U.S. troops buying own armor for Iraq duty

[Scairp]

(AP) -- Soldiers headed for Iraq are still buying their own body armor -- and in many cases, their families are buying it for them -- despite assurances from the military that the gear will be in hand before they're in harm's way.

<snip>

Last October, it was reported that nearly one-quarter of American troops serving in Iraq did not have ceramic plated body armor, which can stop bullets fired from assault rifles and shrapnel.

The military says the shortfall is over and soldiers who do not yet have the armor soon will. But many want to avoid the risk.

It's appalling that these guys (and girls too I suppose) feel that they cannot depend on the government that is sending them into a combat zone to have the proper equipment that will make them safer. Even the RW should be up in arms about this situation, but do you hear anything from them? I certainly don't recall an outrage about this from the right. Bunch of hypocrites as usual.

Link.
http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/03/26/body.armor.ap/index.html

[DeepModem Mom]

1. This happened in our family -- finally a story in the press --

It took far too long. And it certainly SHOULD be an issue, with Bush still standing in front of cheering soldiers, as their hero.

[lebkuchen]

2. Stars and Stripes had a letter yesterday on this issue

Spend more for protection

On March 20 there was a large “Bring the Troops Home” rally in my neighborhood. I did not expect to be moved so greatly by one group of speakers. The group consisted of mothers of servicemembers stationed in Iraq. One woman spoke eloquently. She said that her son, who she supported completely in his decision/commitment to serve in Iraq for more than one year, brought home unbelievable news of conditions for American soldiers fighting there.

She said he described soldiers who were lacking the most basic equipment, such as helmets and two-way radios, to do their jobs. She further explained that her son had spent nearly $4,000 out of his own pocket to buy badly needed equipment for himself and for members of his division. Furthermore, he felt completely unable to speak out about this problem. The family members were very upset and thought it imperative to tell others.

This information, if it can be verified, was truly shocking to me. I didn’t write today to oppose or support in any debate. I am only writing to express my deepest concern for the men and women who are doing their jobs in Iraq. I am also writing to ask a few very important questions:

1. Why aren’t the troops being supported better?

2. Where are the trillions spent for this war going?

To the soldiers and their families: Thank you, God bless you and we love and support you every day, every way.

Noel Terrell
San Francisco


Stripes printed the following letter under the one above it. :)

Terrorists amused by protests

As I watched the recent anti-war (anti-Bush/America) rallies throughout the world, I could not help but think that the terrorists must be laughing their butts off. They must be saying among themselves, “We kill thousands of their civilians and they still blame America and Bush. Ha, ha, ha.”

Jerry Komar
Collingswood, N.J.

http://www.estripes.com/article.asp?section=125&article=21232

[jmowreader]

3. How much is the owner of General Jackson's giving to the RNC?

Something occurs to me...

Go outside any large Army post and you'll see three things: bars, used car lots and "off post supply rooms." I refuse to call them army surplus stores, because they're not; what they sell is new. But basically, you can go into one of these places and get damn near any piece of military equipment you want except for weapons. We've got about a hundred of them in Fayetteville.

They're supremely profitable.

And they all sell body armor.

We know Bush is a crook and a traitor, but how much would the proprietors of these stores have to slip to the RNC to get them to somehow "forget" to purchase body armor for the troops? Knowing, of course, that when some soldier's wife decides to take matters into her own hands and get her husband some body armor she'll go to one of their stores to get it.

I have no proof whatsoever that this is happening, but if you look at how evil the Bush administration is, it makes sense.

[dbt]

4. This is inexcusable!

You cannot run armies the way you run a corporation. Cost cutters and bean counters have no business directing military supplies and numbers of troops necessary to achieve a given objective.

Of course, this kind of shit is BOUND to happen when you go to war for profit!

"Support out troops," my shiny metal ass!

:grr:
dbt

[rooboy]

5. This is Bush's "ownership society" in action. n/t

[Joanne98]

6. but but but Kerry voted against body armor for the troops

that's the ticket. The Kerry campaign should run an ad saying, "Bush got the 87 billion for the troops". Where is the armor? Did Bush steal the money or what? This is exactly why Kerry voted against it. YOU CAN'T TRUST REPUBLICANS WITH YOUR MONEY.

[fishnfla]

7. This is a crime-depraved indifference

any trooper that is killed due to this negligence was murdered by our own government. God forbid, may He keep them safe.

[UpInArms]

8. this sentence

The military says the shortfall is over and soldiers who do not yet have the armor soon will. But many want to avoid the risk.

The military will get their armor when the jobs are created.

Remember, we are right on the cusp, next week, next quarter, very soon, any day now....

:nuke:

[atreides1]

9. Where's The $87 Billion

Where's the $87 billion dollars that was suppose to be used to purchase body armor for the troops.

The Rethugs keep focusing on that money, and say that John Kerry did not support the troops by voting against that bill. Yet the troops still don't have body armor, and there is no way to follow where the money might have really gone.

My bet is it's sitting in some bank account somewhere, and why not this is the typical Bush tactic, invest small and be given a big payoff. He did it with Harken and with the Texas Rangers baseball team.

[oldcoot]

12. The troops should have had the body armor before the war

If the Rethugs bring this up, we should point out that this request for the $87 billion was made after the war started. Before getting the United States into this mess, Bush and his fellow idiots should have investigated whether the United States was ready to fight this war. A competent and responsible administration would have made sure that the troops were fully prepared and adequately equipped before sending them off to fight in Iraq. If the administration was doing its job, the troops should have had the body armor before the war started.

I bet that most of the $87 billion ended up in the ends of the private contractors.

[DeepModem Mom]

10. kick

[TahitiNut]

11. Yup. Fighting terrorism by going shopping.

One might wonder what prices are being paid for this body armor. It must be quite 'convenient' for the hucksters to both get massive mayments from the Fed and then sell at greater profits to frightened people. We're back in the days of feudal armies when soldiers had to bring their own gear ... or die. D'ya s'pose there's a warranty? D'ya s'pose the stuff is really "mil spec"?

[icymist]

13. Tell me this isn't so! Billions can be spent 'training' Iraqi police

while they won't provide basic protection for our own troops?! It's a bad dream, right?

[Karenina]

14. Yup. Until folks

WAKE UP!

[Lisa]

15. remember one of those reporters at the * turkeyfest?

Took off his vest to get some pics, and someone made off with it. I recall at the time that various DUers said that it was probably a desperate soldier who hadn't received his/her armor.