Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Pentagon study faults US body armor in Iraq deaths
Reuters ^

Posted on 01/07/2006 4:53:06 AM PST by benjamin032

By Will Dunham Fri Jan 6, 11:19 PM ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Better body armor could have prevented or limited about 80 percent of fatal torso wounds suffered by Marines killed in Iraq, a report by U.S. military medical experts obtained on Friday said.

The report, conducted for the Marine Corps by the Office of the Armed Forces Medical Examiner and not released to the public, examined the cases of Marines fatally wounded from the start of the war in March 2003 through June 2005, and found weaknesses in the torso protective gear.

Bullets or shrapnel hit the Marines' shoulders, the sides of their torsos or other areas not fully covered by ceramic plates contained in the body armor in at least 74 of 93 fatal wounds examined in the study.

"Either a larger plate or superior protection around the plate would have had the potential to alter the fatal outcome," the study stated.

Critics in the U.S. Congress have accused the Pentagon of failing to provide the best possible body armor and armored vehicles for American troops fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan. But military officials have defended the protective gear provided for troops as well as the quality of vehicles.

(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...


TOPICS: Government
KEYWORDS: aftermathanalysis; bodyarmor; dod; equipment; gear; ied; iraq; oif
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-31 last
To: Non-Sequitur

' The fact that body armor isn't widely available in the color most likely to be used is an indication that it isn't a high priority item to the military.'

Body armor was most likely to be worn in exercises before this present war. The green plate carrier reflects that. Tons of green, camo and otherwise is purchased yearly. If there isn't a desert tan carrier available in YOUR size, do you forgo body armor use or opt for green?


21 posted on 01/07/2006 7:52:31 AM PST by xone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Future Snake Eater
"A mortar round blew up a tree near one of the operators and a splinter from the tree pierced his heart, killing him instantly. A complete waste of a well-trained warrior. Nowadays, such losses are minimized."

We had body armor back then that would protect you from this kind of shrapnel wound, but we elected not to wear it. For every ounce of weight you carried on your body, you sacrificed a certain amount of mobility, and lack of mobility would kill a recon team much quicker than the occasional bits of shrapnel ever could.

22 posted on 01/07/2006 8:29:28 AM PST by DJ Taylor (Once again our country is at war, and once again the Democrats have sided with our enemy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur

No, they're not as minimized as they could be, but it gets to the point where you have to decide just how much mobility you're willing to sacrifice for a little extra protection here and there. The IBA is definitely more restrictive than an LBE, but it's not that bad, and, given the tremendous amount of protection afforded because of it, we're more than willing to make the trade-off. Now, there's also a lot of attachments for the IBA (throat protector, shoulder pads, groin pad, etc.) that add a little extra protection, but it starts to affect your mobility. Now, mobility on foot is not nearly as big a need for us now in Iraq as it was in, say, Vietnam, but there gets to be a point where you say, "No more armor. Let me be able to move, and I'll take my chances." Part of the Future Combat System is nanotech armor that wears like clothing but immediately solidifies when hit by a high speed object. That technology does exist now (although I think it's limited only to metal objects). Once that becomes fully viable, we can have entire suits made of it with little effect on mobility.

It's all just part of a trade-off. Me, personally? I'd prefer to be able to skip a full Kevlar suit of armor so I can still perform my job.


23 posted on 01/07/2006 10:04:03 AM PST by Future Snake Eater (The plan was simple, like my brother-in-law Phil. But unlike Phil, this plan just might work.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Future Snake Eater
Since I know several people who have taken AK rounds in the lethal zones of their body's but for the IBA, I am a huge proponent of wearing it. Since I joined almost 2 decades ago we have gotten almost paranoid about force protection. We would have lost many more warriors if it were not for the advances in personal and vehicle armor.
The real question is, who "released" this report? Why not skip the middle man and e-mail the findings to the Al Queda? Maybe paint the vulnerable areas orange. Somebody has further endangered our servicemen and they won't be held accountable. Reuters should be hauled into court, criminal court, the next time a soldier dies from a wound in an unprotected area. How reckless can they be? And how long until they pay for it?
24 posted on 01/07/2006 12:27:29 PM PST by benjamin032
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: benjamin032
I dunno, talked with my son last weekend. One of his buds took a sniper round in the chest. SAPI plate stopped it cold, knocked him on his ass mind you, but he lived thru it.

Could they wear more, maybe. WOULD they wear more? Likely not.

I have seen several cases where soldiers have died because they left out their back plate to save on weight.
25 posted on 01/07/2006 2:07:58 PM PST by ASOC (The result of choosing between the lesser of two evils, in the end, leaves you with, well, evil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ASOC

I trust the armor, love it. I hate the unpatriotic idiots who say it's poor leadership that anyone died.


26 posted on 01/07/2006 2:34:37 PM PST by benjamin032
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: benjamin032

The release of this information to the public sounds like another leak, but the contents of the findings do raise a few eyebrows. Do soldiers have options on what they can or cannot wear or are those decisions made by superiors?


27 posted on 01/07/2006 3:43:21 PM PST by WillT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: WillT

Commanders allow almost no flexibility in the force protection methods. I firmly believe that we have the best in equipment and technology. Ask a member of any other military in the world. We have armor that will stop a 7.62 mm! What else do they want.


28 posted on 01/07/2006 4:31:09 PM PST by benjamin032
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

My brother returned from Iraq last week. My cousin was killed in Iraq in August. So, I am extremely distressed that the Democrats are using body armor once again to attack the President and the war.

How can these people claim they are supporting the war when they attack everything being done? War is Hell. People die. I'm sad my cousin is dead. I'm happy my brother is home safe. Using the death and injury of our troops as a political football is disgusting.

Here's a typical liberal scum attack.

I'm at my wit's end in that I am completely lost about how to support our troops and the war.

So what do we / I do to demonstrate my support in a way that will have some real impact? Bumper stickers, yard signs, and tee-shirts are fine. But, I want to do more in honor of my brother for fighting and my cousin for dying a hero.

29 posted on 01/08/2006 12:37:52 PM PST by proudtobeconservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Terabitten; benjamin032
bump!

HILLARY'S ARMOR: A decades-old story...



for the birds
(THE INCOMPETENCE OF HILLARY CLINTON)



30 posted on 01/11/2006 3:12:43 PM PST by Mia T (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations (The acronym is the message.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Mia T

Thanks for the bump. She is evil incarnate.


31 posted on 01/11/2006 6:09:37 PM PST by benjamin032
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-31 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson