain is not surprising… it just is what it is.
This story is bogus.
Me? Eight year active duty Army. Staff sergeant who deployed to Iraq. We weren’t even a combat arms unit and we got everything you could ask for and more.

Jake, good post. After 20 years in the Army, I can tell you the most admirable trait of our military is its ability to innovate in the face of miserable neglect and fiscal malfeasance of the chain of command. I was listening to Oliver North say he’d been in Iraq and Afghanistan more than anyone and had not seen ONE soldier without the equipment he needed to do his job. I suggest to him that he leave the plush General’s tent and hit the field.

I want to congratulate the news media, for once, on examining Barack Obama with a fine tooth comb. I’ve been under the assumption that he has been running a “B” campaign, and Sen. Clinton running a “D-” campaign, and that is why he has such a lead in the Democratic contests. So I’m actually glad to see the scrutiny tighten up over the last week and a half on his record, his policies, and even the anecdotes that people claim he’s plagiarized on. Why, you might ask?
Because the more it tightens up, the more certain I am that those who are passionately, even maniacally against the idea of an Obama candidacy don’t have anything worthwile on him as far as the person
Rezkogate, Larry Sinclair, Wordsgate, the Army Anecdote (Bulletgate), and the rather cunningly phrased argument that he would bomb Pakistan (while neglecting to mention that the whole quote said he’d do so if there were actionable intellegence and that Musharraf had failed to act.) In case you’re wondering, here’s the quote.
“There are terrorists holed up in those mountains who murdered 3,000 Americans. They are plotting to strike again. It was a terrible mistake to fail to act when we had a chance to take out an al Qaeda leadership meeting in 2005. If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won’t act, we will.”
Note the word “if” (because words matter, see Wordgate) attached to this quote, which establishes that inaction from Pakistan and actionable intelligence would be required before an attack) Doesn’t sound like the action of an rash, inexperienced, feeble commander in chief to me (though precious little argument has been given to the “Bomb, Bomb Bomb, Bomb Bomb Iran” argument issued by the Republican challenger. I don’t believe that McCain is just going to act without some type of precipitating incident either, I just wish that the foreign policy coverage were a little more even handed.) Actionable intelligence has been the calling card in response to terrorist activities for several Presidents now: this argument is nothing new.
Just like the Iselin scandal with McCain was complete horse pukey, it’s nice to see that the anecdote checks out. It should be a good contest come November. I’m just praying it’s one where we can leave the “politics of personal destruction” at home.

Vietnam all over again. Remember the M15 ammunition problems? No problem getting AK-47′s and compatible ammuntion, and they were far more reliable. My brother carried a Thompson.

This needs to be fixed but let’s not pretend that Barack Obama is the man who will fix the logistics problems that army’s have had since, well, forever.

I dont think Senator Warner want to look under this rock for too long..there are cell phones videos of soldiers in Iraq complaining about lack of equipment.The reason it not public is because the videos include them blaming Bush,Rice,Rummy and all who voted to go to war for their comrades deaths…

I am Obama, I am me, you are you, I want change, you want change, together, we are change. I am hope, you want hope, together, we can be hope. I am peace and love, I will love you if you love me. Unicorns are fun, colorful and fluffy… and as real as my promises to you.

Re Dan Tana:
”
YOU GO TO WAR WITH THE ARMY YOU HAVE.
Rumsfeld unfortunately took flack for this
truth.
Will the Congress ever understand this truthful statement?
Will the fine citizens of our nation understand this true statement?
I doubt it.”
As a comparison with how the Bush admin. got ready for Iraq, which was their war of choice, you all might check out Eric Larribee’s “Commander in Chief”, about the scramble of FDR’s admin. to get ready for WW2.

No, look fellas, Senator Obama dissembled. He attempted to peddle a falsehood: that the Captain was talking about an experience he was having in 2008, when in fact, the incidents, whatever they did have, were happening in 2003.
Obama is trying to cover for the fact that he wants to engineer a slow, but graceless defeat for the armed forces in the Middle East. This after Petraeus has scored a victory, much the same way that Ridgeway was able to salvage MacArthur’s disastrous outing against the Chinese in 1950. But, Obama gives the game away by peddling this story as cover for his towering naivete.
By the way, I should relate to those admirers of Roosevelt, I am one, as well. But understand this, no Democratic Administration has won or has been able to win a war since 1945. You can look that up.
Kosovo doesn’t count. Having the Chinese and the Russians pull your gonads out of the fire only counts when you’ve screwed up real bad.
The only wars we’ve actually “won” have been won when Republicans have been in power. Please bear that in mind.
Appeasement has consequences.

We all know we entered into the Iraq war unprepared. It is fact supported by soldiers, and the media and our collective memory.
We all recall the stories of HumVee’s having no armor.
Now we are splitting hairs over the specific year when the West Point grad said he told ABC news “we were unprepare?”
So many lives have been lost. That is the point.

“You go to war with the Army you have.” Exactly. Which is why you should be careful about going to war.
Condi Rice and others like to proclaim themselves “Students of History”, but anyone who has read much history can cite numerous examples of military failure due to overstretch. Sometimes that overstretch has led to cascading disaster. Machiavelli in the “Discourses” points out that Rome during its period of growth never fought two wars at the same time.
The issue isn’t whether normal supply snafus occur, of course they do; the issue is whether poor strategic choices and failure to set priorities make shortages worse. That’s what’s happened to us. And the main responsibility lies with the present Commander-in-Chief.
Look at us now: our best troops pinned in a profitless, distant, apparently endless occupation at the end of a precarious supply line; our true enemy Bin Laden still free six years after Tora Bora; punks like Chavez and the government of Sudan rising everywhere; our borders so porous that we are reduced to building walls; our economy under tremendous strain due to excessive debt. A proper Commander-in-Chief would make decisions that avoid these consequences.

This is absolutely hysterical. There is not a person here who can bring one shred of evidence that anything this alleged captain said is true, yet you all just put it in the books as fact and move on.
And beyond that, what Obama used as his money shot isn’t even what the person said. So basically, this until proven fictional person didn’t even say what Obama claims he said and yet the Obama cult continues to run with it? Are you people insane?
Boy, when Clinton denied armor and gunships in Somalia we didn’t hear a peep out of the “I despise the military” liberals, but now that Obama says it we all get ready to riot. Where were you people in 1993 when our Rangers and Delta were pinned down and nobody could come get them because your buddy Bill would not send armor as he didn’t want to send the wrong message?
Absolutely pathetic.

I recommend we bring the good Capt. home to until his nerves settle down (he’s wouldn’t be a descendant of General McCellan would he).

H.P.
You think Obama is clean? Do you even read the other blogs here and on other sites? So many people will never vote for this man. He lies and lies about Hillary then he steals her ideas and her plans she first talked about in 2007. He lies about his Iraq vote, he lies about stealing other peoples words and on and on and on. He wouldn’t know how to tell the truth if the world was ending.
Obama is a snob with no experience. The American people will wake up. And he will never be the leader of our great country. He has no idea what he is doing or how to lead. The American people will wake up and see him for the fraud he is.

Good Job ABC! He’s making change we can believe in and he’s not even in office yet. Politicians are scrambling to equip and train our troops as we speak. Obama stated a fact, it was also confirmed by CNN. OBAMA ’08!

Jack
I can respect that but, after serving in the Navy for 24 years, and knowing the pressure the military can/will put on it troops/soldiers for off camera comments that could be deemed embarrassing is proof enough for me. Why the list of witnessed are short.
I gather you are questioning the validity of whether the story was investigated by ABC, my augment is CNN also substantiated the story.

well done JT. Obama is credible, yet again. and the neocons get more desperate daily.

C DEPP
Stay with me, I’m pointing out the weak argument over experience and how it didn’t resonate with the vast majority of liberals who are over-whelmingly voting for Obama, and if we who consider ourself to be right or who tend to lean to the right, need to do better then Hillary and bring something new other then this experience bull. Smart people know you put smart people around you, like Reagan knew. Obama is a progressive who is seeking a liberal agenda to move this country to the far left after what I consider a moderate Republican president. Attacking him on experience is weak and will not work.

Just a little bit of history, George Patton, hero of WWII etc. machine gunned WWI veterans at the orders of a republician president when they were protesting in Washington. That is not speculation, that is fact. I will also state that the officer’s name was unimportant, the fact is his story is believeable, I experienced much the same thing in Viet Nam, we had to turn in all of our flex gun systems off the UH IB and replace them with mini-gun systems. The army purchased many of these systems but if they purchased one parts catalog or one operations manuel, they kept them from the troops in the field. We learned how to operate the guns but it took awhile, meanwhile we were fighting every day with unfamiliar equipment, and no way to replace the parts as they wore out. Hard to order something if you don’t know the part number. War should be the last resort, not the first thing a person thinks of in a crisis, could be that some people got richer out of the present war as with the war in Viet Nam, I do know for a fact that Lady Bird’s construction company built all the big runways in Viet Nam that we left just a few years later. I also know that the airstrips here in America sure do need to be fixed. But please republicians don’t let yourself be confused by facts.

reagan told stories of things he did – turned out they came from movies. i excuse him – he had alzheimers. obama makes up stories of things he supposedly did – regardless of whether the soldiers did or did not have enough equipment, the point is that obama made up the story as it related to his actual personal involvement. i do not excuse him – as far as i know, he does not have alzheimers.

All one needs to do to verify military readiness shortages is to go to the Department of Defense, Office of Inspector General. One document alone, Report D-2007-049, dated Jan.25, 2007, Titled “Equipment Status of Deployed Forces Within the U.S. Central Command”. Quote: “We prepared this audit to determine whether units deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan were equipped in accordance with mission requirements. Based on responses from approximately 1,100 service members, they experienced shortages of force protection equipment, such as up-armored vehicles, electronic counter measure devices crew served weapons, and communications equipment. As a result service members were not always equipped to complete their mission.” The report goes on to speak of troop shortages, body armor shortages, armored vehicle shortages, etc. etc.. This is from our own DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL, not from any Presidential campaign. After reading our government’s own report, I have no doubt what this Captain talks about as not being true.

There is no doubt the Army in 2003 was stretched thin. 10 years of budget cuts under Clinton were just beginning to be redressed in the 2002-2003 timeframe. We are in much better shape now and it would be a shame to put another Jimmy Carter, aka Barak Obama, in charge to slash and burn military funding to pay for his entitlement expansions.

The republicans probably wouldnt like to face the facts the campaign contributions from the military go to 1) Ron Paul 2) Obama. OMG! Supporting the troops deosnt mean using them on a whimsy!

