English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

That is what the ineptitude of the Bush administration policies has done. Almost 200,000 weapons that we have provided to the Iraqi forces have gone missing. The majority are believed to be in the hands of insurgents. The worst part of this story, we are STILL providing weapons to the Iraqi militia with little or no accountability as to where the weapons go. Shouldn't someone be held accountable for this? How many of our own troops have been killed with weapons paid for by US tax dollars?

2007-08-07 01:42:09 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Other - Politics & Government

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2006-10-29-missing-weapons_x.htm

2007-08-07 01:48:04 · update #1

I don't blame Bush for Katrina or the bridge collapse in MN. However, I do believe that controls should be in place BEFORE providing weapons to potential enemies.

2007-08-07 01:50:34 · update #2

Good point Tomb. I thought maybe I had written it incorrectly so I double checked. BBC is definitely reporting we gave them AK-47s. US 'loses track' of Iraq weapons

AK-47 assault rifles might have ended up in insurgents' hands
"
The US military cannot account for 190,000 AK-47 assault rifles and pistols given to the Iraqi security forces, an official US report says."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6932710.stm

2007-08-07 02:22:40 · update #3

Jeepers, sorry the link I provided was old. Check the BBC link from yesterday:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6932710.stm

2007-08-07 02:23:59 · update #4

13 answers

I stopped trying to measure the ineptitude of our illustrious leader long ago. You will go insane if you start tallying it all up. Mostly it's the fact that we as Americans can't get along enough to do something about it as a unified whole. When I was younger, in Arizona, we had a Governor who once called all black people Pickininnies, (sp?). He was out so fast your head would spin. I don't even think all of Arizona disagreed with him but..........It was wrong. There was discussion of impeaching Clinton when he cheated on his wife because, well..........it was wrong.
But it's ok to lie, murder, con, cheat the human race, and steal. Hmmm.........maybe I'm in the wrong line of work.

2007-08-07 01:53:47 · answer #1 · answered by trednwatr 2 · 0 0

Well, legally speaking, treason isn't like that. Last time I checked treason is, "betraying one's country by supplying the enemy." Technically, it could be argued (though I don't think even the fictional Sebastian Stark would go up against the government without a hell of a good basis) that after we give them to the enemy, what happens to them is not the United States of America's responsibility. Then again, you could also say legally that the country knows that the weapons are in the wrong hands. I'm just the type that looks on both sides of the coin.

2007-08-07 08:51:26 · answer #2 · answered by Brian H 3 · 0 0

Most Certainly, unless you were a friend of GWB.
By the way, aren't AK-47s Russian made weapons ?
Don't tell me, I know, we're outsourcing making weapons also or importing them through Iran. Spread the funny money around to everybody except the American people.

Yes, they should hold someone responsible but haven't found anyone outside the Bush Administration yet.

Please watch the short music video linked below:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVBd03ibziM

2007-08-07 09:01:35 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Um, not many. The vast majority are killed by improvised explosives. They face our soldiers and Marines with an AK-47 and they won't live long enough to look down the sights.

As to your question, yeah, you would be. But no one was handing out weapons to our enemies. We were handing them out to our allies. If you have a suggestion for better controls and accountability, I'm sure your United States Army would love to have your expertise helping them out in the effort.

www.goarmy.com

Heck, you might even get enough experience to know what you're talking about.

2007-08-07 08:48:25 · answer #4 · answered by The emperor has no clothes 7 · 0 1

Your own link says just 14,030 weapons are missing.

" The Pentagon cannot account for 14,030 weapons — almost 4% of the semiautomatic pistols, assault rifles, machine guns, rocket-propelled grenade launchers and other weapons it began supplying to Iraq since the end of 2003."

They just don't have the serial numbers of the rest, they aren't missing.

2007-08-07 09:03:00 · answer #5 · answered by jeeper_peeper321 7 · 0 0

You crack me up, the Bush administration is now responsible for lgoistical distribution and stroing of weapons for the US military in Iraq. Just stop. You, I am sure blame Bush for Katrina, 911, and the Bridge in Minnesota as well. Get a clue.

2007-08-07 08:47:59 · answer #6 · answered by booman17 7 · 1 2

Arming both sides of another country's civil war is as American as apple pie. Usually doesn't happen when US troops are trapped in the crossfire, though.

2007-08-07 08:56:34 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Another example of the incompetence of Bush and his cronies. The price paid(dead Americans) seems not to matter to them at all.

2007-08-07 08:46:21 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Why do you consider it "ineptitude"? Somebody's been getting away with it for years (can you say CIA?). Why should they all of a sudden become accountable?

2007-08-07 09:20:03 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Id say alot considering you also armed saddam and ossama!!

2007-08-07 08:45:51 · answer #10 · answered by FanTorresTastic 4 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers