Two seat version is a cargo/shelter carrier. The four seat variant, depending how it is fitted out is a command, communication, general combat, or antitank vehicle.
Not Obama’s fault. JLTV began development in the early/mid-2000s. And a lot of its “problems” derive from the requirement to deliver MRAP levels of under armor crew protection in something smaller than an MRAP or an MRAP-All Terrain Vehicle (MATV). To get a perspective on this, there are pictures around the Internet showing the four vehicles (MRAP, MATV, JLTV, and the latest armored HMMWV side by side. The size differences are startling.
The sad part is that the protective technology being used (standoff combined with dense steel armor plate) is really just a modern version of what has been used since the 1940s. There is so much new armor technology under development now (liquid armor, armor foam, lightweight high density steel, etc.) that could go a long way to addressing the weight issue. But, if JLTV is really is delivering at an all up $400k unit price, how can the services walk away from their capital investment in 10, 20, 30, 40, 50 thousand vehicles when the new technologies are ready?
Keep in mind that the JLTV predecessor, HMMWV, began fielding in the 1980s. There will still be tens of thousands of units on duty with both services well into the 2030s; nearly 50 years after adoption. (Unlike B-52s, these still-in-service HMMWVs will not be 45-50 years old. They will be, for the most part, the latest armored variants manufactured in the 2000-2010+ timeframe.) If the services over invest in JLTV, they may be cutting off all new technology light tactical vehicle development for the next....50 years?
In the 60s and 70s, we had 1/4 ton trucks in a variety of configurations, from command and control, forward observer, scout, machine gun, anti-tank, radio relay, etc. It had a handy, 1/4 ton trailer we could configure in a variety of ways.
We had a 3/4 truck for larger applications, including communications shelters.
What replaced them has done poorly. Again, the “One-size-fits-all”, which started with the ATF under McNamara (who also gave us the M-151 1/4 ton widow-maker, instead of the Jeep CJ product), continues to result in substandard successes, if not abject failures.