Army Officer Explains How Armor Adds Costs

[Rose Siding]

WASHINGTON -- Bolting extra armor on Humvee utility vehicles undoubtedly saves soldiers' lives, but it also adds indirectly to operating costs, a senior Army officer said Thursday.

Brig. Gen. Jeffrey Sorenson was not suggesting that adding armor is not worth the expense. He was explaining to reporters the circumstances in which the Army has responded to insurgents' use of improvised explosive devices, or IEDs, that have killed and maimed hundreds of soldiers in Iraq

The extra 1,000 to 1,500 pounds of weight on each Humvee causes the vehicle's suspension system to wear out three or four times faster than normal, Sorenson said. The extra weight also adds to fuel consumption, he said.

The vast majority of Humvees were not armored initially because they were not intended for use in a high-threat environment and the Army had never seen an IED threat like it faces in Iraq.
...
Sorenson said that when the initial phase of the war ended May 1, 2003, after the Saddam Hussein regime had been ousted from Baghdad, the U.S. military had no idea it would face an extensive IED threat.

http://www.newsday.com/news/politics/wire/sns-ap-iraq-vehicle-armor,0,2585091.story?coll=sns-ap-politics-headlines

[damntexdem]

1. Yeah, the suspension system wears out 3-4 times faster ...

on those Humvees that last that long in Iraq.

[UpInArms]

18. gosh, does that mean that a humvee that has been

blown apart by an IED lasts longer?

Huh?

What are these people smokin'?

[jdj]

43. it's even worse isn't it.

No foresight. Assholes.

[htuttle]

2. "the Army had never seen an IED threat like it faces in Iraq"

Have they finally purged all the officers who served in Vietnam? How could they say this with a straight face?

[ashmanonar]

22. well, they didn't have ied's in vietnam...

they were provided with claymores and limpets from the NVA, so they didn't NEED ied's...

the only reason we face ied's in iraq is that they are not a legitimate gov't or backed by a legitimate gov't...insurgents have different resources than a "real" military...

[soothsayer]

29. and they used our own unexploded ordnance, too

the VC

[alfredo]

39. Still they should have been protecting our soldiers against that type

of weapon, whether it was home made, or bought from arms dealers.

[ashmanonar]

45. indeed

not arguing you there...just niggling over a point...:7

[alfredo]

46. No problem

[LiberalFighter]

26. Are they from the Vietnam era or more recent?

I wonder if they were Vietnam era if they would know better.

It could be these jackasses are more recent from the first Iraq War with no Vietname experience and think they know everything.

[leftchick]

37. who could have predicted the Iraqis were smart enough???

First, to loot many UNSECURED ammo dumps! Then to figure out an imaginative way to use those looted explosives against an occupying force??? God, I hate these assholes!! :argh:

[jukes]

3. doesn't getting

blown-the-fuck-up add indirectly to operating costs?

[chieftain]

7. Excellent question .

These people are so short-sighted it is scary .

[WannaJumpMyScooter]

19. No, that comes from a different account, apparently

That is all the Army is anymore.... an armed accounting agency

[happyslug]

36. Not in the units budget

On the other hand the increase maintenance and fuel is in the Unit's budget. Wounded are shipped to a hospital and what treatment that person get is no longer in his unit's budget.

[teach1st]

4. Which would mean...

Sorenson said that when the initial phase of the war ended May 1, 2003, after the Saddam Hussein regime had been ousted from Baghdad, the U.S. military had no idea it would face an extensive IED threat.

Which would mean that the neocons who ignored warnings and declared that we would be met with as a liberating Army with flowers and all of that are directly responsible for this crap.

But we knew that. They had to have known about IEDs (bombs). They were convinced by some madmen that nobody would use the bombs against us.

[gratuitous]

10. Right

It's not like they weren't warned. But then, the millions demonstrating in the streets were dismissed as naive, not worthy of serious consideration, a focus group. With the added benefit of being right a long time ago.

The real tragedy is that it's the soldiers getting blown up, not the short-sighted architects of this quagmire. They're sitting safely stateside, collecting their sinecures and going on the talk shows to tell the public not to believe its own eyes.

[acmavm]

5. So the problems with the wear and tear on the suspension system and

the additional fuel costs outweigh the costs of human lives? Oh, excuse me for being so stupid to think that money, suspension and fuel, all replacables, are worth so much more than a life WHICH CANNOT BE REPLACED!

[peacebird]

16. according to Rumsfailed - our troops are replaceable - "fungible"

Published on Tuesday, April 20, 2004 by Newsday / Long Island, New York
Listen up, Rumsfeld: Troops aren't 'Fungible'
by Clarence Page


This explains the mindset -

"Every so often, a high-profile Washington figure gets himself or herself into trouble by inadvertently revealing what he or she really thinks. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld knows. In a town where candor can be a crime, he's a repeat offender.

His latest score came in a Pentagon news conference Thursday when he revealed a new Rummy-ism: "People are fungible." My dictionary says "fungible," which is pronounced with a soft "G" as in "sponge," refers to something that can be satisfactorily replaced, either in part or in whole, with some other part or quantity of similar value.

"Oil is fungible," experts say, in arguing why no country or cartel can quite corner the market on it. If the price is too high in one place, you can buy it someplace else and the price in the first place will come down in order to compete.

Now, Rumsfeld wants you to know, our troops are fungible, too.

http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0420-11.htm

[Career Prole]

21. While many of them are busy completely f***ing up shrub's war,

there are still many others f***ing up the economy, who hand-in-hand with the anti-choice faction will ensure a steady stream of poor people to man the hummers for generations to come.
To a mother, father, sibling, or friend a particular soldier is irreplaceable but to the M/I complex, troops are eminently replaceable. They only need a sufficient level of poor folks to draw from.
Disgusting.

[XemaSab]

6. Wait a sec...

fuel costs???

I thought we OWNED all the oil there...

[WannaJumpMyScooter]

20. No, we have to SELL the oil there to make more money

for Halliburton, see?

[sandnsea]

8. $87 billion

That's what Bush said the money was for and the evil John Kerry stopped the troops from getting armor. So what's all this "added costs" a year later about? Where'd the $87 billion go?

[Wilms]

13. Haliburton...where else? n/t

[Acryliccalico]

15. I guess some pockets are real deep

[idiosyncratic]

9. Uh, if they had secured the explosives, there wouldn't be IEDs

Or, not as many as they have encountered.

The vast majority of Humvees were not armored initially because they were not intended for use in a high-threat environment and the Army had never seen an IED threat like it faces in Iraq.

Tell me again why Rumsfailed still has a job. Good planning. Nope, wrong answer.

[tabasco]

17. Tell me why Tommy Franks got a Freedom Medal too.

He was aware of the ammo dump BEFORE we invaded and still failed to secure it. ONE PLATOON could have kept that material out of the wrong hands. :mad:

[idiosyncratic]

24. I was looking for a different cartoon about those medals

but this one will have to do for now:

[msgadget]

34. Read Doonesbury's 12/30/04 strip

http://www.doonesbury.com/strip/dailydose/index.html?uc_full_date=20041230

[DeepModem Mom]

11. Say effing what???

n/t

[Solly Mack]

12. a war of containment needs a steady supply of warm bodies not armor

which is what they never tell people...they don't have the guts to say it...but it's the truism they've based their thinking on

[Boosterman]

14. This is what ticks me off

Supposedely the military experts have been planning for the new type of wars. Mosty urban btw (think about that for a second) and they didnt plan for IEDs? Morans.

[Demeter]

23. An Ounce of Prevention Is Worth a Pound of Cure

This just proves that military intelligence is a genuine oxymoron.

[TexasChick]

25. Well, duh, Mr. Sorenson. Just maybe the Chimp should have never

declared war on these people and sent our children and parents into harms way for PNAC. Did you ever think about that? Damn, keep it up asshats, you, Dumbsfeld, etc. must be pissing the military right the eff' off!

Where are all these billions and billions of dollars the Chimp keeps asking for going, huh? *cough* Halliburton *cough*

[brentspeak]

27. Well, then replace the gas-guzzling Hummers with something better

So much for the Iraq War military beareaucracy being the "best-and-the-brightest". The only thing these guys seem able to do correctly is to make sure Halliburton gets its checks on time.

