Malaysian-born US soldier files lawsuit over Iraq deployment
-
haha that is what they alway tell you when they want you to clear the obstacle in front - "yes there is artillery , yep soldier ready to protect you" !!!Originally posted by Shotgun:You have serious misconception of Combat Engineers. We always have artillery and amphibious assets around to secure the gap before any bridging begins.
But in real - the obstacle is in front line - usually guarded by enemy .... !!!
So what you expect the top man to tell you " Combat engineer -go take down the obstacle .....but we may not have anything to protect you !!!"
Think have they ever even teach you to how to call down artillery fire in combat engineers ? Yep you go to gap !.... then yell enemy engage in gap !!! artillery engage .... help ..... you think the artillery can target them ? or maybe the rounds may end up on top of you instead. -
Sorry I don't blow open gaps.
We kena arty, the equipment gets blown up, too many pioneers die, the Leopard2s, SM1s, and tonner better figure out how to SWIM across the water or causeway. -
Not sure about today, but in the 70s, Bridging Engineers had organic recon elements.
These chaps were trained in combat survival, recon and raiding work in addition to their primary role as scout parties for the safest and best river crossing zones. -
But Michael Moore is a fraud, as bad as Bush. So much of what he said is made up as well.Originally posted by Daniel-Lim:I just watched the Michael Moore 911 documentary again.
Forgive me for ranting, just very affected by watching the 911 documentary again. At the time of the documentary's release, the Iraq body count of US troops was only in the hundreds. Now it is in the thousands. -
Most certainly agree. Moore is a crook.Originally posted by chino65:But Michael Moore is a fraud, as bad as Bush. So much of what he said is made up as well.
The things that I was referring to is not the drivel from Moore. The things that affected me from the film were reported facts.
For example, Saddam did not have anything to do with bin Laden. Iraq had no WMD. These 2 facts alone made the Iraq invasion questionable. -
And don't forget the other farce about US troops in Iraq being BANNED from wearing Dragonskin body armor, and only allowed to wear US MILITARY approved Interceptor armor.
Countless tests have shown Dragonskin to be superior to the Interceptor, yet the Pentagon can daringly claim that Dragonskin failed their tests. Dragonskin was not even penetrated by a GRENADE going off right in front of it, and withstood AK-47 7.62mm fire from point blank!
If those troops have to be there, why don't they give them the best protection there is available? Again, its politics and Money. -
Therefore we must not allow politicians to interfere with military affairs. As in the case of Malaysia and US,the politicians will manage the military according to their interests and not to the nation's and soldiers interest.Originally posted by Shotgun:And don't forget the other farce about US troops in Iraq being BANNED from wearing Dragonskin body armor, and only allowed to wear US MILITARY approved Interceptor armor.
Countless tests have shown Dragonskin to be superior to the Interceptor, yet the Pentagon can daringly claim that Dragonskin failed their tests. Dragonskin was not even penetrated by a GRENADE going off right in front of it, and withstood AK-47 7.62mm fire from point blank!
If those troops have to be there, why don't they give them the best protection there is available? Again, its politics and Money. -
Apparently the problem wasn't with the bullet resistance of the dragonskin, but with the fact that the plastic laminates used to hold to 'scales' together decomposed at 60 Celsius and above. The company argued that by 60 Celsius, the soldier would be dead, but they did not take into account the storage and transport of dragonskin, where such high temperatures are easily reached.Originally posted by Shotgun:And don't forget the other farce about US troops in Iraq being BANNED from wearing Dragonskin body armor, and only allowed to wear US MILITARY approved Interceptor armor.
Countless tests have shown Dragonskin to be superior to the Interceptor, yet the Pentagon can daringly claim that Dragonskin failed their tests. Dragonskin was not even penetrated by a GRENADE going off right in front of it, and withstood AK-47 7.62mm fire from point blank!
If those troops have to be there, why don't they give them the best protection there is available? Again, its politics and Money.
Remember that a bullet-resistant vest for military use must not only be effective, it must remain effective after being stored for many years. How much do you think the US Army would have to pay for climate control chambers to store the body armour to ensure that it wouldn't fall apart? Would it be cost effective for the increase in bullet resistance?
Also, dragonskin is heavier than the presently issued body armour, so soldiers move slower and suffer more heat injuries.
In summary, bullet resistance is not the only factor that determines whether a vest is chosen. We should keep in mind other criteria whereby the vest could have been rejected before condemning political interference in the military.