GreekChat.com Forums  

Go Back   GreekChat.com Forums > General Chat Topics > News & Politics
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

» GC Stats
Members: 329,739
Threads: 115,667
Posts: 2,205,087
Welcome to our newest member, aellajunioro603
» Online Users: 2,220
0 members and 2,220 guests
No Members online
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #16  
Old 12-13-2004, 12:19 PM
Rudey Rudey is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Taking lessons at Cobra Kai Karate!
Posts: 14,928
Quote:
Originally posted by DeltAlum
You're right. But isn't he called the "Commander In Chief?" Just where does the buck stop?
The buck doesn't stop ever to me. People can always be blamed. And in my opinion, more than one person deserves blame. You can only go after one person in the blame department I guess, but I choose to be upset at more than one person.

-Rudey
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 12-13-2004, 12:52 PM
dekeguy dekeguy is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Virginia and London
Posts: 1,025
Kudos to Coramoor for cracking the code. Improvised "armor" is highly suspect at best as to its effectiveness and very often acts against those who are relying on it. Logistic vehicles are not designed to operate carrying an extra load of weight that slows them down substantially, changes their center of gravity, and provides a false sense of security which dissolves when a round or a bit of shrapnel punches through a quarter inch or half inch plate of non-armor grade metal. This results in additional bits of frag flying around the confined space of the so-called armored vehicle. HUMVEES, CUCVEES, 2 and 1/2 ton trucks, five ton trucks, wreckers, etc, etc were not designed to operate with all sorts of added weight. S&Ps (stake and platform semi-trailer trucks) were surely not designed for this sort of window dressing. The Army learned that lesson in Viet Nam. The improvised gun-trucks which the Army used to escort supply convoys were OK on main roads but had no mobility off roads and in situations requiring fast pick up or sustained speed. The cargo and logistic vehicles were much better off without add ons that actually impeded performance and put the drivers more at risk. If you are going to get hit by a command detonated device it is most likely going to take you out no matter what sort of improvised armor you have. If it is a smaller non-command detonated random device you need to learn to smell out the likely detonators. One favorite is a tin can in the road. You roll over it, crush the can, and it closes the detonating circuit. Bang, you are dead. There are many such devices and our people are learning how to spot and avoid them. In addition to my own experience I have spoken and corresponded with many friends from the Army who tell me that the best way to deal with this issue is to keep a sharp lookout for likely detonators, don't talk about the types we have learned about (except for the obvious "classic" ones) so as not to tip off the murderers that we are on to them, and be prepared to react instantly when an incident occurs. If it is a command detonated device the bastards will almost always be in direct line of sight to the target. We need to be able to spot them and nail them. Sometimes however, you can't respond immediately and that becomes one of those times you earn your pay the hard way. Remember, this is a war, it is dangerous, and it is going to be a lot more expensive in terms of casualties before it gets better. We have a 100% volunteer army and the downside risk of military service is that you can get hurt or even killed when doing your job. In case anyone wants to mutter about armchair quarterbacking, please remember that I was there at the start and among my keepsakes from that deployment is a purple ribbon with white edges.
Historically, we have never gone to war with a perfectly equipped Army. We go to war "with the Army we have", learn how best to deal with what we face, and respond accordingly. Let's not loose sight that war is dangerous and every time we engage an armed enemy someone is always calling for magic solutions to make it safe. War is not safe and there are no magic shields to protect us from harm. Its a hard, dangerous business and we need to fight with our eyes open and keenly aware of our surroundings and get over this business of looking for deus ex machina solutions.
dekeguy
Captain, USAR
been there, ready to go again
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 12-13-2004, 01:57 PM
DeltAlum DeltAlum is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Mile High America
Posts: 17,088
Quote:
Originally posted by dekeguy
We go to war "with the Army we have", learn how best to deal with what we face, and respond accordingly.
And that's pretty much always been the case.

In both of the World Wars, we had to build up our armed forces and gear up our industry. In Vietnam, we had to learn jungle warfare. In this case, after the initial campaign, it's turned to urban warfare. We've always had to adapt.

The problem with that, in terms of this particular situation is that it turned into a political issue during the last election with the GOP alleging that Senator Kerry didn't want to pay for the best equipment, etc.

Now, with the questions from the Reservist/Guardsman last week and reports from armor manufacturers, that would seem, at least on the surface, to have turned around on the Administration since they have been given all of the appropriations for which they've asked.

The bad news, always, is that it's the grunt on the line that ends up bleeding while the politicians sit and...well...politic.
__________________
Fraternally,
DeltAlum
DTD
The above is the opinion of the poster which may or may not be based in known facts and does not necessarily reflect the views of Delta Tau Delta or Greek Chat -- but it might.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 12-13-2004, 02:16 PM
RACooper RACooper is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Calgary, Alberta - Canada
Posts: 3,190
Send a message via Yahoo to RACooper
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: I'm sorry, but I've gotta say this...

Quote:
Originally posted by Rudey
From what I understood, they didn't care who you were or what you had done and gave you a completely new identity. Supposedly if you ran away, let's say to your country of origin, they could also kill you as a deserter or something along those lines.

-Rudey
Not entirely true... there are some crimes that the Legion won't overlook But yes it has been historically used as a great way to gain a new identity and citizenship, if shall we say, your previous country/identity was getting a little too "hot".

Case in point would be the Foreign Legion after WWII.... there was a suprising number of new recruits from Germany with convient wounds or burns under their arm (were the SS tattooed it's troops with blood-type)... so interestingly enough up to 50% of the force was German WW2 veterans fighting in places like Algeria or French Indo-China (Vietnam).

That being said... I have to respect some of the things that they did in Rwanda...



Okay back to the thread topic...

Well the armouring issue is currently the media darling, like Dekeguy has said it's not the black & white issue the media makes it - we went through the same thing, media wise, up here just over a year and a half ago. Yes armour does raise the protection and survivability of the troops, but it isn't the "magic bullet" that solves the problem of IEDs... training and enviromental awareness is the primary way to protect yourself - the armour is a fall back.
__________________
Λ Χ Α
University of Toronto Alum
EE755

"Cave ab homine unius libri"
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 12-13-2004, 04:56 PM
AKA_Monet AKA_Monet is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Beyond
Posts: 5,092
Dekeguy--

Do you truly have all that you are allotted to do your job with the utmost efficiency? Is there anything you must need that was told you would have it and it never came through--not because someone in your area, command-group didn't do their job, but because someone in another "reality" chose not to follow thru--or does it work like that?

Because the American people need to know straight up, with no chaser exactly what has to be going down so that you all can do the best job you have been highly trained to do...
__________________
We thank and pledge Alpha Kappa Alpha to remember...
"I'm watching with a new service that translates 'stupid-to-English'" ~ @Shoq of ShoqValue.com 1 of my Tweeple

"Yo soy una mujer negra" ~Zoe Saldana
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 12-13-2004, 05:52 PM
dekeguy dekeguy is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Virginia and London
Posts: 1,025
AKA_Monet,
To clarify a bit, I am not currently deployed. I was there at the start of this conflict but have been home for a year and am finishing my last year of law school. When I was there I commanded an Armored Cavalry Troop and we were very well equipped with everything we needed to successfully defeat our opposition. Of course there are all sorts of nice-to-have items but none that were really necessary. On the other hand, the role of the logistics troops can often be a bit more dangerous in this present sort of fighting because they operate vehicles that are not designed to engage the enemy in direct combat where we slug it out nose to nose. Likewise, they are not designed to withstand explosive devices in ambushes. These are trucks, admin vehicles, and light scouting vehicles. As I mentioned in my previous post, these vehicles are actually often at a disadvantage if encumbered with improvised armor plate that degrades performance and is inadequate to provide real protection. These vehicles can't carry the weight needed to afford real protection. So, we encourage a false sense of security while turning these vehicles into possible death traps by hanging all this "stuff" on them.
Our soldiers have excellent training, excellent weapons, excellent supply replenishment, and material appropriate to their role. In an ideal world there would be magic armor and bullet proof vests and impervious vehicles and all sort of wonderful things to keep our troops from harm but sadly these things do not exist in the form the media would have us believe, and soldiers from the dawn of time have had to make do with what was both available and appropriate to their role. Actually, in an ideal world we would not be fighting any wars at all. But, since we have to deal with this world in which we fight with the Army we have, we need to realize that this is the best equipped Army we have ever sent to war and we need to realize that sometime its not too smart to burden the troops with too much equipment and let them get on with the job rather than lugging around half a ton of stuff that does not really do what you want it to.
Do we have what we need to do the job? Yes. Do we have everything we could possibly want to make life easy and safe? Of course not, but we need to deal with reality, not with media generated attention to the awful truth that war is messy and dangerous. Lets know this and realize that sometimes there are no easy solutions, just hard soldiering. Then, when our soldiers do come home lets recognize what they have done under less than perfect conditions and simply say thanks. The basic right of all Soldiers is to gripe, then he gets down to business and carries out his mission.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 12-13-2004, 06:37 PM
AKA_Monet AKA_Monet is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Beyond
Posts: 5,092
Dekeguy,

Thank you for your honest and clear reply... I appreciate what you have done, what your battle group has done and what you all may have to do, if necessary.