I’m somewhat startled by the large numbers of people who categorically state they will never vote for Obama because he took drugs.
You’ve got a president who was a confessed alcoholic, who more than likely used cocaine, that many of you support. Don’t you find that astonishingly hypocritical?
We are a society that abuses drugs at an extraordinary rate- most of those drugs being “legal”. It seems perfectly fine to use a drug when prescribed by a doctor, even when its effectiveness is in great doubt (independent testing is rarely performed- we rely on the manufacturers who have a vested interest in the tests success!) and their effects on our bodies and minds are often unpredictable. How many suicides and murders have been committed by people who’ve been on these drugs, or had recently stopped taking them?

I suggest everyone check the names of the people who spearheaded the war in Iraq against the names of the people responsible for the US policies in Vietnam. The same profiteering at the expense of US armed services personnel and Vietnamese civilians took place throughout the conflict.
I’ll give you the first one: Rumsfeld

Over the past five years, I’ve been reading about these deadly lapses by the Bush administration (and Rumsfeld’s Pentagon) in providing enough firepower and proper equipment for our troops fighting both over in Iraq and Afghanistan.
U.S. soldiers have died because of these deadly lapses. U.S. Marines in Iraq in early 2005 desperately sought MRAPs (Mine Resistant, Ambush Protected) vehicles, but they were put on hold, until Rumsfeld left and Gates made this his No. 1 Priority. Result: A new military phrase “Search and Avoid,” in which troops patrolling in lightly-armored vehicles would leave their base in Iraq (search), but go somewhere and park (to avoid being hit by IEDs while riding down an Iraqi road).
We also know about deadly lapses in body armor delivery to our troops in Iraq (and Afghanistan), but I’ve also read about what this Captain reported to the Obama campaign…that due to shortages in ammunition and even weapons, many of our military’s recruits while training end up “simulating” firing their weapons.
There are many reasons for these deadly lapses by the Republicans in charge of the Pentagon, but the primary one seems to be Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld relying on too few crony Republican defense contractors to provide desperately needed munitions and equipment for our troops, instead of opening up production to whomever could provide munitions and equipment the fastest. Thousands of U.S. troops have either been killed or maimed for life because war-profiteering by Republicans trumped taking care of our troops properly.
I served in the U.S. Air Force during Vietnam. What these “crony” Republicans in the Bush admnistration have done, if not illegal, is definitely shameful. (Although, handing no-bid contracts to crony Republicans, I believe, actually is illegal, per U.S. law, which may explain why people in the corrupt Bush administration don’t want anyone, especially in Congress, to investigate what they’ve been doing, nor track how many of our troops have been killed or maimed for life due to the Bush administration’s deadly lapses in judgment and morality).

What great work by a journalist.
The whole thing is beyond disgusting,
Why is it not criminal to do this?

It is in no way surprising that some would go to great length to deny anything that threatens to shatter their tenuous grip on reality. There is a group of people–of which several commenters on this thread are obvious members–that confuse the support for their chosen leaders with patriotism. It is quite obvious–and has been for a long time–that the Bush White House and the Rumsfeld Pentagon have badly mishandled both Iraq and Afghanistan. This has nothing to do with party loyalty, conservative ideology or liberal anti-militarism. If anything, conservatives should be more critical of Bush & Co for putting troops in harms way, for bungling intel, for failing to plan for obvious contingencies, for making a mockery out of the country they purport to love. Instead of supporting the troops, they support those who would–and did–do them harm.
We have one candidate (Obama) who relayed a story told to him in 2007, communicated it–correctly–as he was given it, and criticizes those responsible and those who looked the other way. He gets pilloried for breaking some sort of a pseudo-patriotic commandment not to criticize the military brass. Wake up you, limey idiots! Supporting the brass is not the same as supporting the troops!
Instead, we got another candidate, who goes to Baghdad and proclaims it safe from the streets of a market. As the camera zooms out a bit, you see over 100 bodyguards protecting the man, not to mention additional snipers and other troops who are guarding the perimeter and who swept the markets before he toured it. The very next day, after the man goes home, the very same market gets blown up by suicide bombers. Yes, Baghdad is safe…
Party loyalty should not get in the way of patriotism. If anything, what you are doing is anathema to patriots. It’s about the country, not some fools who put their interest above those of the nation.

(You’ve got a president who was a confessed alcoholic, who more than likely used cocaine, that many of you support)
I never voted for the booze hound and drugie Bush. His wife said on more than one interview that he would go drinking and disappear for days. AND PEOPLE OF AMERICA STILL VOTED FOR THIS CLOWN. And look horrible he has been.
Obama has his involvement with the crook Rezko, Larry Sinclair saying they did drugs and sex, Obama stealing words from everyone, Obama stealing words and Hillarys ideas and plans she first brought up in 2007, Obamas race baiting in S C and on and on and on. But how many people are voting for this fraud?
I feel the same way I did in 2000 that this guy is nothing but trouble. And he is going to lead America down the same road to he!! Bush did. Instead of Iraq it will be Kenya. People are so blinded by this guy. If they would only look at the great ideas and solid plans Hillary has they would vote for her in mass numbers.
Voters always say they want a smart president with great ideas and solid plans to put those ideas in place. But most don’t vote that way. And when the person they elect screw them over they have no one to blame but themselves. But the rest of us live here to and we are sick and tired of the dim wits controlling America. Hillary is the Gore of 2008. Smart and experienced and her opponent is using his money and influence to try to con his way into the WH. Only the smart American voters can stop Obama. See the facts for yourself.

The whole world is fully aware that American soldiers are the best equipped soldiers in the world.
But nobody is perfect.
Therefore, it is inevitable that problems appear, as the one presented.
Now, Obama dirty-mind took advantage of the opportunity to present himself as he truly is: a dirty guy.

