Roger Long wrote:
"Dennis Pogson" wrote
Is this another case of the CG simply taking the view that "it's only
$300,000, let the insurers pick up the tab"?


Now that the CG is nearly as overstretched and underfunded as the rest of
the military, and deprived of proper equipment by the the hidiously corrupt
supply contractor / procurement system that sees everything as a money
siphon from the taxpayers and cares not one whit for the safety or security
of the nation, they have not unreasonably adopted an unwritten policy that
their job is to save people; not toys. After all, there is only so much
they can do. If I were out there risking my life on an aging cutter or
aircraft looking at a toy boat owned by the kind of fat cat that deprived me
of the proper equipment to do my job and keep me safe to be alive to do it,
hell, I'd let the damn thing sink too.

So your solution to others having more than you is to do what you can to
see that they lose it, if you get the chance. Hmm.

I know that not all, in fact very
few, sailors actually fit into this category but, if I were on of those
dedicated and courageous and dedicated people out there who had been waiting
for new equipment and had been following the Deepwater fiasco, it would be
an easy attitude to slip into. It's also the only rational prioritization
response at the command structure level to the task / resources ratio forced
on them.

Why is it that the conservatives who get so worked up about private
lifestyle issues and taxes never seem to get very exercised about the
massive theft that is military procurement or the fact that the soldiers
they put "Support our Troops" bumper stickers on their cars about are in
Iraq without proper body armor or mine resistant vehicles?

The answer is that you misunderstand what you oppose. Conservatives
generally see the problem as belonging to the system and instead of
wanting to dump more money into that system like liberals always want to
do, they want to change the system so that the problems you speak of are
eliminated. One great way to do so is the free people up to choose the
best products and services. In other words, let people profit from
creating better products and services, the best products and services
will succeed. The worst will fail. This is what capitalism accomplishes,
if free.

More than
enough money to supply all that stuff disappeared into the companies run by
Cheney's chums. Twice as much of our money was spent to give the USCG the
equipment they need and they didn't get so much as a usable RIB out of it.

Any clue why a politician would want to risk life in prison to make
their "chums" rich? People spout this so much and never stop to think of
how ridiculous it is. These are bad, evil people taking huge risks for
someone else?? It doesn't make a bit of sense.

People mindlessly repeat the propaganda they have been fed by talk radio

Hmm. You do realize you are mindlessly repeating propaganda you've been
fed by talk radio too, right?

Stephen