The Stryker's have been performing admirably. Every weapon system is tweaked after it is fielded and especially when it is a combat zone.
This is a case of "Write it and they'll come" syndrome. Only it's after the fact. The Stryker is doing just fine.
Sorry: 'Strykers'
Got references?
[Not PR sources]
Note: I don't think Stryker is 'bad',
I think it is far less than advertised.
Ergo, money wasted on a side trip.
If the Stryker is so great, why did the Army stick it up in the relatively peaceful north? Why is it the only pictures of the Stryker off of paved roads usually show them stuck?
I have read the posted article, the original article, and previous articles by Lonnie Shoultz, He obviously is against the LAV/Stryker and is not being objective, in addition a lot of the points he raised I suspect are taken out of context or false. In essence I believe the article to be bollocks.
The Stryker's are not taking the field. They are hidden in the open areas of a former palace grounds. I can do that in an old jeep a lot less expensively than in a $3.3 million dollar Stryker.