Joel Pett by Joel Pett

Joel PettNo Zoom

Comments (22) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. Simon_Jester

    Simon_Jester said, 29 days ago

    I cannot confirm the truth of this, but I remember reading somewhere that this is what the US does WHENEVER we leave a war-zone; it’s supposedly cheaper to buy new gear than to transport the old stuff home.

  2. cdward

    cdward said, 29 days ago

    @Simon_Jester

    I’ve also read that before.

  3. Harleyquinn

    Harleyquinn GoComics PRO Member said, 29 days ago

    We left, bugged out, gone on a Date known, left so fast and left no boots on the ground. Obama caused the vacuum that led to the suck right in from a guy who we once had in jail, but Obama thinks we do not need Gitmo, so the guy never made it that far and we turned him lose.
    As for what we left behind? If we had only had a negotiator, a diplomat or a politician in office who was confident. I mean really, Jimmy Carter could have made a better deal and left some peace troops in place. But no we have this Community Organizer and his bible of Rules for Radicals. That getting elected by those means does nothing for you on a world stage. Flying around apologizing and putting down America. Now it is ooop my bad, did I leave those.
    I thought we were to junk what we left behind. Was there not a brew ha ha over junking new stuff to replace it with new stuff?

  4. mikefive

    mikefive said, 29 days ago

    @Simon_Jester

    @ cdward

    " it’s supposedly cheaper to buy new gear than to transport the old stuff home."

    I, too, have heard that, but in looking at the prices on that equipment, I find it difficult to believe that it’s cheaper to leave a $45 million dollar tank behind than to bring it home. Even leaving behind armored Humvees at $140,000 each seems questionable.

  5. old1953

    old1953 said, 29 days ago

    Actually, no, it’s not. The items in question are generally pretty beat up and require a lot of new gear. Still usable, so we give em’ away and go for a new one. Though it’s usually more like humvee’s and other items than tanks – don’t give away many of those. IIRC, there was a news report about 1200 M1A1’s waiting for repair in Missouri a couple of years ago. Price tag was very high per each for reconditioning.
    To put it another way, would you keep a vehicle that had over 150,000 miles on it and had been modified several times, or spring for a new one?

  6. Simon_Jester

    Simon_Jester said, 29 days ago

    @Harleyquinn

    Y’know Harley…
    That Obama bugged out’ lie has been debunked every time you’ve posted it…and every time, you responded in the same manner.
    1. Ignore the response.
    2. Post that lie again on another thread.

  7. redbeemer

    redbeemer said, 29 days ago

    Growing up listening to my WWll veteran dad and friends talk about the war, one of the items talked about was how equipment was dumped over the side of the ships rather than be brought back to the US and the various reasons for doing so.
    Couple of decades later while wearing the green, I participated in prepping equipment to be shipped back from Viet Nam. It, the equipment, never made it out of the South China Sea. Reasons ran from not cost effective to contaminated with residue of the battle field. A lot was left to the locals to keep the war going but was left at the way side ASAP.
    Your tax dollars whizzed away.

  8. masterskrain

    masterskrain GoComics PRO Member said, 29 days ago

    Well, THIS TIME there are REAL weapons there, NOT the Imaginary “Yellow Cake Atomic Bombs”, and “Sophisticated Mobile Poison Gas Plants” we were told about in 2001!

  9. masterskrain

    masterskrain GoComics PRO Member said, 29 days ago

    Well, I have said before, that if the Pentagon wants to get rid of a Humvee, or even a Deuce-and-a-half, I’ll be VERY glad to take it off their hands.
    Either one would be very handy here in the woods in Kentucky…

  10. beekaay

    beekaay said, 29 days ago

    Anything we bring home winds up in the hands of our local police who then use them in a similar manner against U.S. citizens!

  11. NeoconMan

    NeoconMan said, 29 days ago

    @Simon_Jester

    Simon_Jester said, “…this is what the US does WHENEVER we leave a war-zone; …”


    No big deal; the taxpayers can afford it.

  12. Beau Nobo

    Beau Nobo said, 28 days ago

    And it creates jobs for our arms makers.

  13. Harleyquinn

    Harleyquinn GoComics PRO Member said, 28 days ago

    @Simon_Jester

    How about, just tell the truth you have no idea so you just call others liar!

  14. Ziveron

    Ziveron said, 28 days ago

    @Harleyquinn

    The truth: The U.S.–Iraq Status of Forces Agreement (official name: Agreement Between the United States of America and the Republic of Iraq On the Withdrawal of United States Forces from Iraq and the Organization of Their Activities during Their Temporary Presence in Iraq) was a status of forces agreement (SOFA) between Iraq and the United States, signed by President George W. Bush in 2008. It established that U.S. combat forces would withdraw from Iraqi cities by June 30, 2009, and all U.S. forces will be completely out of Iraq by December 31, 2011.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S.%E2%80%93Iraq_Status_of_Forces_Agreement

  15. TripleAxel

    TripleAxel said, 28 days ago

    @Ziveron

    The left clings to the 2008 Status of Forces Agreement with the desperation of a drowning man to a lifeboat, which is appropriate because the alternative is to admit that President Obama has been in power for the last five years. Also, it is good to remember that President Obama and Vice President Biden took credit for the state of Iraq back in 2011; Biden claimed that it would be listed as the major success of the Obama Administration. Better to pretend that the withdrawal of American troops was done against Obama’s will due to a treaty signed by a previous administration (and ignore how Obama disengaged himself from the country).
    -
    But in signing a Status of Forces agreement that expired early in President Obama’s term, President Bush was giving Obama flexibility in deciding whether and to what extent it should be renegotiated. Most people expected and assumed that Obama would negotiate an extension, with continued immunity for American soldiers. Iraqi leaders privately wanted to maintain a stabilizing American presence. But Obama ended up killing the possibility of an extension through indifference and incompetence, and mentally checked out of the country in the following years. We have now reaped the harvest of his indifference.
    -
    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2014/06/13/6-reasons-Obama-lost-Iraq

  16. Load the rest of the comments (7).