Home » Air » Lawmakers Question Air Force’s Use of Russian Rocket Engines

Lawmakers Question Air Force’s Use of Russian Rocket Engines

by Matt Cox on April 2, 2014

Atlas V AV-026 OTV-2; LO2 tanking prior to launch
As tensions continue to escalate in Ukraine, U.S. lawmakers want to know how the Air Force plans to replace Russian-made rocket engines used to launch military satellites.

The Air Force’s Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle, or EELV, program relies on the Russian RD-180 as the main engine on its Atlas V boosters.

Critics argue this is a risky practice since the relationship between the U.S. and Russia is deteriorating over the deployment of Russian troops and equipment into Crimea amid political and social unrest in southern Ukraine.

“It’s no secret that we have had some differences with Russia in the last few months,” said Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., the chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee’s Defense Subcommittee. “And yet in at least one important area we are dependent on Russia in terms of our American national defense.”

United Launch Alliance LLC, a joint venture between Lockheed Martin Corp. and Boeing Co., is the sole provider of medium and heavy lift rockets for the EELV program. ULA officials have assured lawmakers that it has a two-year supply of RD180 engines.

But Durbin said he is concerned it could cost up to $1 billion over five years if ULA produces the engines domestically.

“If we decided to produce this engine domestically, clearly we have a big bill to pay,” said Durbin, who asked Air Force leaders to explain their plans to resolve the issue during an April 2 hearing.

The Air Force is currently reviewing alternatives to the Russian engines in case the former communist country decides to stop supplying ULA with engines, said Air Force Secretary Deborah Lee James.

“We have initiated a review, which is due at the end of May, to get to the bottom of some of these questions and more importantly to provide some answers that if we did have it shut off, what would it mean?” she said. “I have learned spare parts are very important so that is a question that the review is also going to look at is do we have the spare parts for the two years … We are studying it quickly, and we hope to have some more answers shortly.”

Durbin questioned why the proposed budget seems to put “most of our faith in the ULA project to continue despite the question mark about Russian sources.”

The EELV program is made up of “heavy launches and lighter launches,” James said.

“We want competition for all of the launches and by 2017, under the process that has been laid out, we expect that we will have new entrants to compete for all of it,” she said. “What you are referring to is the fact that in terms of the launches – some of those launches have gotten deferred beyond the five year plan. Why? The answer is those launches involve GPS satellites and it turns out that the existing GPS satellites are lasting longer than we originally anticipated therefore we don’t need to launch them as quickly.”

The Air Force anticipates eight of these light launches will occur over the five year period, and seven of the eight will be competitive assuming the new entrants qualify, James said.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., said ULA officials visited her in May of 2012 and promised that the alliance between Lockheed and Boeing would lead to lower program costs.

“They told me that two big American defense companies coming together instead of competing could lower costs through the alliance,” she said. “Well it turned out that year they couldn’t; the cost went up 60 percent.”

EELV is projected to cost $70 billion through 2030, according to a recent report from the Government Accountability Office, the investigative arm of Congress.

Feinstein said she was also concerned that the Air Force only planned to hold a competition for eight cores — main part of the rocket that includes the engine – but awarded a sole-source contract to ULA for 35 cores.

The Air Force awarded the large contract to ULA to save money, James said. The contract locked in cost savings of $1.2 million compared to the analysis of projected costs, she said.

“With that said even the threat of competition caused the costs to come down,” James said. “The quicker we can get more companies qualified to compete, the better as far as I am concerned.”

Share |

{ 78 comments… read them below or add one }

Rufus Frazier April 3, 2014 at 1:18 am

Maybe they should also address why the US is dependent on the Russians to put people on or off the International Space Station.

Reply

RAS743 April 3, 2014 at 8:25 am

You mean like social-program spending — "stimulus"? Obamacare? — crowding out "providing for the common defense"? Yeah, good luck with that. The droolers that put people like Dick Durbin and Barack Obama in office don't know or don't care what you want "addressed". They've got their bennies; everything and everyone else can go to hell.

Reply

PolicyWonk April 3, 2014 at 10:22 am

Go and re-read the Congressional Budget Office report on the causes of the Great Recession. In the time period from 2001-2008, this nation gave "temporary" tax breaks to the .01% of the incredibly wealthy, AND radically increased corporate welfare programs without funding either change.

