Posted on 10/17/2004 2:40:08 PM PDT by freepatriot32
What does an 'uparmored' fuel tanker look like? ;~)
This is terrible.
Every soldier should have been outfitted in 3" of depleted uranium armor with air conditioning and a vibration massage unit to ease the tension of combat. Not only that, but they should have been able to drive their convoy by remote control from the relative safety of an underground bunker specially constructed back in their hometowns in the U.S. Kerry would never have allowed U.S. troops to be treated in such a heartless manner. He has a plan.
Right now you do not know the whole story, so you do not know if it was a lawful or unlawful order. From what I have read it seems to be lawful, but then again this unit has been there for 9 months and this is there first complaint.
Don't you hate it when that happens?
Exactly. These people should be court martialed. It is a breakdown in military discipline, end of discussion. If you let them get away with this, who is to say what the next group will object to when they refuse their orders? This lot belongs in Leavenworth. If there was really a problem with the equipment, there was a way they could approach their CO and point out the problems. If the CO said, "I know, I'm sorry, but that's the best we have right now and there is the objective, and you're nominated," then the only reply befitting an American serviceman was 'YES, SIR."
Sandbags are VERY effective, somewhere on the internet are guidelines, if I recall 12 inches is supposed to stop anything below .50cal
I know that...but did they use the same vech, that the other crew refused?
jack deth they do have something to replace the hmmv for this type of stuff. the hmmv was never desigened to be an armored personel carrier. the m1117 guardian looks like it would do well. It has an enclosed gunners turret and is similar to a stryker but it has 4 wheels.
Had 2 flak jackets in Desert Storm, sat on 1, put 1 in the floor of my GMC Jimmy.....
Ninety-nine times out od a hundred I'd agree with you but there is that instance where you come up with some numbnut officer who doesn't think about what he's asking his troops to do. Let's see what an investigation says.
Still not answered is whether they were to be sent out without the gun trucks and helicopters that are SOP according their General. On Fox earlier today he said there was supposed to be a gun truck for every five convoy vehicles and helicopters. If they had these they need to be punished severely regardless of the armor situation. If not they still need to be punished and who ever did not arrange the proper cover needs to go down hard.
Yes, that's what he said they did. And despite the heat, yet because of the heat, they had to zip up the canvas top to keep the 140F air from moving around them as they drove, or it would burn. Burn, like the ceramic plate in his flak vest did on his back one day from spending all day in the sun (it literally cooked inside his flak jacket, left a near 2nd degree square red patch on his back). But did he ever refuse orders? No.
And thank YOU "raynearhood" for your service! :)
Then I would say it was disobeying a direct order and they will pay a high price for their mutiny. I know that when I joined the service I knew I was joining the military. I would have to think long and hard before I disobeyed a direct order.
We can operate remote vehicles on Mars...well...kinda. But I think the real plan is to identify and detonate the roadside bombs before they blow up one of our vehicles. No idea on how to do it...but it would be the most logical and cost effective method, IMO. It would save our men and women and our vehicles.
Until we know the full story...I'm not ready to hang ANY of our men and women serving in combat zones and it is a shame that any of us here sleeping in our nice, warm, comfy beds eating home cooked meals are so quick to jump on them.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.