I have a few friends serving in this war and they are telling me things that would be considered unacceptable coming from my profession--medicine. We cannot have a patient on a surgery table unpreppred. Malpractice would nail us to the cross. But many medical doctors who receive training at my current location are ready to leave because the "state" has malpractice insurance up so high, it is not worth practicing here. And if there were to be any epidemic, or threatening health conditions--whoa to the patients coming in the hospitals... Because there would be very few medical doctors or nurses (practionner's included) to do the type of job required to protect the health of the patient.

From what my friends were telling me there are some "policy issues" related to "Geneva Convention" Rules... But we can post that on a different group... However, I was shocked at what you are NOT allowed to do, which seemed to me that stopped you from doing the best job. I know that is how it is being a soldier--you don't question the orders, you carry them out...

But, I am sorry, I just want to make sure most of you folks are set and cared for completely when you are civilians or deployed...
__________________
We thank and pledge Alpha Kappa Alpha to remember...
"I'm watching with a new service that translates 'stupid-to-English'" ~ @Shoq of ShoqValue.com 1 of my Tweeple

"Yo soy una mujer negra" ~Zoe Saldana
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 04-25-2005, 02:33 PM
Rudey Rudey is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Taking lessons at Cobra Kai Karate!
Posts: 14,928
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/25/in...arines.html?hp

Bloodied Marines Sound Off About Want of Armor and Men
By MICHAEL MOSS

On May 29, 2004, a station wagon that Iraqi insurgents had packed with C-4 explosives blew up on a highway in Ramadi, killing four American marines who died for lack of a few inches of steel.

The four were returning to camp in an unarmored Humvee that their unit had rigged with scrap metal, but the makeshift shields rose only as high as their shoulders, photographs of the Humvee show, and the shrapnel from the bomb shot over the top.

"The steel was not high enough," said Staff Sgt. Jose S. Valerio, their motor transport chief, who along with the unit's commanding officers said the men would have lived had their vehicle been properly armored. "Most of the shrapnel wounds were to their heads."

Among those killed were Rafael Reynosa, a 28-year-old lance corporal from Santa Ana, Calif., whose wife was expecting twins, and Cody S. Calavan, a 19-year-old private first class from Lake Stevens, Wash., who had the Marine Corps motto, Semper Fidelis, tattooed across his back.

They were not the only losses for Company E during its six-month stint last year in Ramadi. In all, more than one-third of the unit's 185 troops were killed or wounded, the highest casualty rate of any company in the war, Marine Corps officials say.

In returning home, the leaders and Marine infantrymen have chosen to break an institutional code of silence and tell their story, one they say was punctuated not only by a lack of armor, but also by a shortage of men and planning that further hampered their efforts in battle, destroyed morale and ruined the careers of some of their fiercest warriors.

The saga of Company E, part of a lionized battalion nicknamed the Magnificent Bastards, is also one of fortitude and ingenuity. The marines, based at Camp Pendleton in southern California, had been asked to rid the provincial capital of one of the most persistent insurgencies, and in enduring 26 firefights, 90 mortar attacks and more than 90 homemade bombs, they shipped their dead home and powered on. Their tour has become legendary among other Marine units now serving in Iraq and facing some of the same problems.

"As marines, we are always taught that we do more with less," said Sgt. James S. King, a platoon sergeant who lost his left leg when he was blown out of the Humvee that Saturday afternoon last May. "And get the job done no matter what it takes."

The experiences of Company E's marines, pieced together through interviews at Camp Pendleton and by phone, company records and dozens of photographs taken by the marines, show they often did just that. The unit had less than half the troops who are now doing its job in Ramadi, and resorted to making dummy marines from cardboard cutouts and camouflage shirts to place in observation posts on the highway when it ran out of men. During one of its deadliest firefights, it came up short on both vehicles and troops. Marines who were stranded at their camp tried in vain to hot-wire a dump truck to help rescue their falling brothers. That day, 10 men in the unit died.