Gee, last month there were 39 US combat deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan and there were 35 murders in Detroit. Ask any soldier if he would rather be stattion in Detroit or Takrit. My nephew is in Ft. Bragg after returning from Takrit this week. He says it’s far safer and the people are way more helpful in Takrit!

Talking to an unnamed source is not finding that “Obama’s anecdote
check(s)out.” Verifying his unit and
interviewing those in the captain’s
former command would be more
credible. You’re betraying your bias.

Can we get back to the serious topics like change, hope, change, love, did I say change, luv.

So many rushettes miss the point, that you have to be competent to prosecute a war and to hobble the effort against the taliban in order to pursue a phony war in Iraq is more than incompetent, it is criminal. This liberal is all for the effort against terrorists and could run a more effective defense than bush-cheney..

The question isn’t which city is safer, Takrit or Detroit, it is which city to we have a greater obligation to. I’m gonna go with Detroit, but that’s just me.
Some of you guys really should do your homework regarding Presidents and their inappropriate behavior in their personal lives. Aside from George W. being a raging alchoholic and drug addict, Reagan may well have had early onset Alzheimer’s while in the White House. Nixon was an avowed anti-Semitic and rascist (not to mention getting caught in Whitewater). Clinton had an infamously loose zipper, and so did JFK (though who wouldn’t have had an affair with Marilyn Monroe?) . Politicians who have run this government have done some pretty dirty things over the course of history. Some of the more straight laced guys (Jimmy Carter, Gerald Ford, and George H.W. Bush) are reviled by one side or the other. If you were waiting on a clean politician (see Keating Five for McCain, Rezko for Obama, Whitewater for Clinton) you will not be voting in this election, unless you’re a Mike Huckabee fan.
Crickets:
FDR attacked Japan after Pearl Harbor, an attack that was definitively linked to Japan BEFORE a US assault happened. It has consistently been shown that Iraq had no link to Al Qaeda, and that Iraq was contained within its own borders. There is nothing in George W. Bush’s Iraq policy that mirrors FDR’s response to the Japanese. He started a pre-emptive war: let me attack you before you attack me. If we accept the premise that a nation is justified in doing this, what stops anyone from attacking anyone else? China has the largest standing army in the world, has repeated human rights violations and actually IS rather aggressively threatening Taiwan (China declares that there is but one China and that Taiwan is a part of it), Taiwan is a nation that we have promised to defend. Shouldn’t we consider attacking them pre-emptively to protect our ally?
You ever heard of a country called Iran, and a conservative lion by the name of Ronald Reagan, who sold them military arms (See Iran-Contra for more details) Saddam Hussein? Supplied the nerve gas that he uses against the Kurds by….Ronald Reagan’s administration. The Afghan government that becomes Al-Qaeda? Well, those guys were supplied by the United States in an effort to expel the Russians, and the moment the Russians left, the United States abandoned them to the mercies of the mullahs who then become …Al Qaeda! During whose administration? Who abandons them? Reagan and his VP, George Herbert Walker Bush! It seems that the current war on terror is in large part an effort to clean up messes created in administrations past.
Also, the record on Republicans and Democrats in time of war is about even. Wilson, FDR, and Truman (all DEMOCRATS) presided over WWI and WWII (both victories). Kennedy and Johnson (both Democrats) get us involved in the Vietnam debacle and Gerald Ford (Republican) pulls us out of it (by the way, the Republican Party jumped down LBJ’s throat for sending our troops to Vietnam without an exit strategy (way to get them out if things go badly…sound familiar?) Eisenhower (R) presides over the Korean War. I’ll even, just to be fair, give Reagan the credit for ending the Cold War (though it’s not officially a war and more of a state of political conflict, which DIRECTLY bleeds into the war on terror.) No party has a monopoly on wartime success, and this will be no exception (Don’t cite McCain, who graduated 5 spots from the bottom of his Naval Academy class. War hero this guy may be, but Eisenhower he ain’t). And if Obama or Clinton likely nominate Wesley Clark, who was a NATO supreme Commander, as their running mate, are you honestly going to tell me that the Republicans will be better suited to protect the country (after all, McCain hasn’t been in a military officer’s position since 1973, when he returned from Hanoi.) There have been a few changes in how we fight wars since the early 70s, you think?
Oh and for those who are citing the Somalia incident, remember that the military troops over there are UN forces that were deployed by George H.W. Bush in 1992. Clinton doesn’t become President until Jan 22, 1993. He INHERITS that problem from George H.W., he didn’t create it.
I really don’t expect this to sway anyone (most are far too busy being right to let things like the facts get in their way). Obama’s not a clean guy. But no one running for President is, and very few have been. Let’s grow up and realize that.

Sorry, you are wrong. It doesn’t check out. This reminds be of “what the meaning of is is”. This is a bit of communication. Obama is telling a story. What this passage says to people is not true. This passage says to people that the platoon was split – half going to Iraq and half to Afghanistan. That did not happen. Individuals were promoted or otherwise moved to other, probably higher jobs. They may have gone to Iraq.
This passages says to people that the soldiers did not have enough bullets to fire their guns in Afghanistan. This is not true. They had enough there, where Obama’s story takes place. They may not have enough when training.
Sure, technically, a lawyer might be able to wiggle out of this, but not a politician, someone whose job is to communicate to the public. This is not a courtroom. This is a political campaign and a political debate. In that context — as people heard it — it is a misleading, even deceitful, attack. I don’t care about splitting hairs and debating what is means. Obama should be above such petty, Clinton-ian reasoning.