[Note: other causes included two unfunded wars, amongst other things].

The congress could rescind these two massive mistakes, and go far to restoring the economic balance of this nation that they themselves screwed up – but have since proven reluctant to do so.

The claim that the super-wealthy are the ones creating the jobs via their ultra-low tax payments should've had the effect of creating millions of jobs – yet at the height of the recession when tax rates for the wealthy (and corporations) were at their lowest, and corporate welfare at its highest, should have by the logic we were sold on, of creating a tremendous quantity of jobs and business opportunities.

Instead: they sent all the jobs to Communist China; kept the money; and, the nation suffered its worst economic disaster since the Great Depression.

Reply

Dr. Horrible April 3, 2014 at 10:52 am

I appreciate your contributions, PolicyWonk.

Reply

George W Bush April 3, 2014 at 12:37 pm

Let me paraphrase for PolicyWonk, “Its all Bush’s fault”. Instead of actually holding obama accountable for his own mistakes and lack of leadership, people like him just use the go to excuse of idiots.

VTGunner April 3, 2014 at 3:10 pm

Why didn't the democrats do this when they held the supermajority from 2009-2011??? Oh wait they're just as correupt as the "evil" republicans and Bush.

Reply

Mitch S. April 3, 2014 at 4:06 pm

"Oh wait they're just as corrupt as the "evil" republicans and Bush."

Hit the nail on the head.

hibeam April 3, 2014 at 3:24 pm

I'm pretty sure PolicyWonk is actually Barney Frank. Forcing the banks to make home loans to people without jobs, assets or income. Who could have possibly known that would end badly?

Reply

UAVgeek April 4, 2014 at 2:32 am

Except the Banks made out with record profits and scored an 800 billion dollar bailout on top of that.

mrlee April 4, 2014 at 5:36 am

The only thing that you left out, was that Warren Buffet and Bill gates support higher taxes for the wealthy. And those two are WEALTHY.

Reply

kiddy bear April 9, 2014 at 7:56 pm

PolicyWonk, who "sent all the jobs to Communist China"???

Look like you don't fully understand the meanings of the words "all", "jobs", and "Communist"

If you want to get hold of the root causes for America's irreversible fiscal nightmare, you might want to look elsewhere … the criminal phony "wars on terror", the colossal yet outrageously wasteful military spending year after year, the voracious greed of fraudulent Wall St bankers (Capitalists that you love so much), the lies and fake journalism of the press, the ignorant, uninformed and apathetic general population …

Reply

Maxtrue April 4, 2014 at 10:49 pm

Well, eventually Elon is going to have to build power stations to 1. get lower energy costs for building his own version of Russia's methane engines (which he has built for the Dragon), 2. supply power for his direct sales of his electric car 3. win over the people that have been bamboozled by the administration and Congress both in the pocket of the Western elite who want to control the playing field of their profits. If I were Musk I would hire the best personal security he can buy. Too bad there aren't more patriotic industrialists with any kind of balls or vision. I wouldn't count on the political system here supplying any themselves.

Reply

Talgat April 5, 2014 at 1:43 am

So true.
America desperately need truly patriotic industrialists.

Reply

Philippe Geril April 3, 2014 at 3:35 am

buy European launchers

Reply

mrlee April 4, 2014 at 5:38 am

The French seem to have a supply of launch vehicles.

Reply

Karen Jarman April 8, 2014 at 6:26 pm

Buy American! Fly American!

Reply

LPF April 3, 2014 at 4:11 am

Why not develop their own engines? ??

Reply

Stratege April 3, 2014 at 6:45 am

United Launch Alliance's CEO Mr. Gass:" The United States has fallen behind in propulsion technology, adding “when we went to Russia, there were things they were doing that we found in our text books were impossible.”

Reply

LPF April 3, 2014 at 9:17 am

From the country that built the Saturn five , that is a joke! , what he actually meant to say is "We could build them ourselves, but we could a buttload from our bonuses, by just buying the Russian designs"

Reply

Dfens April 3, 2014 at 4:11 pm

Bingo! There's nothing about those Russian rocket engines that hasn't been around for 50 years. I'm sure von Braun and the rest of "our Germans" were quite aware of the technology being incorporated into the Russian engines and they simply chose another way. Given the fact that our space program, at least when it was led by our Germans, was the envy of the world. I see no point in second guessing such a fantastically successful team. The smart thing would be to learn from them.

