The US is liberating Iraq, we are told, and the soldiers are treated like kings. Or not:
"A secret Pentagon study has found that as many as 80 percent of the marines who have been killed in Iraq from wounds to the upper body could have survived if they had had extra body armour. Such armour has been available since 2003, but until recently the Pentagon has largely declined to supply it to troops despite calls from the field for additional protection, according to military officials."
These figures are devastating and prove, not unlike Vietnam, that soldiers are expendable. The main difference this time lies in the fact that anti-war sentiment within the armed forces is growing much quicker than during the Vietnam era.
"A secret Pentagon study has found that as many as 80 percent of the marines who have been killed in Iraq from wounds to the upper body could have survived if they had had extra body armour. Such armour has been available since 2003, but until recently the Pentagon has largely declined to supply it to troops despite calls from the field for additional protection, according to military officials."
These figures are devastating and prove, not unlike Vietnam, that soldiers are expendable. The main difference this time lies in the fact that anti-war sentiment within the armed forces is growing much quicker than during the Vietnam era.
7 Comments:
Body armour is essential, of course. The Bushies are failing to protect soldiers, that's the issue here, in case you need reminding.
Will some one please show the graph of how many US soldiers were forced into service due to economic hardship?
Someone on this thread posted some addamo concerning this without any proof.
Addamo_01 said...
Most of us have addressed
Most of us have addressed how the soldiers themselves are just exploited by the US government as cannon fodder. Most are forced into the military due to economic hardship.
Please prove this bit of deliberate addamo.
Perhaps you missed this while you were loading your sling with more addamo:
Addamo_01 said...
Most of us have addressed how the soldiers themselves are just exploited by the US government as cannon fodder. Most are forced into the military due to economic hardship.
Please prove this bit of deliberate addamo. A reference if you please, proving this bit of doggeral? Or was it just addamo?
You can admit it. No one will bite your head off.
The first is mere opinion and can not be proven either way. Prove the second, you stated a cold hard fact. I was merely including the first as part of your quote, not as an escape hatch for a coward.
It's clear that AL's supporters aren't familiar with basic ballistics. The armour package worn by troops in the ME consists of plating rated to a certain ballistic tolerance, usually level III, that is to say small arms fire.
7.62 x 39 rounds fired by the AK family are steel tipped, copper jacketed rounds, designed for maximum frangibility. I've seen rounds penetrate through engine blocks, firewalls and then pass through flesh and bone. The efficacy of the armour is predicated on a straight hit, not angled, multiple shots.
Those who shed crocodile tears for the safety of potentially ill-equipped US troops would do better to put their energies into topics they understand. Like Play School.
The best defence against an attack is mobility. Heavily armoured vehicles and troops are a liability in low-level conflict, ie urban patrolling, roadblocks, cordon and search type operations.
Between the need for protection versus the increased fatigue, lack of hydration, and limitations to speed of movement, the US Marines have opted for a solution that provides protection to the front and back of their body with ceramic plates which are removable.
You can engineer body armour to stop heavy/high speed weaponry. You just can't move in it. Your glib coments about the Pentagon's refusal to issue "better" armour shows a lack of understanding of the subject. What percentage of US Marines were killed or injured by IED's or high explosive RPG rounds? There's no armour in the world that would stop that. As previously stated, stick to ranting about subjects that are in your sphere of influence or understanding. Making claims about the evils of the US administration when it is patently clear that the majority of AL's commenters woulds clearly like to see the Iraq deployment fail is just white noise.
You are all like Simpson's dog, just choosing to hear what you want to hear. "Blah, blah, hate US/Bushitler, blah, blah"
Post a Comment
<< Home