After reading the milblog post titled, "An Ethic Dilemma" I was immensely frustrated! I realize that whoever controls the military spending is trying to control wasteful spending of taxpayer's money, but this is ridiculous. Just because an item is on a "no-no list" does not mean it should be a forbidden expense indefinitely. I'm sure that right now, to get an approval for an item means going through an entire ordeal filling out enormous amounts of forms for just a digital camera. I think all orders for expenses should go through a panel of people to review the order. Then an interview should follow regarding the item(s). If there were any questions regarding the purchases, the reasons would be stated. I'm sure it would be hard to hold a conference like that in the middle of Iraq, but it would be infinitely better than needing an item you can't buy.
The article about Sgt. Joel L. Murray really made me think. It isn't too often in life that you find someone that truly inspires you or makes you think about things the way that author made it seem. Joel seemed to be an inspiration to all of the troops around him, giving everyone hope and someone to look up to or ask questions. It sounds like the narrator was right by saying he already was a great person. My prayers and thoughts go to his family. I'm truly glad we have people like him in this world.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I completely agree with your blog, and just so you know, it is the responsibility of Congress to decided just how much of our tax money the Department of Defense gets to spend.
The no no list should be burned! It's not right that our soldiers can't have something so useful, that could make a tremendous difference in the war.
Post a Comment