[vs the introvore]

44. please. you ninny, no offence intended, the HMMWV is not a Hummer

the M998 is a sweet vehicle for toolin' around the desert. just fucking armor them, you imbecilic and/or deranged mr. secretary, you craphead! i despise all war-planners who were not combat soldiers.

[niceypoo]

28. It adds to the cost and......

cuts into precious Haliburton profit$

[high density]

30. So the armor kits should include beefed up springs, shocks, etc.

And the increased fuel consumption sure as hell shouldn't be a problem in Iraq of all places.

Perhaps Brig. Gen. Jeffrey Sorenso would like to visit Iraq and ride around for a few nights in one of those fine unarmored Humvees.

[BrightKnight]

40. light weight ceramic armor programs

The military has been developing light weight ceramic armor for a very long time. I understand that it is light, cheap and more effective than steel.

[trogdor]

48. My thoughts exactly.

It's sooooooooooooooooo easy for some pencil-pusher to spew about how armor increases costs, bla bla bla, but you can bet he never once went on one of these missions with an unarmored HMMWV. Fscking asshole.

Incidentally, even though an armored Hummer eats more gas than one that is not armored, it sure beats the hell out of anything that lays track.

[NYC]

31. People are cannon fodder.

Parts dip into profits.

[kodi]

32. actually, operating costs decrease with decreasing casualties

rehab costs to soldiers and marines wounded far excede armorment refits that prevent injuries and deaths.

anyone in the private sector would understand this, why not the army?

can't someone just ask that fellow:" what is the cost of a wounded or dead soldier or marine to the US Defense Dept?"

[BrightKnight]

33. What does it cost to treat a wounded person for life?

What does it cost the government when someone is killed? What is a life worth?

[driver8]

35. "The Army regrets to inform you...

that a Humvee is worth more to this country than the life of your son/daughter..."

Just when I think I have heard it all...These neocons have got to be the most uncaring, insensitive, stupid dipshits that American politics has ever seen.

Good God, I am not going to survive four more years of these assholes.

[indepat]

38. Had no idea it would face an extensive IED threat: no shit! Seems

the military must have eaten up the unproven and idealistic assumptions of extreme ideologues rather than having used a modicum of common sense, rationality, reasoning, and miitary logic, without having fully considered every possible course of action by the adversity and having a plan readily in place to deal with each and every possible eventuality. Surely Military pre-101 covers order of battle et al.

[NuttyFluffers]

41. un-fucking-real (sorry mods, delete if words too harsh)

un-fucking-believable. did they seriously just try to pass off the indirect argument that "armor is so expensive it isn't worth our soldiers' lives"? am i wrong? isn't that what i just got out of this lil' bit of trash? didn't want to pass off the argument that armor isn't worth the expense, is it? isn't that like saying, "i don't mean this to be insulting, but... {add insult here}"? if he didn't want to 'defend' SoD rumsfeld's incompetence, then why bring up this tidbit at all? why doesn't he just say it's about damn time they got armor on the vehicles?

where's a vengeful angel of the lord when you need it? :mad: :spank: :grr:

what about the "expense" (:puke: i can't believe i had to phrase it like that for assholes like this to understand...) of dying soldiers? what about all that "money" (:puke:) to feed, clothe, train, transport, arm, and tend to wounds? that's an "investment" (:puke:) that a few extra bucks is not worth? it's a sacrifice "too expensive" (:puke:) to make of our country?

:grr: :nuke: :grr:

i swear, if i hear some freeptard spout this talking point about armor being "inconveniently expensive" (:puke:) i don't know if i'll be able to hold back. i'm seriously now rethinking my friends' little half-joke that there should be a 'once a year permissable assault and battery.'...

aaarrrrggggghhhhh....

[EFerrari]

47. That's right . We telegraphed the invasion for months, just in case

our "enemy" needed more time to organize. Then, we invaded with f@cked up supply and resupply lines and aren't our service people brave?

And then, we torture people FOR A YEAR while their families wait in the shadow of Abu Graib.

This is no accident. This is purposeful. These mofos are trying to make this as horrible as possible. No other explanation I can see.

.

[Frangible]

42. yeah, ok.

"Sorry son, you would get some armor, but that would make this Excel spreadsheet look bad."

I mean, thank god. Won't somebody please think of the humvee suspensions?