Posted on 01/07/2006 4:53:06 AM PST by benjamin032
' 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?
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.
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.
I trust the armor, love it. I hate the unpatriotic idiots who say it's poor leadership that anyone died.
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?
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.
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.
HILLARY'S ARMOR: A decades-old story...
for the birds
(THE INCOMPETENCE OF HILLARY CLINTON)
Thanks for the bump. She is evil incarnate.
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.