In order for this to be a straw man argument, one of the arguers must have distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented the other arguers true position. Have you any examples of such misrepresentation?
No Spec 4s prowled Iraqi junkyards for sheet metal.
"100% invulnerable military force" "entitled to an armored vehicle" "if we let that notion take hold we can't fight wars anymore. I think that is what some people have in mind." "people seem to feel it is criminal negligence not to give the 18 through 25 year olds whatever they ask for" "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"
When the actual argument on the other side was and is - "Latest word from the field is that the armored hummers are not effective against the RPGs and bombs that are killing them. We need bradleys, tanks, strykers, and old apcs...The israelis sent the correct answer. Use real armor first". And "a wise commander wants some of everything: light, middle, heavy. There are different uses for each. The idea to streamline and go totally light and middle is unrealistic."
The actual argument the other side is making in this debate is much more reasonable than the position you have directed your comments again. That is exactly what the straw man fallacy is.
As for ad hoc up-armoring, I hear it told differently. Some examples -
"Their Humvee was a regular, soft skin vehicle that had been modified by local contractors with steel plate, known to the troops as a 'Hadji Hardshell.' You see a lot of them around, with boiler plate bolted or welded on in a hodge-podge of different styles and configurations. All of them emergency field modifications concocted as things turned hostile over the last year. The protection they provide is dubious at best..."
And "Over the last couple months, as the Iraqi resistance has gotten much more dangerous, the US military has been frantically trying to armor up all of their vehicles. So you can see what were once olive-drab army vehicles turned into these multi-colored monstrosities. As their APC’s and tanks keep getting blown up, the Americans have to take any face-hardened steel plating available and start welding...Now you see these improvised fighting machines all over Iraq. Once painted with that solid olive drab color, they are now patchworks of red, black and green, with random pieces of metal sticking off everywhere, bristling with guns. They look incredibly bizarre. I call it the Mad Max Rolling Sideshow."
Some of it is still being done stateside "The Army has been scrambling to put armor on its Humvees in Iraq, but (U.S. Rep.) Simmons has also been pushing for action on the trucks as well, which are used to transport large numbers of troops. Hunter said after Simmons demanded action on the armor shortage the Army realized it could take leftover 3/16th inch armor from its Stryker armored vehicle program and modify it for the trucks. The armor is being cut and drilled into kits that can be assembled inside the trucks, with a 6-inch space between the outer skin of the truck that can be filled with sand."
"Fearing roadside bombs and sniper bullets, members of the U.S. Army Reserve's 428th Transportation Company turned to a local steel fabricator to fashion extra armor for their five-ton trucks and Humvees before beginning their journey to Iraq earlier this month. But their armor might not make it into the war, because the soldiers did not obtain Pentagon approval for their homemade protection...The 72 vehicles operated by the 428th are not designed for battle. They have thin metal floorboards and, in some cases, a canvas covering for doors. Iraqi guerrilla groups have been targeting all types of military vehicles with homemade bombs and small-caliber weapons. E-mails from soldiers already deployed in Iraq urged the Missouri reservists to get extra armor if possible, said 1st Sgt. Tim Beydler, a member of the 428th."
Nah, nothing ad hoc going on here. All regular channels.