Reply

kiddy bear April 9, 2014 at 7:36 pm

Saturn V was a joke itself, in ways you would never have imagined.

Reply

Mitch S. April 3, 2014 at 4:08 pm

That's what you get when you buy textbooks from China!

Reply

blight_ April 3, 2014 at 10:12 am

The Russians owe us for saving their space program from the scrapheap in the '90s.

We smugly wrote the Russians off in the '90s, but they survived on our table scraps. Sure, there's a demographic hole that the Russians need to reverse, but for a brief moment in time it seems the Russians might bounce back.

Reply

Talgat April 5, 2014 at 1:40 am

As a person who was born and raised in Soviet Union and migrated to US, I was always fascinated by how naive is US government in understanding of Russia.
And of course Obama took that naiveness to ridiculous levels.

Anyone who speaks Russian and reads Russian media, knows what the public perception of US and Obama is out there.
In Russian mainstream media, any goodwill concession by US is heralded as an American defeat and inability of American people to produce anything even comparable to Russian achievements/technologies.

Obama is a favorite wuss boy in Russian speaking internet.

Reply

wtpworrier April 4, 2014 at 8:59 am

Because our engine makers were oursourced to Russia during the bush years, and besides, Congress cut the budget anyway.

Reply

Marc April 6, 2014 at 8:52 pm

The russians spent billions on this engine tech. It would be cheaper to do what the russians typically do, just "barrow" the tech.

Reply

John Riley Goldsmith April 9, 2014 at 7:04 pm

The Russian N-1 rocket motors and their follow-on motors are based on a technology American scientists thought was impossible. The way they burn rocket fuel makes them much more efficient with significantly more thrust. It would be a serious blunder to stop using them until we can come up with something that matches them.

Reply

voodkokk April 3, 2014 at 8:15 am

“They told me that two big American defense companies coming together instead of competing could lower costs through the alliance,” she said. “Well it turned out that year they couldn’t; the cost went up 60 percent.”

Wow and these are our elected officials. The only ones driving the bus are defense contractors.

Reply

Dfens April 3, 2014 at 4:14 pm

Exactly. That's what I've been saying too. It's time to take their remote away.

Reply

Bernard April 3, 2014 at 8:33 am

Elon Musk from SpaceX says "hi."

#buyAmerican

Reply

blight_ April 3, 2014 at 9:29 am

“The quicker we can get more companies qualified to compete, the better as far as I am concerned.”

SpaceX is coming. Eat your heart out ULA.

Reply

mrlee April 4, 2014 at 5:40 am

And don't forget the space elevator.

Reply

Dfens April 4, 2014 at 8:51 am

Just as soon as that miracle happens, we'll have a space elevator.

Reply

Mark April 3, 2014 at 10:27 am

Elon Musk called it before congress more than once.

Reply

Ben April 3, 2014 at 11:23 am

Did anyone watch that congressional hearing that pitted Elon against ULA's Michael Gass? It's basically an hour of Gass trying to confuse the committee with jargon and skirt around the issues while Elon throws it in his face.

The highlight, imo, is at 56:30 when the issue of "Mission Success" is brought up :)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O_azyt1JhI0

Reply

jack April 3, 2014 at 12:23 pm

Just another problem created by the amateur Obama and his Socialist Stooges.

Reply

mule April 3, 2014 at 2:07 pm

The first Atlas V's launch was in 2002. Yeah, totally Obama's fault…

Reply

sailor12 April 8, 2014 at 11:11 am

Anything in the world that goes wrong at any given point from year 0001 till now is Obama's fsault if you listen to some of this trash that is being spewed around the US.

Reply

shawn1999 April 11, 2014 at 12:01 pm

Yes, damn sheeple failing to realize that both parties are in collaboration to keep the rest of us in-fighting so we don't realize goals of both parties are fundamentally the same- keep the middle class as working slaves and appease the welfare class (democrats) or ignore them (republicans) while making sure they and theirs (both parties) have more than enough to stuff in their off-shore bank accounts and multiple estate residences.

