Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: R. Scott
1. Please see #28 below.

2. Our basic requirements for fighting vehicles prior to the Stryker was that it should be able to fight in degraded mode. Otherwise, it's not even as good as a pill-box; it's just a stationary coffin. All I'm saying is that we should maintain that standard.

3. I can't speak for all "Stryker critics," but this one doesn't like it because it does not meet the basic requirements layed out prior to the selection of a prototype. It is a fraud that is going to get American soldiers killed.

71 posted on 09/26/2003 5:28:15 AM PDT by Matthew James (SPEARHEAD!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies ]


To: Matthew James
I am no fan of General Shinseki, but there are so many arguments against the Stryker that sound like some are grasping at straws or simply want something to complain about.
I can’t think of any piece of military equipment that was perfect from day one.
73 posted on 09/26/2003 6:12:41 AM PDT by R. Scott
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson