The Armor Thing (Again)

• May 31, 2005

I thought this whole thing about Humvee armor was over once everybody realized that it was a left-wing exaggeration aimed at discrediting the Bush administration shortly before the election. Apparently, some (including Bill Maher posting at the Huffington Post today) just can’t let the exaggeration go:

A soldier currently serving in Iraq responds:

Armor is armor, who gives a damn what it looks like. Maybe it would make people feel better back home if this “Hillbilly Armor” was painted up to look really nice and pretty, but making it pretty isn’t going to make it any stronger. Anyway, the vehicles with “Improvised Armor” are few and far between, and they mostly just sit inside the FOB.
So I know for a fact that our Brigade is covered when it comes to armored vehicles. [...] I’m going to go out on a limb here and assume that the vast majority of people who actually go outside the FOB are riding in armored vehicles. Of course you wouldn’t think that from reading Trudeau. That’s the travesty of this comic strip. Some schmuck sitting at his breakfast table, eating a bowl full of soggy bran flakes, will read Trudeau’s words and think how shameful it is. “Honey, can you believe all those poor kids over in Iraq don’t even have the proper armor to protect them from those roadside bombs.” “Oh Howard, that’s just awful, hey, can you take the kids to school, I have to get my nails done.” Poor Howard, he’s been hoodwinked by a cartoonist.

Who are you going to believe, a couple of liberal malcontents looking to make some political hay or a soldier who uses (and trusts his life with) the armored vehicles in question?
(via The Indepundit)

Tags: General

http://Array richard

Gotta say I love the slant today.

Rob you are correct they have come along way baby however, the fact remains that we sent troops into harms way witout the proper armament initially.

Of course with all of the other underestimations I am not convinced that this was the biggest F’up that happened over there.
2Hotel9

Let us revisit this issue one more once! The US Army, in’76,’78,and ’80 put forward the requirement specifications for a dedicated Armored Personnel/Armored Cargo Carrier vehicle series. Instead, they got the Hummer. And not the good kind. HMMWV was NEVER intended as an armored vehicle. It is unsuited to the role it has been forced to fill. On the other hand, Mowag and FMC both had APC/ACC vehicle systems tested and available for operational sevice in ’77, FMC’s vehicle is now called Stryker. Why were these systems not adopted by US military at that time? Because James Carter’s Defense Dept. felt they would make America look to agressive in the eyes of the rest of the world. Ain’t that just peachy!
WOOF

Don't you read what you post?

From "the soldier who uses (and trusts his life with) the armored vehicles in question?"
"I'm sure there are some soldiers or Marines that have been out on the streets without armor. I'm not discounting that, especially any that have been wounded or killed by an IED,"

"Is there still a shortage of Humvee armor?

Yes. According to an April 6th Associated Press article:

"For the fifth time in the past year, U.S. commanders running the war in Iraq have told the Army to send more armored Humvee utility vehicles to protect U.S. troops. Just as the Army was reaching its target of 8,279 factory-built armored Humvees for delivery to Iraq, U.S. Central Command last month raised the bar again, to 10,079, Army officials disclosed Tuesday."

http://www.theunionleader.com/articles_showa.html…
http://sayanythingblog.com robport

""Is there still a shortage of Humvee armor?

Yes. According to an April 6th Associated Press article:

The Army is requesting more armored Humvees. That doesn't imply that soldiers are patrolling without armor. Clearly you didn't read the whole article as the link you provided doesn't supply the full text. Here's a link that does.

As the soldier I linked to pointed out, the vast majority of Humvees used in the field have armor from the factory. Those remaining have scrapped together armor and aren't typically used in the field. That's not exactly supportive of the spin people like yourself and Maher are trying to put on it.

the fact remains that we sent troops into harms way witout the proper armament initially.

Perhaps, but nobody foresaw the need for armored Humvees going into the war. As Dwight D. Eisenhower once said, "No plan survives the first encounter with the enemy." We've seen a need for armored Humvees and our government has done its best to see that those Humvees reach the soldiers.

Still not anywhere near the spin that's been put on this issue.
Josh

If only Clinton had sent our military to Iraq, no one would be complaining about this. It wouldn't change the fact that the humvees would need to be up-armored, but we would simply never hear about it.

SayAnythingBlog.com

The Armor Thing (Again)

Create a SAB Readerblog

Recent Comments