Editor: Disclosure was needed on armor query

cnn ^ | 12-10-04

[phoenix0468]

BushisTheMan wrote:

This reporter is a SLIME!!!!!!!

.........................................

Can I get an AMEN!!!

[NY Attitude]

Probably none. I think I remember reading that the reporter did this on a one-on-one situation.

[rodguy911]

Rummy was set up and the soldier who asked the question must have been Butthead's brother he is so dumb. On Hannity today a spokesman,a solider from the front, said that the humvees that needed the steel got it "early" on all the rest the "upgrades" are all "recent" requests. This whole thing is more bogus rat/bs and as usual only one side is being reported.

[FierceDraka]

Okay, not the Fox guys. I was thinking more of the weasels from NYT, LAT, KC Red Star, etc.

[Bernard]

And, of course, you have to wonder why the Army had so many vehicles without armor plating in the first place, don't you?

As I understand it, this goes back to the 1990's, when military budgets were less generous than they might be now. The Marines decided that all their Humvees would be armored, while the Army decided to go for quantity and only have a percentage armored.

As a result, the Marines ended up with all their Humvees being armored, while the Army ended up with a percentage being armored. Part of this would have to do with the intended use of the vehicles.

This would make a nice background filler to the original story, wouldn't it? Of course, it would require research and verification. You can't just depend on some anonymous Internet poster for your facts.