how we honor our soldiers..

[sq764]

Soldiers required to pay for their own body armor.. unreal

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=519&e=3&u=/ap/20040607/ap_on_re_us/iraq_body_armor_1

[schweitz]

Originally posted by sq764
Soldiers required to pay for their own body armor.. unreal

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=519&e=3&u=/ap/20040607/ap_on_re_us/iraq_body_armor_1

Nobody was required to buy body armor---according to the story, some went ahead and did buy, even though they were not going to be put in an area where they needed it until more body armor became available. Which it now is.

[Secretariat]

This was an issue brought up last year. Isbets assured that everyone would have the armor by the end of December. I asked him about that not that long ago and he said everybody has it now. The question is the type of body armor and is it the best you can buy. Some is much more protective than other forms. It is also true we needed better plating on the armored vehicles.

I hope that article is wrong and all the armor was there in January as Isbets said it would be.

[JustRalph]

The point that needs to be made here is this: The body armor with the appropriate specifications was not available and could not be produced fast enough to keep up with demand. The body armor that the Troops were buying on their own was not up to the specs required in the War Zone. As one who has worn body armor and went through some testing on some of it, I can tell you that different brands and specs mean a great deal. I guess had I been going I would have bought a lesser product as did these guys. Until the good stuff comes in........... it would be better than nothing.........

[Tom]

Gotta disagree.
It COULD have been made available amzingly fast.
Did it for WWII.
Did they work 24-7?
If not, they have no excuses.
Our troops are over there 24-7-nothing less than that at home is acceptable.
Where is the outrage over this?
Oh, I forgot, the libs HOPE they have it now.
But they DEMAND answers for putting undies on some slug's head.
Must some of those guys PA refered to.

[lsbets]

All I got out of this story is that everyoone has the body armor, and that in March some soldiers headed- key word headed - for Iraq were buying the body armor before they got in country where it would be issued. The article didn't say the armor wasn't here, it said people bought it before they came here. There was no need for anyone coming over for OIF II to buy the body armor, because everyone is issued it before they head north from Kuwait. Its pretty simple - you are not allowed to cross the border without it.

Now, I do take issue with Secretariat's tone here. He seems to be questioning my integrity when I said that everyone in Iraq has the body armor. Soldiers in Kuwait don't need it, so they do not concern me. I will assure you of one thing Sec - as a commisioned officer, integrity is everything to me. If my soldiers did not have what they needed, I would yell louder than anyone. I am the one putting my life on the line everyday over here, and t the last thing in the world I want to hear is someone with a political agenda trying to make an issue out of something that is simply a non issue. Back in the 90s I screamed louder than anyone about the shortage of training ammunition because our budget had been cut so deep. My soldiers could only shoot their weapons once a year! I don't care about making the Army look good, I care about bringing my soldiers home alive. How many times do you have to hear the truth before you believe it? Everyone in Iraq has the new body armor with SAPI plates.

We need better plating on the armored vehicles? Where did you come up with that one? The armor on our vehicles works great. I know from first hand experience, not from some AP atricle. My driver would not be alive today if it were not for his armored doors. Two of my soldiers had roadside bombs explode right next to their vehicles and walked away unscathed. Are there some vehicles without armor? Absolutely. I can assure you, those vehicles have been configured that way long before this war started, and the armor shops are working around the clock to get everyone fully up armored. It is very, very rare to see a vehicle without armor out on the road, the majority of vehicles with no armor are used to get around on a base. Does every vehicle have armor? No. Does every vehicle need armor? No. How long have humvees been made without armor? Since they were introduced into the Army inventory, a long time before Bush became President. Have any previous administrations done anything to armor up humvees? No. Has the Bush administration? Yes. Has it taken a long time to get everything armored up? Yes, but priority was placed on those vehicles that would be in harms way on a regular basis.

And I will also assure you of one other thing. When I get home if some idiot stood in front of me and accused me of not doing everything that I could to take care of my soldiers and accused me of not speaking the truth because I did not want to make the Army look bad, then an Iraqi would probably not be the last man that I killed.

