Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld was in Kuwait talking to the tropps. During a Q&A session, some GIs asked about the stop-loss program and about the limited supply of vehicle armor.
Rummy responded to the armor question by saying, "not every vehicle has the degree of armor that it would be desirable for it to have. As you know, you go to war with the Army you have, not the Army you might want or wish to have at a later time. If you think about it, you can have all the armor in the world on a tank and a tank can be blown up. And you can have an up-armored Humvee and it can be blown up."
Bitter partisan Senator Chris Dodd (D-CT) wrote a letter to the secretary, "Your response -- 'You go to war with the Army you have' -- is utterly unacceptable."
What would this country have done in WWII with this kind of thinking? Japan decimated our Pacific Fleet at Pearl Harbor. Would Sen. Dodd suggest then that we should rebuild the entire fleet before retaliating? When we lost thousands of men on the fields of France and Germany, would Sen. Dodd insist on stopping the war until replacements are found or created?
Would he suggest holding off the War on Terror until we rebuild the military to Regan-era levels...before Clinton and the Congressional Dems gutted it?
Would have it been so hard for Dodd to say, "if our troops are low on armor, I'll introduce legislation today to secure funding for our brave troops"?