[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.

[FRMAG]

I was in transportation and logistics for most of my 26 year career and the troops seldom have what the want but almost always have what they need.

The issue if deployability is a valid one and the methods are fixed. If you go boots on the ground anyplace in the world in 72 hours air is the only way to go and it becomes a choke point because to land an aircraft withany realy lift capability yo need a developed runway thats in a secure area.

One of the major problems with Stryker is and has been cramming one into a C130 which can use semiimproved runways. No problem with loading the vehicles on larger aircraft such as a C5 which can ever swollow an M1 (provided you can talk the tread heads into shucking the huge load of crap they insist on loading on their tracks)

Non logistics types can't see this as a factor. However its said that every general has a logistician riding around on his shoulder whispering in his ear "you can't do that."