I recently sat impassively as Sec. Rumsfeld aswered questions from the media regarding his tenure with the Bush administration and any change in the direction the present occupation of IRAQ is going. Some political objectives were attained by prominently placed IRAQI citizens and politicians but I was dumfounded by the response by Donald Rumsfeld recently, to a very direct question by one of our own soldiers in the field. Amid growing concern for proper equipment and weapons for our troops the foremost interest had to be in getting armoured vehicles for patrols and convoys for the occupation forces. I was appalled to learn that our own troops are digging scrap metal out of dumps, harvesting armour from soviet made equipment and even acquiring ballistic glass and kevlar outside of normal army channels to ensure that when they are struck by insurgents they can respond with a greater chance of survival. Mr. Rumsfelds response was edited for the left wing media that exist in Europe and America, so I waited for the entire question and response and dialogue to emerge after the intial dismay of the American public. I dont care for Rumsfeld, but his response to the soldiers question was IMO very inadequate considering the impact of the soldiers question. My own brother, a veteran of IRAQ and another conflict during his career is deeply concerned about the lack of armour on our own Bradleys and HUMMERs and the current policy of waiting for something to happen before we begin a cascade response to insurgent threats. Rumsfeld would like to shift the focus to the field commanders and somehow make them the target of the media inquisition but my rifle and scope is leveled right back at the real threat to our soldiers in IRAQ, The honorable Donald Rumsfeld. I compare him to McNamara of the Vietnam war era, although clearly they are diffferent men, I see that matters of grave concern to our own countrymen serving in the field never seem to make it to the Ivory Tower within the Bush Administration. As someone who voted for Bush both times, I am dismayed that Rumsfeld persists in this tactic of saying little and comforting very few concerning the matter of stabilizing IRAQ. We should be talking about building hospitals and schools, feeding IRAQI people and reinforcing the infrastructure of the occupied nation. Instead we are forced to hear statements from our own troops voicing concerns to Rumsfeld and then having those concerns deflected away from the primary focus of our own men and women serving honorably in IRAQ. Donald Rumsfeld is way behind the power curve, and yet he is one of the most powerful men in the Bush cabinet. I am disgusted with the mans performance for the past 20 years and equally distrustful as my brothers and sisters now serving in uniform. If Secretary Rumsfeld wants to do us a favor, give us the armour, weapons, and latitude to prosecute the war against the insurgents to the level it should be. Does anyone wonder why we cannot effectively deal with the insurgent threat? I will tell you it all boils down to money, equipment and leadership. Our men and women in combat are starting to taste the fruits of Rumsfelds garden of deceit and ineffective leadership. The matter sits squarely on the shoulders of the very man that ignored a CIA memo reqarding the mistreatment of prisoners, the lack of supplies for our troops and the extended enlistments of men and women who have served far long in the field than anyone that volunteered in Vietnam...and I remember the futility of that war so well. I hope my president can reassess the situation and bend Donalds ear a little and save more lives in IRAQ, because it see the situation getting considerably worse for our troops.