[SJSAMPLE]

Your original post referenced “all the experts” and many of them, through education, training and experience were, indeed, experts. Many of their concerns were valid and remain so.

The Stryker was part of a “interim” vehicle program that was supposed to be followed by the delayed/defunct FCS. Many of the target points of the Stryker were missed (specifically, air-deployability aboard C-130 aricraft). This was a significant concern because getting the Stryker to the battlefield was already a huge hurdle. As it is, it takes TWO C-130s to meet the original objective and even then it requires some wrenching to do so.

I like the Stryker because I’ve spend 16 years in the M113-based variants and it was, indeed, a huge improvement. I longed for a more reliable, more on-road maneuverable wheeled FDC vehicle to replace my M577 command track. I literally drool over the CP variant.

I, too, think that those who predicted “disaster” were mistaken. As it is, the FCS program is nowhere in sight and the Stryker will likely become much more than the “interim” vehicle proposed. With that in mind, deployability concerns become more of an issue. Of course, if the DOD would get off its ass and extend the C-17 line in California, this shortcoming would be heavily mitigated.

[Paul Ross]

I, too, think that those who predicted “disaster” were mistaken. As it is, the FCS program is nowhere in sight and the Stryker will likely become much more than the “interim” vehicle proposed.

That is the real good news of the situation. The Stryker does work. And well. But not enough for the "rogue nation" enemy which can do all its scientific work over in Iran...and then effortlessly...and without consequence... infiltrate their combat teams across the Iranian border armed with the latest weapons and tactics.

What do you think of the multiple versions of MRAP coming on line now? (Perhaps two years too late to make a real difference now in our political-support avalanche situation) They sound REALLY tough.

With that in mind, deployability concerns become more of an issue.

I suppose the MRAP will have similar issues.

Of course, if the DOD would get off its ass and extend the C-17 line in California, this shortcoming would be heavily mitigated.

Actually, that wasn't the DOD...so much as the Bush Administration refusing to keep the C-17 alive. They CHOSE to kill it. They have hinted they thought they could "outsource" the logistical need or buy some sort of commercial Airbus replacements for less. (All of which happy-horshit turned out to be rather badly mistaken).

Over and over, this supposed "business manager" has proven to be "Penny Wise, and Pound Foolish. Don't blame the Pentagon for that one.

That little collossal stupidity has "WHITE HOUSE INTERFERENCE" thumbprints all over it. Totally ARBITRARY funding limits on the DOD...IN A WAR.

And ignoring that the best equipment is needed...like the C-17.

Just like the NAVY ship complement implosion that Bush has orchestrated. Not the Pentagon's fault. Bush imposed ARBITRARY AND FOOLISH Navy budget limits...irrespective of the Xlinton legacy to our fleet. The White House refuses to budget strategically...squandering assets, nor budgeting for replacements or sustaining of the existing base of the arsenal.

This president was not kidding when he said, and I quote: "I never wanted to be a War President."

He clearly still doesn't. Even when it is thrust upon him. He is continuing to deplete our strategic forces.