[FRMAG]

The fact is, was, and will remain that the Hummer is simply an upgraded jeep which, like the original jeep was introduced to replace the horse. The damn things were never intended to serve in the front lines as they are being called on to do today.

The armored versions were intended for issue to MPs one of whose missions is patrol in urban areas. Even the armored versions were never designed to withstand land mines and command detonated mines. Only small arms fire. To expect that every single grunt will ride to the fight in an armored vehicle thats up to the threat is foolishness.

When boots on the ground cling to vehicles they are not being used as their training and experience dictates.

[JasonC]

When men on the ground do not fight the way their training dictates, they are following their experience instead, and usually something is wrong with the training. Spec 4s rummaging through Iraqi junk yards for sheet metal are a clear sign the boys back at the Pentagon who decided nobody would need a Bradley let alone an M-1 were just flat wrong.

[Cannoneer No. 4]

To expect that every single grunt will ride to the fight in an armored vehicle thats up to the threat is foolishness.

Exactly. I have been trying to make that point for months, but there is so much emotionalism involved. So many people seem to feel it is criminal negligence not to give the 18 through 25 year olds whatever they ask for, but have no idea what a Modified Table Of Equipment is, or a Basis of Issue Plan, or a Fielding Initiative, or New Equipment Training. In my humble opinion neither privates nor Senators should be deciding force structure and hardware issues. It is a sad commentary on the state of affairs that people like Teddy Kennedy and John Kerry and Robert Byrd and Evan Bayh and Hillary Clinton are thought by some to know what is best for the Army better than the Army itself does.