So, what are we to make of Obama’s comments?
If he is making the point that this Capt should have had 30 troops in his platoon? Does he want to double the number of troops per platoon? Or would he be happy with a minimum number of say 26 per platoon? Can they no longer deploy with 15? Or, is he making the point that we need to double the total number of troops in Afghanistan? Is this a strategic reflection that he will implement as Commander-in-chief? Regarding Humvees, what is the minimum number of Humvee’s per platoon? Does each soldier need his own Humvee? Does Obama have the formula and numbers from all of the units, or should we accept his view that all of the platoons are similarly distressed in Afghanistan?
Finally, it seems that Clinton is correct in her assessment of Obama. All talk and no action. As an sitting Senator, he could have actually DONE something about these shortfalls. He has apparently had this information since 2003. Has he demanded an inquiry? Has he held congressional hearings on the subject? Has he asked for a minimum manning per platoon? minimum number of Humvee’s per platoon? Minimum number of troops in Afghanistan? Minimum number of rifles per company? Or is he just all talk? These are just some of the questions I would like answered, since he appears to have so many…

True or not true is not the issue.
The issue is why does a presidential candidate think its appropriate to reveal military intelligence or problems on national television?
There are stil lUS troops in Afghanistan and Obama has just endangered their lives and given the Taliban information they can use.
Hillary has been on the senate armed services committee the entire time. She has never used military intelligence to score political points in a debate, or divulged information about US troops on television or any other media.
True or not true, this information should have been forwarded to the senate armed services committee, if Obama was genuinely concerned about the well being of US soldiers.
Someone who would criticize the US militaary and divulge information on televison that could endanger US soldiers lives to scor a point in a debate is not fit to be President.

There you go again, Obama. I remember our unit getting emergency deployed to Vietnam. At first we didn’t have enough men, equipment, aircraft, ammo, etc. We just went. Just our mere presence was crucial. Eventually,over a reasonable amount of time, our unit was at full, combat strength. However, before we actually went into a combat zone, I never remember us having enough of anything to train with. There are also units and equipment, for one reason or another, that are cannabilized for the benefit of units that are actually doing something. I am sure this is the case as the Marine Corps, and the Army too, don’t see troops into combat that are not designated as combat-ready. They may be in theatre, but they are not in harms way.

I think Educated Americans have amnesia and forgot that they themselves(including Obama) mutely along with President Bush authorize the war against Taliban. Obama voice was not strong enough at that time even if he claims that today he opposed war which does not make sense.
Educated Americans forgot that you can have diplomacy with countries and but cannot have diplomacy with terrorist. It was the terrorist dominated countries that President Bush fought. These terrorist are like termites. If not stopped they will ruin everything and improve the American’s morale or the economy of US would have impacted.

I find it interesting that from purely watching the debate that I assumed several things:
1) That this was a recent problem–my fault for not catching the link to 2003;
2) That he had heard from the Army Captain–not that it was relayed to him(mislead?); and,
3) I didn’t think we should be telling our enemies that we’re unequiped to fight them (if it’s true).
Suggestion: Senator Obama should think about going back to Commander In Chief school and start at Level 101 to get the facts straight and present them in an organized fashion (before “Day 1″)!
In Summary: I think Senator Obama’s story was inspirational; but, to the Taliban.

I find the Captain’s story more than believeable. We had the same problem in Vietnam in the war’s early stages. I remember my unit buying ammo and weapons on the Vietnamese black market. Peronnel movements were in choas. Men spent their entire tour in tent cities awaiting deployment to a combat unit (Not to say they tired hard to get to a combat unit). Again, Clinton cut the military to the bone, people and equipment.

From a comment below:

“Soldiers of the 1st Brigade, 3rd Infantry Division had so little time between deployments to Iraq they had to cram more than a year’s worth of training into four months.”
Some had only a few days to learn how to fire their new rifles before they deployed to Iraq — for the third time — last month.

They’re on their third combat tour and don’t know how to fire weapons? Indeed, things are far worse than anyone thought…

Andylit said, “Obama sits on the Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs and the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. If he had this knowledge and suppressed it…well…I’ll leave it to you to decide on that.”
I’m hoping you can understand this. Where on earth did you read that the Captain gave this information to Obama in 2003???
You said, “The source claims to have met with Obama in 2003.”
NO, he didn’t. Read on.
“The Captain has spoken to Sen. Obama, he says, but this anecdote was relayed to Obama through an Obama staffer.”
The Captain was in Iraq 2003-2004. Nowhere did he say he gave Obama, or his staff the information at that time. Sounds like it was recently.
You said, “These are not simple attempts to discredit the source. Recent history if rife with sources who either lie about their duty stations, or even lie about being in the military at all.”
So give us some links to these ‘rife’ stories. I gave you plenty of links below to stories that back up the Captain. Several million as I recall.
A lot of them, United States Military sites.

The Obama comment – and John Cole unhinged

In any case, Obama’s supporters jumped all over Jake Tapper’s article above like it was the next gospel. I left a few comments about the issue there and on other web sites (as I frequently do). In return, I often get a lot of abuse, but none so much …

Maybe – just maybe — these right-wing nuts, who have long appropiated and monopolized discussions about the military (and religion, i might add), feel thereatened by an “encroachment” to thier turf.
But guess what, Obama will not only give lip service; he’ll acutally do something to fix the problem.
I find it irksome that these ‘conservatives’, who speak so highly of ‘the troops’ in public settings, have done more to undermine the military. Just look at the neo-cons pet project in Iraq.
The ought to be ashamed of themselves.

Funny to listen to your spin on this story, I listened to a similar report on CNN and the outcome was quite different from yours. The captain, for instance, was talking of ‘not enough’ equipment for ‘training in the USA’, not in Afghanistan, etc etc etc

“Similarly Iraq had the fourth largest standing army in the world and represented a country that could and would provide material aid and support to Al Queda. ”
Oh good God, people still believe that crap?
Once more: Saddam Hussein, Iraq’s secular Communist dictator, hated al-Qaeda, executed them when found.
Once he was *removed*, al-Qaeda, seeing the power vacuum, flooded into Iraq.
As for “fourth largest standing army in the world”, that depends how you count. The US is by far the largest by every measure, followed IIRC by Russia and China. Saddam’s inflated numbers in his *land* army posed no threat to us — how would they get to the US? Meanwhile, it was a very poor, poorly *equipped* military.

So when Obama tells us martians are landing or the earth is flat, I suppose the press will find a way to justify that baloney. The guy stretches the truth as much as he ego.

Appropriately ill-timed purely for political consideration, Sen. Warner’s priority-displacement and lunacy wreaks of a “flaming cocktail” that all show and offers no buzz…rather morality high! His attack smacks of desperation, while offering a striking retrospective-sadly, of a more modern face of McCarthyism…rather early European and American “witch-hunts!” And at his age, I’d wager that he himself might offer an eyewitness testimonial to this dark era of western civilization. Predictably irrational…as are most of America’ current crop of spendthrifts elected-officials daily making a “run-on-the-bank” of tax-payer’s hard-earned wages under the capital dome, Sen. Warner appears conspicuously oblivious-rather there appears to be no rush-to-judgment on behalf of the “Warner Commission” assuaging fellow-partisan and 2008 presumptive Republican Presidential nominee: Arizona Sen. John McCain’s alleged…blatant conflict-of-interest concerns, cozy relationship with “certain shadow” communication-operatives slash lobbyists. All of whom were recently…some anonymously, quoted in a story in the New York Times, as well his own “Keating Five” testimonials. Sen. Warner is all about polarized-politics, for which Sen. Obama seeks to disband. This form of demagoguery is void of any movement proactively-as you’ve risen, to pursue viable or alternative solutions to the concerns at the core of Sen. Obama’ conversation with the Captain. Sen. Warner’s lame-duck tactic doesn’t past the smell test…selecting to use politically-correct discourse rather than reverting to a more preferred Texan, beer-induced, expletive-laden tirade.

Tommy Times wrote: George W Bush was president for three years before he sent undertrained and undersupplied troops to Afghanistan.
Operating Enduring Freedom, that is the war in Afghanistan Tommy, began on October 7, 2001. That’s a little less than 10 months into the Bush presidency Tommy, not three years.
Might want to sign up for that remedial math course Tommy.

Just one more example of how Bush/Rumsfeld wanted the US military to travel “light.”

CPT, under Carter, the US Army SF did not have night vision equipment, and our x-county skis dated from WWII. So if you want that level of funding again, vote for Obama.

Sen. Obama, you say that you are going to change things?? OK, then what are you going to change and HOW are you going to change it?? I never heard one word as to how you are going to do something.. Just how do you plan on doing something when you have never done anything in your political career of 1 year?? Name 1 thing that you have done while being a Senator from Illinois?? I would like to hear your response to that!!!!

Thanks for a well-written article. After reading some of these comments that say they STILL don’t believe the story, I have to say a few things.
1) The military/congress/pentagon/you-name-it has stated that the military is over-stretched and can’t keep up this pace or handle another engagement right now. So at some level this has to be plausible.
2) Obama was relating a STORY that he was TOLD by a soldier. He didn’t say he was there or saw it with his own eyes. He isn’t insulting you.
3) His point is that he wants the military in BETTER shape, so why are all you right-wingers and vets calling him a liar? He’s making a case that you should be better equipped.

There is nothing new about shortages in deployed military units. In Vietnam, we rarely had a full complement of men or materiel. Units are equipped and manned in accordance with mission priorities. Perhaps the unit in question wasn’t first priority. Finally, remember that many female soldiers are non-deployable when it’s time to go to war.

Steve,
In case your post wasn’t rhetorical, here’s a quick link to Obama’s work in the Senate, which contains yet more links to more comprehensive work. As for State Senate, cursory searches will turn up loads of info on his work requiring the videotapeing of police interogations which is interesting for how it got passed, as well as his leadership on reproductive rights and other issues.

I’m LOST! Would all of You posting about WHEN this happened and When Obama was informed about it PLEASE tell Me What article YOU read? It SURE isn’t the one I read! Either I need a reading & comprehension course OR YOU DO! I forget WHICH person made the comment about giving Al queada Military information that could put US Troops in harms way by relating this story, BUT I can PROMISE You that They ALREADY KNOW IT! And Probably a whole lot MORE that is TRULY dangerous! They may be Fanatics, But I doubt They are Idiots! Hopefully, in a twist from the current fad of running down someone or something, I would like to THANK some of the Posters here for their well thought out and intelligent posts: Bub, Stephen D., Rich Baltimore, The Oracle, Buck Turgidson & Thomas. It was a pleasure to read Your comments!

