[Repeal The 17th]

Like a lot of military projects, Stryker evolved from concept to delivery. It's mission or "purpose" was constantly being defined and redefined by the politicians and the military brass while the designers and the engineers tried to keep up with the moving target of the concept. What was untimately delivered was far far removed from what was originally conceived. The world and the tools we need to work in it can change a lot faster than we are able to conceive, design, fund, and deliver such vehicles or weapon systems.
This is my "old ride":

The old 113 did it's job in it's day;
but it would be devastated in the current world situation.

[SJSAMPLE]

We have several hundred M113s in inventory, many of them he A3 variant.

The M113 was a true “battle taxi”.
Light (relatively), maneuverable and no-frills.

I spent a good chunk of my career in th M577 variant.
Relatively reliable and simple.

When the Stryker was first fielded, the size and cost drove many to long for their return. However, the simple aluminum “armor” would have been disastrous. Marine AAVs of similar construction have been literally peeled apart from IEDs, taking the entire compliment with them.

Back in 1985, I had long, heated debates with fellow soldiers about the need for the Bradley. I’m glad to see that it’s proven to be very effective and reliable on the battlefield (as I knew it would be). Bradley’s have been called into action to support Marine operations (Fallujah) when the LAV was proved inferior.