like vehicles that has no windows, no doors, no armor; and NOT FOR A PRESENT WAR , rather a future war.
Its cost is about $30,000 less than a "humvee".
Can you say rediculous??
2006-08-30 18:19:50 · 6 answers · asked by charly 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
It is not rediculous but is mismanagement of Government's fund that is reserved for some important portfolio. Only the middle men, pimps and power broakers will get the benifits as the manufacturer gets nothing compared to the commsion agents.
Do you get the clue for "who is in between the manufacturer and the user?"
2006-08-30 18:56:32 · answer #1 · answered by SESHADRI K 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Like the people who wrote the article have any clue regarding what the military does and does not need?
2006-08-31 04:34:49 · answer #2 · answered by MikeGolf 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i could say rediculous. But then i would be rather ridiculous.
2006-08-30 18:36:28 · answer #3 · answered by PommyTom 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
it is all about taking care of select companies. look at how many times we have bought inferior products but we bought them from select companies... can you say Boeing...
2006-08-30 19:26:42 · answer #4 · answered by mig_killing_pigs 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Fleecing of America isn't it lovely...isn't it wonderful./
2006-09-05 09:24:12 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
everyones pissed off when the military doesnt plan, and pissed off when they do.
2006-08-31 01:29:40 · answer #6 · answered by brian f 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