To all those who are in such high dudgeon about Osama’s actually…gee, how could he do such a thing…listening to a soldier tell him about problems our troops are having in this war declared by those deferred in the ’60s, the story’s been confirmed. Deal with it. To suggest that sending troops in without sufficient arms and equipment is okay because it — what is the argument, anyway? Grow up and face the facts, folks. GW jetted onto the ship in his fancy little jumpsuit and meanwhile our troops are still dying. And bin Laden has yet to be caught due to our diversion to Iraq based upon lies and bad intelligence at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
And for the guy who argued that the 3000+ dead we’ve had stemming from incompetence and lies is okay because it’s a low percentage, that is just all too typical. Those are 3000 Americans whose lives were lost because we were lied to by our dishonest and incompetent leaders. It is *NOT* okay that they’re dead because it’s a low percentage of those in uniform. And again, what about bin Laden?
Obama should win. Game, set, match.

My son just finished active duty as a combat engineer in the USMC. He did 2 tough tours in Iraq and went without needed equipment both times. Last time I had to send him replacement boots! He had to go out on patrols with known unreliable vehicles. How would you like to be stuck in a bad neighborhood in Ramadi, waiting for a tow back to base?

Maybe if history was properly taught in the schools most people would yawn and say, “Typically American” We have always had units that went into battle under-manned, under-trained, under-equipped. Ask the US GIs in the Ardennes in the winter of 1944 what it was like fighting in summer uniforms that stuck out that sore thumbs in the snow while the supposedly broken and underequipped Germans had warm winter uniforms that blended in with the surroundings (many froze to death). Or the tankers of the 1st Armored that got to go toe to toe with Rommel’s Panthers and Tigers at Kassering in their Lee and Stuart tanks (they got mauled and we LEFT over a 1,000 dead lying on the battlefield). Or the brave bomber crews that were sent into Germany without fighter escort in 1943 (they died by the hundreds). Or the soliders of the 24th Infantry Division sent into South Korea at half strength to fend off the invading North Koreans (they were routed and the division’s general captured). The list goes on and on. But the thing I am really curious about is what all you hang wringers plan to do about it. What social giveaways are we cutting back on so the troops have the needed equipment? What government subsidies are going to be cut to provide the needed training for the troops? What government agencies are going to have their staffs and pay cut so that we can provide the pay and benefits needed to attract new recruits to fill the ranks? Just curious.

Its gonna be great to finally have a CINC that will listen to phone calls to his aides from Lts in the field on just what that particular Lt believes he was ‘SUPPOSED TO HAVE’ prior to fighting this Nations wars.
I’ll have to go back and see if FDR awaiting what every soldier was SUPPOSED TO HAVE , prior to D-Day.

Do the Bush supporters realize Bush will go down as the First President to lose two wars to some street gangs.
How pitiful

“great reporting” is all the reporters talking to the SAME person.
This whole thing is based upon statements by one (1) unnamed unverified person
who may or may not be a US Army Officer, who may or may not have been deployed to Afganistan.
Has any of these great reporters talked to other members of this guy’s unit?
Do any of these reporters even know which unit we are talking about?
The story told by this ‘captain’ has not been verified.

furthermore, why is this army capitan remaining “unidentified”. If his claim is true, then american lives are being thrown in danger without the tools they need. Am i suppossed to believe that a man willing to die for his fellow soldiers is afraid to lose his commision
or go to jail for them? unlikely.
If this man’s story is true, then he truly serves his country by coming forward so those responsible can be held accountable. Until then, i will not just take a reporters word for it.

Wow… an Army at war has to make decisions on how to prioritize equipment and ammo… never heard of that before.
I am an Army CPT who spent two tours overseas and YES, there was plenty of times I was short supplies and people. You don’t whine about it… you get it done. Throughout history our armed forces have overcame seemingly insurmountable obstacles to win (Point Du Hoc… google it). You fight with what you have until the fighting is done. Ask my grandfather if he had everything he needed during the attack on Pearl Harbor… or my other grandfather if he had everything he should have had on during the battle of the bulge? Surely my uncle who parachuted into Normandy on D-Day had everything he wanted…
I have to say that we are doing pretty well suppling those on the sharp end of an 8000 mile supply line.

For those who wonder why a West Point grad would ask for anonymity, try to remember a fellow named Billy Mitchell. Also, it’s so long ago, but there were a couple of Pentagon guys relieved for saying the occupation of Iraq would require 300,000 troops.
He must be disgruntled.

if what this capitan is saying is correct, that means americans may be dying because of these mistakes. So your argument is that he’s afraid to lose his job, so he lets his brothers die?
anonymity my rear end, Soldiers ain’t cowards.

I just LOVE to see the war hawks here frothing at the mouth! Why? Because they know they are backed into a corner by facts & public opinion which no longer supports their bully mindset towards the world. We now know that it takes brains more than muscle to win a conflict!

The problem with the numerous arguments about being short on supplies in every other war would be valid if we had rations, victory gardens, and war bonds in the US, and if Iraq attacked us first. Unfortunately, our president chose to preemptively go to war with Iraq unprepared, and all we seem to care about is the price of a gallon of gas for our civilian Hummers while our troops aren’t provided adequate equipment from the very same company.