Sergeant Valerio and others had to scrounge for metal scraps to strengthen the Humvees they inherited from the National Guard, which occupied Ramadi before the marines arrived. Among other problems, the armor the marines slapped together included heavier doors that could not be latched, so they "chicken winged it" by holding them shut with their arms as they traveled.

"We were sitting out in the open, an easy target for everybody," Cpl. Toby G. Winn of Centerville, Tex., said of the shortages. "We complained about it every day, to anybody we could. They told us they were listening, but we didn't see it."

The company leaders say it is impossible to know how many lives may have been saved through better protection, since the insurgents became adept at overcoming improved defenses with more powerful weapons. Likewise, Pentagon officials say they do not know how many of the more than 1,500 American troops who have died in the war had insufficient protective gear.

But while most of Company E's work in fighting insurgents was on foot, the biggest danger the men faced came in traveling to and from camp: 13 of the 21 men who were killed had been riding in Humvees that failed to deflect bullets or bombs.

Toward the end of their tour when half of their fleet had become factory-armored, the armor's worth became starkly clear. A car bomb that the unit's commander, Capt. Kelly D. Royer, said was at least as powerful as the one on May 29 showered a fully armored Humvee with shrapnel, photographs show. The marines inside were left nearly unscathed.

Captain Royer, from Orangevale, Calif., would not accompany his troops home. He was removed from his post six days before they began leaving Ramadi, accused by his superiors of being dictatorial, records show. His defenders counter that his commanding style was a necessary response to the extreme circumstances of his unit's deployment.

Company E's experiences still resonate today both in Iraq, where two more marines were killed last week in Ramadi by the continuing insurgency, and in Washington, where Congress is still struggling to solve the Humvee problem. Just on Thursday, the Senate voted to spend an extra $213 million to buy more fully armored Humvees. The Army's procurement system, which also supplies the Marines, has come under fierce criticism for underperforming in the war, and to this day it has only one small contractor in Ohio armoring new Humvees.

Marine Corps officials disclosed last month in Congressional hearings that they were now going their own way and had undertaken a crash program to equip all of their more than 2,800 Humvees in Iraq with stronger armor. The effort went into production in November and is to be completed at the end of this year.

Defense Department officials acknowledged that Company E lacked enough equipment and men, but said that those were problems experienced by many troops when the insurgency intensified last year, and that vigorous efforts had been made to improve their circumstances.

Lt. Gen. James N. Mattis of Richland, Wash., who commanded the First Marine Division to which Company E belongs, said he had taken every possible step to support Company E. He added that they had received more factory-armored Humvees than any other unit in Iraq.

"We could not encase men in sufficiently strong armor to deny any enemy success," General Mattis said. "The tragic loss of our men does not necessarily indicate failure - it is war."

Trouble From the Start

Company E's troubles began at Camp Pendleton when, just seven days before the unit left for Iraq, it lost its first commander. The captain who led them through training was relieved for reasons his supervisor declined to discuss.

"That was like losing your quarterback on game day," said First Sgt. Curtis E. Winfree.

In Kuwait, where the unit stopped over, an 18-year-old private committed suicide in a chapel. Then en route to Ramadi, they lost the few armored plates they had earmarked for their vehicles when the steel was borrowed by another unit that failed to return it. Company E tracked the steel down and took it back.

Even at that, the armor was mostly just scrap and thin, and they needed more for the unarmored Humvees they inherited from the Florida National Guard.

"It was pitiful," said Capt. Chae J. Han, a member of a Pentagon team that surveyed the Marine camps in Iraq last year to document their condition. "Everything was just slapped on armor, just homemade, not armor that was given to us through the normal logistical system."

The report they produced was classified, but Captain Royer, who took over command of the unit, and other Company E marines say they had to build barriers at the camp - a former junkyard - to block suicide drivers, improve the fencing and move the toilets under a thick roof to avoid the insurgent shelling.

Even some maps they were given to plan raids were several years old, showing farmland where in fact there were homes, said a company intelligence expert, Cpl. Charles V. Lauersdorf, who later went to work for the Defense Intelligence Agency. There, he discovered up-to-date imagery that had not found its way to the front lines.