Does it sound like I am angry? Yes, I am. I am so sick of the left in America spewing their crap. My family sacrifices for our great nation,and all they do is sit around and spit out crap they know to be untrue because they want to get back in power. I am sick of it. They disgust me. Do I lump all Democrats in that category? No, not at all. I think only a small number of Democrats fit into that category. Most people there are way to the left of mainstream Dems, and give the sane majority of that party a bad name. Who would I put in that category? Well, I would start with the senior Senator from Mass. Who would I leave out of that category? This will probably shock some people - Hillary. I have developed a grudging respect for her. Whether she has taken her stances for political purposes or out of genuine belief, she has handled herself with dignity as one of the leaders in the Democratic party. Old Teddy should take some lessons from her, and maybe Sec should too.

[Suff]

Originally posted by lsbets

Does it sound like I am angry? Yes, I am. I am so sick of the left in America spewing their crap. My family sacrifices for our great nation,and all they do is sit around and spit out crap they know to be untrue because they want to get back in power. I am sick of it. They disgust me. .

Isbet

You gotta get yourself a little R & R. Take a deep breath. John Kerry did two tours in Nam... and killed viet cong to defend his country. He was wounded 3 times and has been in public service for 25 years. The man is an A #1 Patriot. Fact.

Stay safe. Thanks for your service

Suff

[lsbets]

Suff,

Did I say Kerry? No. Did I say Teddy? Yes. Teddy is the senior Senator from your state. I haven't made up my mind on Kerry yet. While I admire his service in Vietnam I have serious misgivings about his actions afterwards, as do many vets. But, like I said I have not made up my mind on him yet (as a man that is). I obviously disagree with most of his policy positions, but do not know yet how I feel about him as a person. Have I made up my mind on Teddy? Yes. A disgrace to a distinguished family.

[Secretariat]

Originally posted by lsbets

Now, I do take issue with Secretariat's tone here. He seems to be questioning my integrity when I said that everyone in Iraq has the body armor.

We need better plating on the armored vehicles? Where did you come up with that one?

Does it sound like I am angry? Yes, I am. I am so sick of the left in America spewing their crap.

Isbets,

First the tone you're reading is your own interpretation. My concern was for soldiers. I'm not challenging your integrity, only responding to an article that says "soldiers NOW have body armor" which is coming out in June six months after December.

Second, the better plating came from General Meyers before Congress. Maybe he has it wrong.

Look, Isbets, I realize we're on different political sides of the fence. But denigrating liberals in general over our opposition to the war is wasted energy. Do I want every soldier to come back alive, every soldier to be safe. You're goddamn right I do. I was in the service too. Because we disagree on policy doesn't mean I don't want our soldiers thoroughly protected. And because I hear General Meyers say we need better plating on our vehicles, or see an Associated Press article alluding that it is only NOW that we have body armor concerns me precisley because I am concerned about our troops. Whether you like it or not I am interested in you and your men's survival more than to any bumps to your ego or integrity. That was not my intention or concern.

[lsbets]

Sec,

I do not denigrate all liberals over their opposition to the war. There are many liberals whom I respect. I denigrate the far left over their opposition to America.

Do you have the quote from General Meyers? You seem to have a link to everything else. Did he say we need better plating or more plating? If his words were better what was the context? Was he talking about humvees wuth canvas doors that needed to be uparmored? Then I would agree with better. Armor is better than canvas.

The same article appeared in todays Stars and Stripes, with much less editing than at Yahoo. It gave numbers on the vehicles that had been armored up, and was not editied to make it sound like soldier's had to buy armor. Someone needs to send that Yahoo editor to journalism school, because the same article is very, very different without his editing. It is a clear example of bias in the media.

[GameTheory]

Originally posted by lsbets
Someone needs to send that Yahoo editor to journalism school, because the same article is very, very different without his editing. It is a clear example of bias in the media. Where do you think he learned that? Journalism school. If we could have lawyers that could avoid law school and journalists that avoid journalism school, we'd probably be better off...

[lsbets]

PA,

Can I nominate Game Theory's post for post of the week and/or month? He hit the nail on the head.

[Secretariat]

Originally posted by lsbets
Sec,

I do not denigrate all liberals over their opposition to the war. There are many liberals whom I respect. I denigrate the far left over their opposition to America.