Reply

BobSacamano April 3, 2014 at 12:36 pm

A few, 15 years or so ago, I was invited to Aerojet Corp. in Rancho Cordova, CA during an open house and an employee, a friend, gave me the informal tour. I saw the sealed chamber used to weld titanium, albeit, that's been vastly improved on, also what my tour guide claimed was an F-22 ****pit assembly sitting nearby, neat stuff.

Various things of interest were pointed out, remember this was very informal, an after-hour's tour and one thing I'll never forget was the Russian rocket motor sittin' there, the explanation of the the [diffuser] that the fuel and oxidizer is mixed through, with all the random oddly shaped holes and those holes are tried-n-true, fully tested and random is an understatement.

That motor always caused me confusion, confused as to why a Russian rocket motor was there, the go-to? Why don't we have the best rocket motors in the world, or just copy the best features of what-ever is considered the best?! America should have the best, shouldn't it?

Reply

Dfens April 3, 2014 at 4:16 pm

We have the best. The Saturn V's F1 engine is the best. No question about it.

Reply

blight_ April 3, 2014 at 4:23 pm
UAVGeek April 4, 2014 at 2:34 am

The F1 engine is getting a remake. Thank goodness.
http://arstechnica.com/science/2013/01/saturn-v-m

Reply

mrlee April 4, 2014 at 5:45 am

If we had a Russian engine from about 15 years ago, why haven't we copied it?

Reply

hibeam April 3, 2014 at 2:00 pm

Maybe the Muslim Mathematicians could design a rocket motor for us? It sure is a bummer that our bestest new friends ever did not pan out. Romney tried to warn Obama but Obama was too busy being a snarky know it all.

Reply

mule April 4, 2014 at 11:33 am

I really doubt Romney's warnings would have too much effect since the Atlas V had been flying on Russian rocket motors for 10 years already. Maybe he should have warned Bush.

Reply

SJE April 3, 2014 at 2:46 pm

I'd rather that we keep a commercial relationship with Russia for something like this that is not essential, and keeps the door open for a productive relationship in the future. Eventually, the Russians will tire of Putin, and we need to have connections.

Reply

Robert April 3, 2014 at 3:41 pm

U.S. Air Force….Just do it. To hell with the doubting few.

Reply

shawn1999 April 11, 2014 at 12:11 pm

Yes, blame only the AF, don't blame the companies that colluded with each other to raise the costs 60%, or the political dumb@$$es that most likely pushed the AF into making that deal because it was good for their campaign and/or wallet

Reply

Mark April 3, 2014 at 3:57 pm

There are great American companies now, Space x for one, that have shown they have the capability to do the same job cheaper.. Why we would outsource overseas is a mystery to me.. Let’s put goverment dollars behind American companies to promote business and tech development.. I have no doubt that if we decided to tomorrow to suspend all rocket business with Russia that American companies would step up to the plate…

Reply

Dfens April 3, 2014 at 4:19 pm

Damn straight! And the more we get the federal government out of the way, the more true free market companies would and could contribute.

Reply

Andy April 3, 2014 at 4:11 pm

We also buy 2 billions dollars worth of Russian helicopters…

Reply

Chris April 3, 2014 at 4:55 pm

Guess no one in Washington ever thought of this eventuality….. Too bad a nuke doesn't take out DC. We would all be better off.

Reply

Michael_AF_Ret April 3, 2014 at 6:08 pm

We need to make sure everyone is there from lobbyists to the President. But, it is one hell of an idea. And, we can put those term limits in for all political positions of one term for President. One 4 year term for Senators. Two 2 year terms for Representatives. And, one 8 year term for a Supreme Court Justice. And, charge the Supreme Court to intervene whenever the Constitution is not being followed. This waiting to hear lower court cases isn't what they are suppose to do.

Reply

Michael_AF_Ret April 3, 2014 at 6:02 pm

Costs are higher here in the US because of artificially high energy costs. It takes massive amounts of electricity to produce exotic materials. If you start with the food chain, food costs more because of fuel costs – planting, cultivating, fertilizing, harvesting, transportation, processing raw product, shipping raw product, and manufacturing the final product. Then it has to be warehoused, distributed via trucks and trains, and taken to the consumer. Result "higher" food costs. A family needs a minimum income to buy food, clothing, housing, and transportation. US firms have to offer a wage that is high enough to attract the best and insure they have the money for necessities. The economy needs wages high enough for discretionary spending. So, to get a nut and bolt for a rocket engine the necessary energy is far too high to make US manufacturers competitive. Until we stop holding back the energy sector, we are spinning our wheels in losing our economy.