The fact that the source remains unnamed does not invalidate the story.
But nor does it validate it.
In the absence of any substance, then, it remains a story, nothing more, nothing to get excited over, and nothing worthy of basing decisions.
Ben

What I find actually comical about this is that Obama tried to use a story about events in 2003 to bash a war that is going on in 2008. Maybe he thinks that the public is stupid enough to be taken in by the stringing together of loosely fitting facts to make his “non” point. When I heard this for the first time, my firsts thought were “What the hell is a Captain doing commanding a Platoon” and “If they split the platoon to two different theaters, that would be a first”. I suspected from the start of this little gem, that something was very fishy with the comment. But then Barry O. is a politician, which means everything he says should be questioned.

how are the neocon naysayers gonna knock this down?:
‘Army chief of staff Gen. George Casey, testifying on troop strain before the Senate Armed Forces Committee Tuesday, said there is “no reason to doubt” Sen. Barack Obama’s military shortage story during CNN’s debate in Austin, Texas, last week.’
look it up, read it for yourselves, and then please stop whining.

Obama and Nader, they may be serving the same purpose when all is said and done in the 2008 Presidential race.
I’m upset that Obama, with less experience than anyone in recent history, is running for President, and is hurting Democrats… or let me put it differently, he is assuring McCain will win, and be Democrat Loss #3.
Obama has a huge ego, and no patience, and arrogant for sure, so instead of spending some time in the US Senate, and earning our trust through solid deeds and accomplishments, he got elected and immediately hooked up with Oprah, then Ted Kennedy (the oldest Old Boy in DC who owns his seat) and started on the road to STOP HILLARY.
In the end, Republicans will win, and Obama would have made a statement, that a Black Man is ready to be President.
So McCain will probably choose Rice and show that Republican policy may not bring change, and our economy will remain in ruins but at least they are willing to show respect women and black people.
Making a statement and hurting Democratic chances to win, isn’t that what Nader does? Nader has way more accomplishments on his resume, so my answer is I respect Nader more than Obama. The Presidential candidate that Inspires me, and I have faith will bring change I can believe will be realized is, Hillary Clinton. Obama supporters like to say all she is a First Lady, but in fact she has spent 8 years as a US Senators, and has a record of accomplishments that is real. In the General Election, people will choose experience over Obama’s hype, so our President will be Hillary or McCain?
I often hear Obama supporters talk of Obama Uniting Us, and all I hear from my male friends who support Hillary is “People say men who support Hillary are Gay” (Not that there’s anything wrong with that – I say” ;-) This is another hidden – or not so hidden factor in this race — the Bullying that is being done by Obama supporters is unbelievable. The Press is scared to death to admit Obama is playing the race card and sexist card, like no one since Wallace, and what it’s doing to race relations is tearing people apart.
Obama intimidates the Press, because writers can be fired if they say anything that seems racist and Obama is unabashedly running as a Black Man candidate. So they are helping propel his “electrifying” candidacy by refusing to criticize and it’s easier to report Obama’s criticism of Hillary.
Nader will do much better in this election, because he has a record of accomplishments a mile long, and seems very motivated to get people to wake up, and realize what Obama is saying, will not bring any change we can believe in. I voted for Hillary, and if she does not win in TX and Ohio, I may vote for Nader. McCain will win either way if Obama is the chosen Democrat for President. In that case, I’d rather make a statement, to choose someone who actually works for change, rather than Obama, who is a wild card, promoted by people whose main goal was to keep Hillary from being President, at the expense of the Democratic party.
As Hillary supporter, I feel that Obama’s is a guy, who should have earned his way to run for the Presidency, and if there is anyone who should drop out it it’s Obama. Thankfully, I have Hope and Faith, Hillary will win in TX and Ohio. I trust Hillary to bring the change she promises, and am so tired of the Obama bullying, sexism and racism, it makes my blood boil.

You are indeed corporate media. You do not report some very real and pertinent problems facing our servicemen right now.I
I could not sleep so i got up to use my nebulizer to help me breath and i turned the tv on and there was a story of our servicemen committing suide because of the horrors experienced in Iraq. One particular serviceman who came back was to lonely and distraught because of otrocities he saw and had to partake in Iraq that he was drinking heavily and was trying to do it his way to get back to normal. He was so much in need of comort and acceptance that he asked his dad if he could sit on his lap. He wa a you solder only 23 years old. Yet he felt los and abandoned by the inhumane things that thei war has brought upon our military men.
Today is Good Friday. and our Lord jesus was crucified and died for our sins so that we can have life once more. I compare our sacrifices of our military you men who would rather die than go back to iraq or afghnistan to resume killing his fellow men and women. At least he does not have to follow orders by west point commanders who give orders that a morally upright kid from Ameroca does not have to obey any longer.
I was married to a viet-nam naval servicemen who was in the river boats in vietname and he turned from a nice innocent kid into a killer because the millatary turned him into a bad person. These kid that committed suicided had the guts to feel sorry for what was compelled to do in the service and would rather die than go back and do horrible otrocities to his fellow men the Iraqis.
This was has got to stop, now and this story was on so early in the morning that the corporate meid saw fit to show it but that the limited public would see it.
Tomorrow Easter Sunday we are shown that we will all rise and live again because our Lord jesus Christ victory over suvering and death to bring us eternal life. 3/21/08

The experience of this captain resembles stories I’ve heard from my marine cousin who is currently serving in Iraq but was first in Afghanistan. Unfortunately this is not an isolated story.

To Bob: I hardly think that experimenting with drugs in school is anything to discredit a Presidential Candidate. There are plenty of members of our government that I’m sure use drugs, at present. So, he couldn’t have joined right of college, but do you think he wouldn’t have fought just as hard for his country as you, if he did join the military? This argument is completely invalid to his candidacy and this article.

the sad think is this is not unrelated the britsh army are also moaning that thay are being under founded wars are expenceive gordon brown and obama should increse the collition forces founding as soon as possoible