Do you have the quote from General Meyers? You seem to have a link to everything else. Did he say we need better plating or more plating? If his words were better what was the context? Was he talking about humvees wuth canvas doors that needed to be uparmored? Then I would agree with better. Armor is better than canvas.

The same article appeared in todays Stars and Stripes, with much less editing than at Yahoo. It gave numbers on the vehicles that had been armored up, and was not editied to make it sound like soldier's had to buy armor. Someone needs to send that Yahoo editor to journalism school, because the same article is very, very different without his editing. It is a clear example of bias in the media.

I also denigrate any political persuasion over their opposition to America. But the differing points of view on what patriotism and what America's best interests are is very different among people.

I was watching General Myers to the House Armed Services Committee I beleive where Republican Chair Hunter Thompson was taking the procurement system to task, and General Myers was in attendance, and agreed.

I don't have a transcript but a lot of links as to the fall out of that hearing (in April I think).

Here's some of the links since you asked (notice CJ, he did ask for links). Yes, armor is better than canvass. In fact the type of armor being used now is only 1/2th the strength that it should be according to these articles.

Hunter Thompson in Wall Street Journal

http://www.opinionjournal.com/columnists/bminiter/?id=110005033

Myers on deploying better armor on Humvees

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1146236/posts

Kerry and acting Army Secretary Les Brownlee

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A35978-2004Mar6.html

A couple of other links as well

http://www.rense.com/general48/plat.htm

http://www.keepmedia.com/ShowItemDetails.do?itemID=460175&extID=10032&oliID=213

[lsbets]

Sec,

I read the first two links, whick seemed to be the most relevant. the better armor issue is exactly what I said - canvas doors versus uparmored doors. General Meyers said we need more uparmored humvees. Duh! The soldiers in the field have been saying this since humvees were first introduced. Many Marine humvees have a different kind of armor on them, and I have no idea how well that armor works, so i cannot comment on if it is half as thick as it needs to be. I also can't comment on why they have different armor, but my experience here, as someone who has spent a fair amount of time with the Marines, is that the Army and Marines don't play nice with each other. Ether the Army bumped them to the bottom of the waiting list for armor, or the Marines decided to do it themselves and not get any help from the Army. Either way, I don't know, but I would guess it was one or the other. I can only comment on the armor the Army has put on its vehicles, and as I said before, there are no complaints here - we know firsthand how well it works.

[Lefty]

If Kerry had had his way probably no body armor for anyone. He voted agaist the 87 billion. I can only suspect that maybe some of that money buys body armor.

[Secretariat]

Originally posted by lsbets
Sec,

I read the first two links, whick seemed to be the most relevant. the better armor issue is exactly what I said - canvas doors versus uparmored doors. General Meyers said we need more uparmored humvees. Duh! The soldiers in the field have been saying this since humvees were first introduced. Many Marine humvees have a different kind of armor on them, and I have no idea how well that armor works, so i cannot comment on if it is half as thick as it needs to be. I also can't comment on why they have different armor, but my experience here, as someone who has spent a fair amount of time with the Marines, is that the Army and Marines don't play nice with each other. Ether the Army bumped them to the bottom of the waiting list for armor, or the Marines decided to do it themselves and not get any help from the Army. Either way, I don't know, but I would guess it was one or the other. I can only comment on the armor the Army has put on its vehicles, and as I said before, there are no complaints here - we know firsthand how well it works.

My only concern was that soldiers get the best of protection. As you know Duncan Hunter is a staunch conservative who has never voted on a liberal issue, so when he is described as “obviously angry” as in the May 2004 Wall Street Journal piece something is amiss. I saw the hearing and “obviously angry” was an understatement.

Here is Hunter’s quote:
“The delay "has nothing to do with legislation, nothing to do with requisition problems. The problem here is a "big, soggy, bureaucratic" acquisition process. And that process has only gotten worse over the last couple of decades. The biggest problem is that no one is held accountable if soldiers in the field don't get the gear they need. The end result can be seen in the plywood and sandbags soldiers are now using in Iraq in a vain attempt to armor their vehicles against small-arms fire and "improvised explosive devices." “

When the Marines shipped out two months ago, every one of their more than 4,000 vehicles had at least some armor plating. Although many of the steel plates are half as thick as they need to be, the Marines are already reporting the armor they have in place is stopping shrapnel and presumably saving lives.