Reply

Andy April 3, 2014 at 6:07 pm

OR MAY BE aMERICAN eNGINEER AND sCIENTICS are DUMP OR DUMPER?

Reply

Michael_AF_Ret April 3, 2014 at 9:10 pm

Assuming your statement are correct. That means that our school system is populated by a bunch of ignorant teachers that teach what they want and not what we need. Every school I've attended was demanding and the teachers wouldn't make excuses for a student's sub-par performance. If you failed the grade, you stayed until you passed it. No concern with "social stigma". Every kid knew what was expected and teachers "taught" – not build rapport. And, with that type of education you get engineers, scientists, physicists, etc…

Reply

mrlee April 4, 2014 at 6:00 am

Can you explain why we get so many bad spare part for our military from China? Can you explain why we get so many baby products from China that have to be recalled? Can you explain why the children in this country were not being taught anything about the Vietnam war? Even that it happened? Can you explain why most college grads can not write a comprehensive paragraph, when children in foreign countries are being taught foreign languages in kindergarten? Or why India is the largest English speaking country in the world? Can you answer these questions?

Reply

Michael_AF_Ret April 4, 2014 at 10:17 am

mrlee. I am a Vietnam Veteran! And, we had political leadership not military leadership. The boots on the ground had better tactical plans than were put forth by our military commanders that marched to Congress' appeasement of the "cowards" represented by their marches and their clinging to academia. Most of those people became teachers, lawyers, and politicians. The damage they have caused over the last 40 years is what you are experiencing. Our school systems and the children of these people have corrupted the very fabric of this Nation. I was raised in the late 40s, 50s and 60s when you were taught to read and write. You learned grammar and spelling. No calculators. As for the rest of your questions, I can tell you why. But, you would have to start school all over again. LOL. Sign me as a "Vietnam Vet Still Fighting For America"

kevin June 23, 2014 at 7:49 pm

If you're gonna go down that road than you have to include why recently we released 36,000 murders and rapists from prison only because they're ill-legal aliens and our president met with the Mexican President this week but failed to each mention anything about our Marine in their prison, just because he missed the turn-off before entering Mexico.

OUR ELECTED GOVERNMENTAL LEADERS ARE DYSFUNCTIONAL AND OUT OF TOUCH WITH THE SPIRIT THAT THIS COUNTRY WAS CREATED WITH!!!

bart April 3, 2014 at 8:37 pm

What engines power our strategic nuke forces… wouldn't that be ironic!

Reply

Deuterium2H April 4, 2014 at 2:11 am

No worries, bart.

All our strategic nukes use solid fuel main motors (e.g. first, second and third stages) –all made in the USA.

The Minuteman III stage one is manufactured by ATK, with upgraded second and third stage motors being furnished under the Propulsion Replacement Program. The fourth stage Propulsion System Rocket Engine (PSRE — post-boost, warhead bus) uses hypergolic bi-propellant liquid fuel for attitude and maneuvering corrections, and is manufactured by Aerojet.

The Trident D-5 SLBM's first and second stages are manufactured by Thiokol (ATK), and the third stage is by UTC. The Post Boost Controls System (PBCS) is manufactured by Aerojet.

Reply

JJ Murray April 4, 2014 at 7:51 am

You MORONS in Congress are the ones who outsourced our space program and now you FINALLY realize that it wasn't a good idea? Well sorry folks, it's going to be YEARS before the US can take that back and cots billions, more likely trillions, of dollars and YOU won't spend that money!

Reply

shawn1999 April 11, 2014 at 12:17 pm

Ah, finally someone hits the real crux of the matter. Amazing how they have no issues moaning and groaning about engines, but its perfectly OK to send our astronauts to Russia to depart/arrive to/from ISS and any other orbital requirements

Reply

wtpworrier April 4, 2014 at 8:54 am

"Lawmakers Question Air Force’s Use of Russian Rocket Engines"__________________________________From what I hear, it was the "lawmakers" that approved it, I doubt the Air Force did it on there own. But lets be fair, first you "lawmakers" cut the budget, then you authorized to use of Russian rockets, then you question the reason for using them…tell bohner, now thats a joke.

