US Troops using scrap metal for armor

[PhillyKev 0]

Quote

Quote

This argument over budgets is getting silly.

No army has ever had enough armour, etc. when it went to war, because any worthy opponent changes his tactics.

And that is the point I am trying to make.

I don't dispute that. What I do dispute is the administrations claim that they've done everything they can to give them as much protection as possible.

[Ron 10]

Quote

What I do dispute is the administrations claim that they've done everything they can to give them as much protection as possible.

Key words are AS POSSIBLE. You never know what you will face until you are facing them.

The enemy changes faster than battle field plans.

I know you never served, but you had family that did...Now, I don't know if (They were Navy right?) the Navy had this saying...

You know what the first casulty of any battle is?..........The plan.

You can't afford to equip every troop with armor. You can't afford all the training equipment you need. I was in the 82d, and in my total time there I blew TWO claymore mines....TWO. Yet when I was locked and loaded once, I was going to be given them to use......Ya know why? Cause I had used them TWO more times than anyone else in my platoon.

In my three years I shot maybe FOUR rocket launchers, maybe 100 live round in my M203 grenade launcher (My MAIN weapon for combat)...Yet there I stood with Claymores, 203 rounds (including types I had never SEEN fired) and a rocket launcher.

WHY well cause the cost of the training was more than the tax payers would support.

I know folks (non-infantry) that never fired an M-16 once they arrived at their units.....I onle day shot 2,000 rounds...WHY? Cause I needed the training more than they did...SF guys shot that every week, I go to do that once a mth maybe, some never did get to shoot.

You don't want to pay the taxes to equip the military to the standard you think it should be....And once you do, some kid will impovise a device that will make your 10,000 body armor worthless out of a coke can.

You can't prepare for war much better than the US has.

Is it perfect? Nope, but you don't WANT to afford the cost needed to equip a "perfect" Army (A thing that does not exist).

For example the "Striker"...Well its great, except it will not fit on a C-130 after the armor is put on.

So our Army is pretty damn close to ready (as close as the tax payers and Congress will let them be).

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[ScubaSteve 0]

His CO should of dismounted and General Pattoned his ass.

[slug 1]

Quote

Quote

Quote

This argument over budgets is getting silly.

No army has ever had enough armour, etc. when it went to war, because any worthy opponent changes his tactics.

And that is the point I am trying to make.

I don't dispute that. What I do dispute is the administrations claim that they've done everything they can to give them as much protection as possible.

Affirmative

What do you expect Baghdad Rumsfeld to say yea we screwed up went off half cocked made major mistakes since day one and lost a bunch of son's, daughters, fathers , mother's, brother's and sister's because we screwed up to bad so sad.

Country right or wrong take it or leave it.

Charge

Tuesday we met a Major from Ft Lewis at the grocery store (still wearing BDU's) told his about Rummies Town hall meeting. He said "Damn I wish I could have seen that".

Told the guy "No problemo this one isn't going to go away watch CNN tonight." The Major had ust got nack from the sand pile and remarked he's like to hear what Rumsfeld had to say after rideing in a unarmored Hummer for 30 minutes in the sand.

This discussion wasn't from my buddies in the pentagon and no I didn't get the majors name rank and serial number. Who knows maybe I'm makeing the whole thing up.

As you were

R.I.P.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

I don't dispute that. What I do dispute is the administrations claim that they've done everything they can to give them as much protection as possible.

"Everything possible" and "as much as possible" is feel good quotes that are way over abused in politics and business. Much like an executive asking you "what else haven't you thought of".

It's a placating statement put out by all politicians. And generates loads of semantic arguments that occupy the bored for hours and hours of entertainment.

I'd rather they just list what they did and why.

Frankly, this question is nuts.

The "wacko right wing" think it was a setup by the "media". nuts

The "wacho left wing" are jumping on it as another thing to poke at the current admin. nuts

Frankly, it's a good question based on a personal observation:

1 - The soldiers are doing what thy've always done - making do with expected daily issues. They are to be congratulated on their ingenuity.

2 - Rummy likely has someone in his chain of command responsible for armoring vehicles who is doing the best he can with budget he has. Likely his life is hell right now while his boss's boss's boss's boss follows-up on the question just because it's a media topic now. This guy is likely doing a good job and has plans in place. If not, he'll be replaced or 'recalibrated' in his priorities. Still, business as usual.

3 - Rummy had some personal knowledge of equipment deployment. That actually speaks positively to his bandwidth to have some details to tactical issues when he should be mainly strategic in focus.

4 - I doubt this was a big deal for the admin other than they were likely grateful for the information as an opportunity to explore better ways to deal with it.

Cask and Cream comes in flavors - how am I supposed to resist that. (try dark rum, dr pepper, C&C and buttershots - it's not bad).

Edit: whoops

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[PhillyKev 0]

Ok, I'll get more specific. I think the administration chose to go to war in an untimely manner whereas they could have prepared better and equipped our troops better at little to no risk.

Most of all I believe that their budget priorities of financing tax cuts, missile defense systems, space stations and a trip to mars are SERIOUSLY FLAWED in light of the fact that our troops are in combat and at risk of life and limb.

[slug 1]

News flash

In response to a G.I. telling rummy he wasn't wearing any cloth's

Everything possiable has been modidied and production will be increased to 500+ HUMMERS /MONTH Sec of army called CEO of manufactor to see what could be done to increase production.

It appears there was a failure to communicate that would have been missed if the G.I./press hadn't asked the question about the hummers.

Gotta love the "Chain of Command", offical channels etc

As you were

R.I.P.

[kallend 2,146]

Quote

Quote

What I do dispute is the administrations claim that they've done everything they can to give them as much protection as possible.

Key words are AS POSSIBLE. You never know what you will face until you are facing them.

The enemy changes faster than battle field plans.

.....

This war was not forced upon the USA. Bush/Rumsfeld chose to go to war and chose the timing. No-one was invading us and no-one was threatening us. To choose to send our troops into an optional war improperly equipped is moronic at best and, IMO, criminal.

It is now 20 months later and still the troops are improperly equipped. Yet the US has the world's biggest industrial base and the world's biggest defense industry. If Bush/Rumsfeld had spent as much effort conducting the war as they have spent patting themselves on the back (Remember this) then this debacle wouldn;t have occurred.

There is only one possible explanation for our troops being inadequately equipped 18 months after "Mission Accomplished" in a war we entered at a time of our own choosing, and that is PISS POOR PLANNING.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Ron 10]

Quote

To choose to send our troops into an optional war improperly equipped is moronic at best and, IMO, criminal.

Improperly equipped is the question. As I have already said. There is no way to be ready for war.

A peace time people, and Congress will not allocate the funds needed, and a war time people will then bitch about the lack of training and funding.

The same folks that bitch about military spending are now bitching that its not enough now.

But they are also bitching about the economy.

You can't have it all folks.

Quote

There is only one possible explanation for our troops being inadequately equipped 18 months after "Mission Accomplished" in a war we entered at a time of our own choosing, and that is PISS POOR PLANNING.

You seem to have missed the fact that you were/are not willing to pay for it.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[kallend 2,146]

Quote

Quote

To choose to send our troops into an optional war improperly equipped is moronic at best and, IMO, criminal.

Improperly equipped is the question. As I have already said. There is no way to be ready for war.

A peace time people, and Congress will not allocate the funds needed, and a war time people will then bitch about the lack of training and funding.

The same folks that bitch about military spending are now bitching that its not enough now.

But they are also bitching about the economy.

You can't have it all folks.

Quote

There is only one possible explanation for our troops being inadequately equipped 18 months after "Mission Accomplished" in a war we entered at a time of our own choosing, and that is PISS POOR PLANNING.

You seem to have missed the fact that you were/are not willing to pay for it.

Really? When have I ever complained about my taxes being too high?

Last time I checked it was the Republicans who didn't like taxes. And a Republican President who increased government spending to record levels leading to an insufferable debt burden and a declining dollar.

It was piss poor planning, and you know it. It's 20 months since we went to war. Absolutely no excuse for this disgraceful state of affairs.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Ron 10]

Quote

Really? When have I ever complained about my taxes being too high?

You say this,

Then you say this:

Quote

And a Republican President who increased government spending to record levels leading to an insufferable debt burden and a declining dollar.

See my point?

Quote

It was piss poor planning, and you know it. It's 20 months since we went to war. Absolutely no excuse for this disgraceful state of affairs.

And you nor anyone else has shown me one war that anyone was ready to fight.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[slug 1]

Can we keep the political B.S. out of this.

I thought most people agreed that we were going to support our troops. and their families.

This is real simple the troops need something they should get it ASAP.

Rummy and GW are at the top of the "chain of command" they have worker bee's below them to see that things get done. So someone droped the ball in the armor issue.

Lucky for our troops the town hall meeting with Rummy side steped the chain of command and a G.I. was able to talk to the Sec of defense in a public forum.

G.I to Sec of Defence to CIC Chain of command express

I wonder if the alleged problem of the shortage of troops to get the job done can be solved as quickly.First the big boy's have to acknowledge there's a problem.

Time will tell[
As you were.

Support the troops and their families..... really

R.I.P.

[tunaplanet 0]

Quote

Absolutely no excuse for this disgraceful state of affairs.

But yet the American people continue to elect republican presidents. Hmmmmm.

Forty-two

[kallend 2,146]

Quote

Quote

Really? When have I ever complained about my taxes being too high?

You say this,

Then you say this:

Quote

And a Republican President who increased government spending to record levels leading to an insufferable debt burden and a declining dollar.

See my point?

.

No. I don't complain about paying my taxes. I don't complain about military spending. I've even done work for the DoD. The biggest complainers about paying their taxes are Republicans.

I do complain about irresponsible fiscal policies from the last three Republican presidents.

Maybe we could use some of those extra $Millions spent (wasted) on death penalty cases in Texas and Florida to buy armor for the troops. According to the UoF study, each death penalty case in FL costs an ADDITIONAL $2.6M. Buy a lot of armor for $2.6M.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[slug 1]

Quote

Quote

Absolutely no excuse for this disgraceful state of affairs.

But yet the American people continue to elect republican presidents. Hmmmmm.

Hey Tuna!

Hmm the politics card again

Tell us do you think the armor shortage is a political smoke screen (like you claim the troop shortage is) or is it the real deal.

affirmative or negative

41
R.I.P.

[kallend 2,146]

Quote

Quote

Absolutely no excuse for this disgraceful state of affairs.

But yet the American people continue to elect republican presidents. Hmmmmm.

Yup, they even elected Nixon twice. None so strange as folks, as they say in Yorkshire.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 2,146]

Quote

News flash

In response to a G.I. telling rummy he wasn't wearing any cloth's

Everything possiable has been modidied and production will be increased to 500+ HUMMERS /MONTH Sec of army called CEO of manufactor to see what could be done to increase production.

It appears there was a failure to communicate that would have been missed if the G.I./press hadn't asked the question about the hummers.

Gotta love the "Chain of Command", offical channels etc

As you were

R.I.P.

As I was driving home there was an interview on the radio with the president of a company that makes armor panels for the military. He said that his company was far from maximum capacity and could easily double its output IF IT HAD THE ORDERS.

"Lions led by donkeys" as they used to say in WWI.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Jimbo 0]

Quote

Can we keep the political B.S. out of this.

Now -THAT'S- funny stuff!

-
Jim

"Like" - The modern day comma
Good bye, my friends. You are missed.

[DrunkMonkey 0]

I got a sure-fire way to derail this:

BOOBS!

[penniless 0]

Quote

I got a sure-fire way to derail this:

BOOBS!

Wrong forum. Try the Bonfire

[dropoutdave 0]

Attempt #2

------------------------------------------------------
May Contain Nut traces......

[slug 1]

Quote

Quote

Can we keep the political B.S. out of this.

Now -THAT'S- funny stuff!

-
Jim

affirmative
Damn I was trying to be subtle really I was.

As you were.

41

R.I.P.

[Gravitymaster 0]

THE FACTS ON HUMVEE ARMOR

Thursday, Lieutenant General R. Steven Whitcomb,Commander, Third Army "Patton's Own,"
and Coalition Forces Land Component Command, answered some questions, regarding the
armoring of vehicles in Iraq, including humvess.

These are some of the facts the three star General shared with the press:

"Congress has provided in the neighborhood of about $1.2 billion since last year strictly to armor
our vehicles"

"Up-armored humvees... is a vehicle that is produced in a factory back in the United States and it
essentially gives you protection, both glass and on the armament on the side, front, rear, sides, top
and bottom. If you'll think of a protection in a bubble, that's kind of what the level-one up-
armored humvee gives you."

"Back in August of 2003, we were producing about 30 of those vehicles a month. We're in the
category now of over 400 per month being produced. The requirement that we've got from
Multinational Corps Iraq and Multinational Force Iraq, General Casey and General Tom Metz, are
for about 8,100 up-armored humvees. We've provided a little under 6,000 up-armored
humvees to the force to date."