From the other article I gathered that the new Humvee request is for more heavily armored vehicles rather than the makeshift “up-armored” ones.

“The U.S. Central Command may request ``several thousand'' more heavily armored Humvee transports for Iraq operations to help minimize growing casualties from snipers and roadside bombs, according to Army and Pentagon officials.
The extra vehicles would be in addition to the roughly 4,400 so-called ``Up-Armored'' Humvees the Army already deemed necessary, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Richard Myers told the House Armed Services Committee May 21.

I do remember one of the issues being the weight of the up-armored vehicles and the difficulty in maintenance. They went into private hearings on that issue.

[Secretariat]

Originally posted by Lefty
If Kerry had had his way probably no body armor for anyone. He voted agaist the 87 billion. I can only suspect that maybe some of that money buys body armor.

Yes Lefty. Kerry did vote against he 87 billion. Let's face it he was in a Catch 22. If he votes for the bill carte blanche he will be accused of supporting the policy of the war. If he votes against it he can proclaim as he is, that he was duped by the intentions of the President to work with the UN instead of engaging in a unilateral action.

Kerry has said the vote was a protest to the admisntration's policy, but Bush has spun this into Kerry being against body armor for soldiers. Nothing is more absurd, and political. Do you honestly beleive Kerry does not want body armor for our soldiers? Get real.

[Lefty]

Im saying he cares more about politics than supporting our troops. That's what i'm saying and if it wasn't true he would put politics aside and vote for the money. He did vote for the war ya know. So the spin is all his, and now, yours.

[Tom]

Originally posted by Lefty
If Kerry had had his way probably no body armor for anyone. He voted agaist the 87 billion. I can only suspect that maybe some of that money buys body armor. But he voted for it before he voted against it. :rolleyes:

[JustRalph]

Originally posted by Secretariat
Here is Hunter’s quote:
“The delay "has nothing to do with legislation, nothing to do with requisition problems. The problem here is a "big, soggy, bureaucratic" acquisition process. And that process has only gotten worse over the last couple of decades.

Yep...he is right. It is a bureaucratic piece of crap. It has to be. If you don't go through the nightmare process and choose to hire a company the same way civilians choose a guy to remodel a kitchen, somebody will pop up and accuse you of favortism and hiring because someone in your cabinet used to work for them etc.....etc.....etc......not to mention the requirements that you use a minority company in 3 out of ten contracts........So, Screaming and hollering about Halliburton feeds this kind of bureaucracy. It cuts both ways, and it makes things a mess. It has been like this for years. Remember those $700 dollar toilet seats for the C-5 Aircraft? The investigation by Congress showed that 65% of the cost was in the paperwork and hoop jumping required by the contractors who were bidding on the contracts.

[Secretariat]

Originally posted by Tom
But he voted for it before he voted against it. :rolleyes:

We get it Tom, you obviously can parrot a Bush political ad which again tells only a half truth. (Read my above post)

[doophus]

Originally posted by Secretariat
Yes Lefty. Kerry did vote against he 87 billion. Let's face it he was in a Catch 22. If he votes for the bill carte blanche he will be accused of supporting the policy of the war. If he votes against it he can proclaim as he is, that he was duped by the intentions of the President to work with the UN instead of engaging in a unilateral action.

Kerry has said the vote was a protest to the admisntration's policy, but Bush has spun this into Kerry being against body armor for soldiers. Nothing is more absurd, and political. Do you honestly beleive Kerry does not want body armor for our soldiers? Get real. JR.....Isn't this the proper definition/description of LEADERSHIP?

[schweitz]

Originally posted by Secretariat
[B]Yes Lefty. Kerry did vote against he 87 billion. Let's face it he was in a Catch 22. If he votes for the bill carte blanche he will be accused of supporting the policy of the war. If he votes against it he can proclaim as he is, that he was duped by the intentions of the President to work with the UN instead of engaging in a unilateral action.



Good job of summing up of what Kerry is all about.

[Tom]

Originally posted by schweitz
Good job of summing up of what Kerry is all about.

If you throw an extra twenty at a hooker, she will dance any dance you want her to.