Reply

Atomic Walrus April 4, 2014 at 1:17 pm

The Russians continued to focus military rocket development on liquid fuels for decades after the US military switched to solid propellants. It's not surprising that recent engines are more advanced in some respects. Same thing with titanium metallurgy – the Russians have large supplies of titanium, and that led them to develop the technology further than the US where the metal was relatively exotic. The Soviets built entire submarines out of titanium, for example. On the other hand, I don't think anybody would point to Russian technology as exemplars for diesel engines or even aircraft gas turbines.

Reply

WarPony April 4, 2014 at 1:27 pm

This is TREASONOUS, right?

Reply

oblatt22 April 4, 2014 at 3:04 pm

NASA has been told to stop cooperating with the Russians except please still ask them to still bring our men back from the space station.

Putin must be laughing his ass off.

Reply

DBM April 4, 2014 at 6:24 pm

So spare parts are important. That means the engines are junk and have to be repaired before use. Its a miracle non of them have exploded at launch.

Reply

klops April 4, 2014 at 10:40 pm

Why is everyone ignoring SpaceX? Elon Musk is making AMERICAN engines in AMERICA for AMERICANS. He's built the engines! He can build more! And he does it cheaper! WHY isn't SpaceX our lead contractor for them? I don't understand.

Reply

Talgat April 5, 2014 at 1:51 am

In last decade, America has become a paper tiger by its own will.
US had more than enough to have full security in defence.
But why pay your own engineers???
Pay Russians and pocket huge profit.

Reply

ncb1397 April 7, 2014 at 2:29 pm

Outsourcing was such the rage back in the 90s. The generals and politicians just wanted to fit in with their corporate overlords.

Reply

Ed Silverman April 7, 2014 at 3:48 pm

We were the leader in Rocket technology and a huge manufacturing workforce creating millions of good jobs for our people. Now our administration has killed it and given it all away, to China and Russia. Its no wonder that we have such a high unemployement rate., Its time for our politicians to put America first !

Reply

Janice Bredfeldt April 9, 2014 at 6:43 pm

You are kidding, right??!!! Russian helicopters, Russian space transport, Russian rocket propulsion…what else?? Good grief, do we even have an American identity any more?! Me thinks the old adage feed your enemy and he will become your friend has been proven to be false! Again.

Reply

Douglas Boyd April 9, 2014 at 10:55 pm

In my opinion, the USA should supply its own engines. But, using Russian rocket engines gives our own people direct access to Russian technology. What do you think about that?? For every detriment there is usually a benefit, however, I must say that to me, MADE IN USA is much better because there is less unemployment when purchasing from USA factories. Why should US Taxpayers financially boost foreign governments and corporations while our own people depend on government (Taxpayer Funded) welfare handouts. What ever happened to the "Buy American Products" policy of the Taxpayer Funded Federal Government? Sounds to me like the feds hired wolves to guard the treasury hen house. That is my opinion and I will stick to it. db.

Reply

Carl May 22, 2014 at 7:22 pm

I do not believe it at all, no way would anyone with a reasonable mind should believe it. Russia has the only rockets that we need. No don't believe it

Reply

Dfens April 3, 2014 at 4:05 pm

I don't see that what PolicyWonk has to say really has anything to do with political parties. He is discussing real issues this nation is facing, issues that neither party are addressing except to make things worse for the rapidly dying out middle class. I personally think that if more people would vote based on issues instead of voting for parties we would see more candidates of substance running for office and our nation as a whole would be better off. Now we have two huge factions of voters who won't vote for anyone in the other party leaving all the real power in the ballot box to a small minority of swing voters.

Reply

shawn1999 April 11, 2014 at 11:56 am

Bush,

If you are going to paraphrase, please make sure you got the message correct first.

PW stated specifically "The congress could rescind these two massive mistakes [...] that they themselves screwed up"

Last time I checked, Bush was not a member of Congress at all at any time during 2001-2008. Clinton was. Obama was. Bush… not so much (I believe he held the title of "President").

There was a comment about unfunded wars as well, but again, let us remember that Congress AUTHORIZED these wars, so they are just as much at fault as anyone who promoted them (in other words, it may have been Bush's fault in this respect, but its not "All" his fault, as there is a whole group of individuals who share a great deal of the responsibility)

Reply

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: