Why There’s No More Private Body Armor In Iraq
Posted by Adam Graham in : Iraq WarRadical Russ is up in arms about a move by the Army to ban private body armor.
There’s another side to the story I wrote about at WhereIstand, and I included this quote from the AP article:
Extra body armor _ the lack of which caused a political storm in the United States _ has flooded in to Iraq, but many Marines here promptly stuck it in lockers or under bunks. Too heavy and cumbersome, many say.
Marines already carry loads as heavy as 70 pounds when they patrol the dangerous streets in towns and villages in restive Anbar province. The new armor plates, while only about five pounds each, are not worth carrying for the additional safety they are said to provide, some say.
“We have to climb over walls and go through windows,” said Sgt. Justin Shank of Greencastle, Pa. “I understand the more armor, the safer you are. But it makes you slower. People don’t understand that this is combat and people are going to die.”
Its two different branches of the services, but if the Army’s low they can borrow from the Marines. I find it hard to believe, its going to be that different from one branch to another.
Comment by michael [Member]
The army determines what soldiers need to do their jobs as safely and as effectively as possible. If a job calls for body armor it should be supplied. But can you imagine what it would be like if we had each soldier making decisions as to how they would outfit themselves?
Leave the issue of order aside for a moment. Just concentrate on the efficacy of some soldiers being outfitted by better equipment as a result of family wealth. Do you think for a minute that radicals wouldn’t be up in arms (pun) about the inequality of supplies for military personnel?
It’s another example of malcontents who want to criticize just for the sake of having an ax to grind.