Ramadi had been quiet under the National Guard, but the Marines had orders to root out an insurgency that was using the provincial capital as a way station to Falluja and Baghdad, said Lt. Col. Paul J. Kennedy, who oversaw Company E as the commander of its Second Battalion, Fourth Marine Regiment.

Before the company's first month was up, Lance Cpl. William J. Wiscowiche of Victorville, Calif., lay dead on the main highway as its first casualty. The Marine Corps issued a statement saying only that he had died in action. But for Company E, it was the first reality check on the constraints that would mark their tour.

Sweeping for Bombs

A British officer had taught them to sweep the roads for bombs by boxing off sections and fanning out troops into adjoining neighborhoods in hopes of scaring away insurgents poised to set off the bombs. "We didn't have the time to do that," said Sgt. Charles R. Sheldon of Solana Beach, Calif. "We had to clear this long section of highway, and it usually took us all day."

Now and then a Humvee would speed through equipped with an electronic device intended to block detonation of makeshift bombs. The battalion, which had five companies in its fold, had only a handful of the devices, Colonel Kennedy said.

Company E had none, even though sweeping roads for bombs was one of its main duties. So many of the marines, like Corporal Wiscowiche, had to rely on their eyes. On duty on March 30, 2004, the 20-year-old lance corporal did not spot the telltale three-inch wires sticking out of the dust until he was a few feet away, the company's leaders say. He died when the bomb was set off.

"We had just left the base," Corporal Winn said. "He was walking in the middle of the road, and all I remember is hearing a big explosion and seeing a big cloud of smoke."

The endless task of walking the highways for newly hidden I.E.D.'s, or improvised explosive devices, "was nerve wracking," Corporal Winn said, and the company began using binoculars and the scopes on their rifles to spot the bombs after Corporal Wiscowiche was killed.

"Halfway through the deployment marines began getting good at spotting little things," Sergeant Sheldon added. "We had marines riding down the road at 60 miles an hour, and they would spot a copper filament sticking out of a block of cement."

General Mattis said troops in the area now have hundreds of the electronic devices to foil the I.E.D.'s.

In parceling out Ramadi, the Marine Corps leadership gave Company E more than 10 square miles to control, far more than the battalion's other companies. Captain Royer said he had informally asked for an extra platoon, or 44 marines, and had been told the battalion was seeking an extra company. The battalion's operations officer, Maj. John D. Harrill, said the battalion had received sporadic assistance from the Army and had given Company E extra help. General Mattis says he could not pull marines from another part of Iraq because "there were tough fights going on everywhere."

Colonel Kennedy said Company E's area was less dense, but the pressure it put on the marines came to a boil on April 6, 2004, when the company had to empty its camp - leaving the cooks to guard the gates - to deal with three firefights.

Ten of its troops were killed that day, including eight who died when the Humvee they were riding in was ambushed en route to assist other marines under fire. That Humvee lacked even the improvised steel on the back where most of the marines sat, Company E leaders say.

"All I saw was sandbags, blood and dead bodies," Sergeant Valerio said. "There was no protection in the back."

Captain Royer said more armor would not have even helped. The insurgents had a .50-caliber machine gun that punched huge holes through its windshield. Only a heavier combat vehicle could have withstood the barrage, he said, but the unit had none. Defense Department officials have said they favored Humvees over tanks in Iraq because they were less imposing to civilians.

The Humvee that trailed behind that day, which did have improvised armor, was hit with less powerful munitions, and the marines riding in it survived by hunkering down. "The rounds were pinging," Sergeant Sheldon said. "Then in a lull they returned fire and got out."

Captain Royer said that he photographed the Humvees in which his men died to show to any official who asked about the condition of their armor, but that no one ever did.

Sergeant Valerio redoubled his effort to fortify the Humvees by begging other branches of the military for scraps. "How am I going to leave those kids out there in those Humvees," he recalled asking himself.

The company of 185 marines had only two Humvees and three trucks when it arrived, so just getting them into his shop was a logistical chore, Sergeant Valerio said. He also worried that the steel could come loose in a blast and become deadly shrapnel.

For the gunners who rode atop, Sergeant Valerio stitched together bulletproof shoulder pads into chaps to protect their legs.

"That guy was amazing," First Sgt. Bernard Coleman said. "He was under a vehicle when a mortar landed, and he caught some in the leg. When the mortar fire stopped, he went right back to work."

