Up-Armored Humvees Still a Priority

DefendAmerica News ^ | dec2003 | U.S. Army Spc. Samuel A. Soza

[Cannoneer No. 4]

Have we become so casualty averse that requiring a soldier to perform his duty in an unarmored vehicle is now considered cruel and unusual punishment? Is there now an entitlement program guaranteeing each soldier the right to be bulletproof?

Force protection cannot be the primary focus of military operations.

[Support Free Republic]

Donate Here By Secure Server

[Teacher317]

Have we become so casualty averse that requiring a soldier to perform his duty in an unarmored vehicle is now considered cruel and unusual punishment?

Only when a Republican is in office.

Is there now an entitlement program guaranteeing each soldier the right to be bulletproof?

Possibly, for women and minorities, given a few more years and court cases.

Force protection cannot be the primary focus of military operations.

True, but it is nice to have it as a medium-sized priority. We won't ever return to the WWI-style logic of throwing bodies at fized positions... but I agree, it can be taken too far sometimes. I'm not sure that the Humvee armor is an example, however.

[Cannoneer No. 4]

ping

[Cannoneer No. 4]

While mounted, I think what the light-skinned HMMWVs sacrificed in protection, they gained in the crew's mobility and ability to scan.

[Cannoneer No. 4]

Armored Humvees in my opinion are not the answer.

The way to be safe is to have the ability to dismount quickly and maneuver against the ambush

[Iris7]

Sorry, old boy, you are completely and utterly wrong. There is nothing more detrimental to morale than to come to believe that your military superiors don't care about your survival. Been there, done that. You obviously have not.

Tell you what, how about someone shooting at you with an AK - would you want armor? Yes? And I told you, as your officer, that you don't need armor, because who cares if you are hurt, anyway? Lots more just like you where you came from, so suck it up! Sounds good, huh?

Besides, $1500 is dirt cheap. The guy making these kits isn't making any money.

[Iris7]

To manuever against an ambush is a different problem. There are very few ambushes of vehicles in Iraq, and a lot of directional mines. The best design available, as I see it, is the Israeli RAM type vehicle.

[doug from upland]

This is good news. I hope they can make them faster.

[Ahban]

Did you notice that the company making them was HQed in Kirkuk? That is in the Kurdish region, our staunchest allies besides the tiny Christian minority. I found that interesting. Iraqi infrastructure is producing those kits. With the cost of labor there, I think they ARE making money on the kits- and loving what they do!

[Happy2BMe]

My son's Company does vehicle maintenance for the 7th ID and will be a festering thorn in the side of Saddam's loyalists come February or so.

I'll keep ya posted. If you want pics, FReepmail me.

[Iris7]

No, did not notice this armor is from Kirkuk. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. Perhaps the same firm could also help the installation program move more quickly.

The Kurds are going to get most of what they want, and absolutely deserve to. I predicted this back when the Turks decided they weren't going to cooperate. Independent Kurdistan is a very real possibility. Turks have only themselves to blame.

The Aramaic speaking Christians have held out under 1350 years of brutal pressure, and have my respect. I hope our people take very good care of them.

[Cannoneer No. 4]

I have never served in a unit in which my superiors didn't care about my survival. I see no need to apologize for that. You obviously suffered under poor leadership. My sympathies.

You say I am wrong. In what way?

What the soldiers want should not be the primary concern. The Army ain't Burger King. They don't always get it their way. Everybody doesn't get to be 19K's.

If I am taking AK fire I want armor a whole lot less than I want firepower. Armor will not make him quit shooting at me. Me killing him will.

What is more important, accomplishing the mission or avoiding casualties? Armor is not always the answer.

Casualty Aversion is driving this armor entitlement mentality.

[Ragtime Cowgirl]

TIKRIT, Iraq — For soldiers conducting missions outside the walls of Forward Operating Base Ironhorse, Humvees, canvas-covered, or soft-back, may not be the best protection on the road.

In an effort to improve the protection of these soldiers, improvised armor kits are being assembled for four-passenger Humvees at FOB Ironhorse.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Made in Iraq.

[VOA]

Besides, $1500 is dirt cheap. The guy making these kits isn't making any money.

And I suspect the long hours of sweat in the armoring shop probably are actually
a bit of a morale lift.
The guys doing the fitting probably feel like their sweat will mean less blood,
and while worn out at the end of a day, they probably have that "good kind of tired".

If the $1,500 fitting yields decent results, the soldiers involved should
get some sort of meritorious notice.

Bet some stateside contractors hope that gets squelched!

[Iris7]

Well, I am certainly glad that your opinion in this matter is of such complete inconsequence. You make Robert McNamara and Lyndon Johnson look like real leaders.

[Iris7]

Any possibility you can become a casualty? One hopes? We will see then if you develop "casualty aversion". Anybody who talks as you do should be walking point, and the rest of the folks behind you, backing you up, should go home. Ah, but justice is so rare, and so hard to accomplish.

This "casualty aversion" stuff is pure stay at home, armchair warrior baloney. Actually much stronger language is warranted. How about insane? Irresponsible beyond any understanding? Foolish beyond foolish?

I have seen it. You have not. Your opinion is not worthy of any respect. Again, much stronger language is warranted.

[Alamo-Girl]

Bump!

[Kevin Curry]

There is a balance to be struck here. No one is saying soldiers are disposable, just that there is a tendency to get caught up in making a dangerous profession risk-free, that, when taken too far, can interfere with and compromise the mission. This excess of caution and the hesitation that comes of can actually result in greater danger, more deaths, poorer morale, and--ultimately--failure.

The difference is the difference between the failure of a McClellan and the success of a Patton.

My opinion is, this attempt to lightly armor the Humvees is reasonable. However, the desire that spurs it must be carefully monitored to ensure it doesn't spread beyond the reasonable and rational and become a morale-destroying infection of the emotional and irrational.

[Cannoneer No. 4]

Inconsequential as my opinion is, it equals yours in importance.