(Started using) "add-on kits that we might be able to produce that gave that vehicle additional
protection.We call that level-two armor, and it's better known probably most places as add-on
armor. It is factory produced, so it's built under controlled conditions, and then it's either -- can be
put on back in the states. But we've got 10 sites here in the theater, a couple here in Kuwait,
and eight sites up in Iraq itself where we can bolt on, add this armor to existing unarmored
vehicles. It gives you protection front, rear and sides, glass. It does not give protection at the
top or at the bottom of the vehicle. So it gives you better than what you have with no
protection on a humvee, but not quite the level-one protection."

"We looked at a stop-gap measure, a bridge, if you will, till we got the factory-produced level two
and the level one protection for our vehicles, and that's what we call level-three hardening.(It
consists of) taking steel plates that have been approved, make sure that they've got the type of
minimal protection. Our real focus for the level-three armor is not the humvees, it's really the
series of trucks that the Army uses in combat operations."

"Right now...we've got about 30,000 wheeled vehicles in our theater -- in Iraq and Afghanistan and
other areas."
level one, about 6,000 vehicles;
level two, about 10,000 vehicles;
almost 4,500 vehicles that have the level- three protection
8,000 (vehicles) do not have some type of armor protection on them.

"Of those vehicles that don't, some number of them are things like tool trucks, communication
vans or vehicles that don't leave the base camp. In other words, they're trucked up into Iraq --
or in cases before what we're doing now, were driven up into Iraq -- and they go onto a base
camp, and that's where they spend most of their time."

"The humvee was a vehicle that was not designed to afford armor protection, nor were most
of our trucks. They were designed as cargo carriers. The only up-armored humvees, the high-end
ones, we had were for our military police forces. They were not for use by -- as we see them used
today with the numbers of forces."

"Add-on armoring runs anywhere from about a thousand pounds of steel plating up to about 4,000
pounds of additional weight. So a lot of our vehicles, as you point out, are not designed -- their
engines aren't designed to carry perhaps an additional ton of weight, the suspension and the
transmission."

"I am not seeing constraints on resources that are -- allow us to do that, with the exception
of, as I say, level one and -- primarily because you're producing vehicles and a certain amount of
law of physics is involved here. It's not necessarily just money; it's a production capacity to be
able to build more."

"When you combine the 6,000 and the almost 10,000, we're in relatively good shape humvee-
wise."

"The other thing that we've got -- and I won't talk about it because it is very sensitive -- is we're
leveraging technology, how to detect where IEDs are, who's using them, how they're being
set off and those kinds of things so we could go out there early and kill those guys before they're
able to execute."

Regarding the soldier who asked Secretary Rumsfeld the armor question, General Whitcomb said:
"What I think Specialist Wilson(soldier that popped the humvee question on Rumsfeld) was
probably talking about is going through a facility that we've got that takes vehicles of two types;
one, it takes vehicles that have been hit in combat and can't be fixed in Iraq and we bring them
back here into Kuwait and we either fix them or we take parts off them that we can use. And
some of those parts may, in fact, be the level-three armor, the steel plating that we either take off
and put into stacks that we'll reuse, or that my suspicion -- and it's a suspicion only -- is that
Specialist Wilson and his crew came in and found a vehicle or found some of that stuff and was
taking it to add on to their vehicles."

SOURCE: (U.S. Department of Defense)

Here some other facts, compiled from various sources:


Today 77% of Humvees in Iraq are armored

9,386 armor kits shipped to Iraq

9,143 have been installed (97%)

Armor Holdings (AH:NYSE) said it could boost its output of "up-armored" Humvees by as
much as 22 percent per month to 550 from 450 now.

The cost of installing the Humvee armor at the factory is $58,000 a vehicle.

[billvon 3,109]

All this makes me wonder if the supporters of less armor for troops will cover up their "support the troops" stickers with "support Rumsfeld" stickers. I suspect not; I think there are a lot of people out there who like to say patriotic things until it comes time to actually pay for them.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

All this makes me wonder if the supporters of less armor for troops will cover up their "support the troops" stickers with "support Rumsfeld" stickers. I suspect not; I think there are a lot of people out there who like to say patriotic things until it comes time to actually pay for them.

I don't understand where you get the idea the armor isn't being supplied. Apparently it is being supplied as quickly as it can be manufactured.

http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/2004/tr20041209-1765.html