-Rudey
--Read more at link above and all that
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 04-26-2005, 10:48 PM
KunjaPrincess KunjaPrincess is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Tacoma, WA
Posts: 229
Scary thought, when I was in Iraq there was a big field behind our office which we walked across several times a day. The fiel was inside the base which was supposedly cleared already. About six months into our tour the explosive division realised that the area wasn't cleared and found several unexploded devices. It is truely a miracle that none of us were hurt or killed.
__________________
Gamma Phi Beta
Founded Upon a Rock....
http://gammaphibeta.pugetsoundalumnae.home.att.net/
Connect. Impact. Shine
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 01-12-2006, 06:55 PM
Rudey Rudey is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Taking lessons at Cobra Kai Karate!
Posts: 14,928
The military is finally providing side body armor.

A previous study said that 80% of deaths could have been prevented had troops had this armor.

-Rudey
--That's our government for us.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 02-06-2006, 03:52 PM
hoosier hoosier is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Now hiding from GC stalkers
Posts: 3,188
You can't make everyone happy:

Today's AJC headline:

"Soldiers chafe at extra weight of body armor"

Sgt. Joshua Winchester, a Pepsi truck driver from Jesup, "doesn't plan to wear the (protective side plates)" which can easily top 70 lbs.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 02-06-2006, 05:16 PM
RACooper RACooper is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Calgary, Alberta - Canada
Posts: 3,190
Send a message via Yahoo to RACooper
Quote:
Originally posted by hoosier
You can't make everyone happy:

Today's AJC headline:

"Soldiers chafe at extra weight of body armor"

Sgt. Joshua Winchester, a Pepsi truck driver from Jesup, "doesn't plan to wear the (protective side plates)" which can easily top 70 lbs.
Extra weight can slow you down and make you just as vunerable as if you weren't wearing armour... it's a trade-off that some are uncomfortable making - but it's a trade-off that the troops should have in theatre.
__________________
Λ Χ Α
University of Toronto Alum
EE755

"Cave ab homine unius libri"
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 02-09-2006, 12:24 AM
KunjaPrincess KunjaPrincess is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Tacoma, WA
Posts: 229
Quote:
Originally posted by RACooper
Extra weight can slow you down and make you just as vunerable as if you weren't wearing armour... it's a trade-off that some are uncomfortable making - but it's a trade-off that the troops should have in theatre.
Agreed, 70lbs is a lot for me to wear especially with the ruck and everything else carried in theatre. I would like the choice though. If in a vehicle I know I would be wearing it at all times. Will be nice to see if my unit gets when they fly next week
__________________
Gamma Phi Beta
Founded Upon a Rock....
http://gammaphibeta.pugetsoundalumnae.home.att.net/
Connect. Impact. Shine
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 02-09-2006, 06:42 PM
RACooper RACooper is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Calgary, Alberta - Canada
Posts: 3,190
Send a message via Yahoo to RACooper
Quote:
Originally posted by KunjaPrincess
Agreed, 70lbs is a lot for me to wear especially with the ruck and everything else carried in theatre. I would like the choice though. If in a vehicle I know I would be wearing it at all times. Will be nice to see if my unit gets when they fly next week
I know the British and Canadian "combat vests"(armour) is somewhat customizable - with various levels of protection depending how much you add to the basic armoured vest... kinda like NBC gear in a way - ever increasing levels of protection as you add on more gear.

Ideally all the troops would be issued a full kit of body armour, and the mission would determine how much they'd lug around...

But damn 70lbs, with kit and weapons you'd be packing around 110lbs... I feel for the GPMG gunner...
__________________
Λ Χ Α
University of Toronto Alum
EE755

"Cave ab homine unius libri"
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 02-09-2006, 06:57 PM
Tom Earp Tom Earp is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Kansas City, Kansas USA
Posts: 23,584
Angry

US Army had a Lt. who was injured. His Body Armor was removed and thrown away as BioHazzard Material.

He was brought back to USA and could not get His Last Military Check as He had not checked in His Body Armorimt at a cost of $516.00.

He had to pay for it but, a Catch 22.

Well, word got out and He will get His Last Pay and get a Check for his Vest. Some Pencile Necked Dick NCO and Minor Officer denide it.

Thank God I did Not searve in The Miliatary!
__________________
LCA


LX Z # 1
Alumni
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:01 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.