NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.sftt.org/main.cfm?actionId=globalShowStaticContent&screenKey=cmpDefense&htmlCategoryID=30&htmlId=4514

Now this is a story I am of two minds on this one
I can understand wanting to make sure that solders are given uniformly quality armor. Why should the army be responsible for paying out when the solder choose to use a potentially inferior piece of equipment and get themselves killed for it

How can you refund or insure equipment you didn't manufacture? Its like blaming Chrysler for third party brake failure.

But some of this third party armor may be of a higher standard
And I am all for saving peoples lives when possible

I don't know what do you all think

It's pretty fucked up. The military should simply test the third party body armor and if it meets or exceeds military specs then it should not invalidate their benefits.

you mean the military doesn't already use the best armor there is?

It's pretty fucked up. The military should simply test the third party body armor and if it meets or exceeds military specs then it should not invalidate their benefits.
Agreed (thought I put that in there but must have been my reply on digg lol)

you mean the military doesn't already use the best armor there is?Naturally, the military claims that they do use the best body armor there is. The soldiers in question disagree.

In the military, disobeying a lawful order is grounds for punishment, i.e. having your benefits yanked. Period. Doesn't matter if the order is about armor or about hopping on one foot and crowing like a rooster every day at dawn. If you object to an order, you go through proper channels to address it. You don't get to say no, or just do whatever you think is best instead.

In the military, disobeying a lawful order is grounds for punishment, i.e. having your benefits yanked. Period. Doesn't matter if the order is about armor or about hopping on one foot and crowing like a rooster every day at dawn. If you object to an order, you go through proper channels to address it. You don't get to say no, or just do whatever you think is best instead.
With that attitude I think then we should start making the millitary more responsable for their fuckups. If they allow no independant thought or preporation they should be absolutly and totaly responsable when their methods fail

With that attitude I think then we should start making the millitary more responsable for their fuckups. If they allow no independant thought or preporation they should be absolutly and totaly responsable when their methods fail

I totally agree. Whoever ordered it should be held responsible.

From the article: Currently nine U.S. generals stationed in Afghanistan are reportedly wearing Pinnacle Dragon Skin body armor, according to company spokesman Paul Chopra. Chopra, a retired Army chief warrant officer and 20+-year pilot in the famed 160th "Nightstalkers" Special Operations Aviation Regiment (Airborne), said his company was merely told the generals wanted to "evaluate" the body armor in a combat environment. Chopra said he did not know the names of the general officers wearing the Dragon Skin.
Seems to me that if generals are allowed to "evaluate" the armor, then individuals who bought it with their own money ought to be able to do the same.

From the article:
Seems to me that if generals are allowed to "evaluate" the armor, then individuals who bought it with their own money ought to be able to do the same.
If you consider the whole controversy over the Zylon body armor fiasco for police (bought both by departments and by individuals who fell for the marketing hype about it being lighter and stronger), it's best to buy armor that has been through some testing.

The Interceptor body armor is pretty damn good. It's hard to think of a set that's more protective (although some may be lighter). And it's gone through rather extensive testing - something you can't say about the other body armor that is very new.

Generals rarely go into situations these days where they'll be shot at. It's the common soldier who kicks in doors and gets shot at.

They're adding side plates to the Interceptor as we speak - side plates that have been tested. So the armor is getting better. A few policemen who fell for the idea that the bleeding edge of armor tech is the best buy paid for that with their lives.

From the article:
Seems to me that if generals are allowed to "evaluate" the armor, then individuals who bought it with their own money ought to be able to do the same.

They can evaluate it all they want in their spare time. When in uniform, they have to wear their legally issued uniform and gear. It is the generals' job to select that gear. That's why they are the ones evaluating IN uniform.

Edit: I agree with the above post that generals are unlikely to get shot. The current situation isn't perfect. But disregarding the chain of command and wearing whatever you please isn't the right answer.

They can evaluate it all they want in their spare time. When in uniform, they have to wear their legally issued uniform and gear. It is the generals' job to select that gear. That's why they are the ones evaluating IN uniform.
One might add that certain types of units get the new armor before others.

Special Forces and Rangers got the IBA armor first more than a few years back - way before it was issued to everyone else.

In the military, disobeying a lawful order is grounds for punishment, i.e. having your benefits yanked. Period. Doesn't matter if the order is about armor or about hopping on one foot and crowing like a rooster every day at dawn. If you object to an order, you go through proper channels to address it. You don't get to say no, or just do whatever you think is best instead.
wow Orwelian much? dont thinmk just do whatever big brother and dont think for yourself . . .wow ya thats gonna work . . .how bout we try instaling tele screnes next? that should make us safer!!!

wow Orwelian much? dont thinmk just do whatever big brother and dont think for yourself . . .wow ya thats gonna work . . .how bout we try instaling tele screnes next? that should make us safer!!!
In geneal I agree
But in the millitary effectiveness saves lives ... whatever works. They voulentarily chose this path.

wow Orwelian much? dont thinmk just do whatever big brother and dont think for yourself . . .wow ya thats gonna work . . .how bout we try instaling tele screnes next? that should make us safer!!!
Not Orwellian - it's military.

Let's see you join, say, the UK army, and tell the sergeant major that you aren't going to wear the UK issue helmet while on patrol - you'll be using this new French helmet you purchased yourself.

you mean the military doesn't already use the best armor there is?
Only in the minds of the people with regular access to the press.

Not Orwellian - it's military.

Let's see you join, say, the UK army, and tell the sergeant major that you aren't going to wear the UK issue helmet while on patrol - you'll be using this new French helmet you purchased yourself.

Canadian soldiers do this all the time -- they have the stuff they're issued (which meets standards), but soldiers who have been "in" for any length of time collect the best kit (exceeding standards) for personal use. They end up with a mismatch of equipment produced by different countries - maybe British boots or a Gurka machete or whatever. At least, the soldier I lived with and all his friends did that. They considered it normal. Mind you, a lot of it was in addition to, and not replacement of, existing equipment.

For example, lots of Canadian soldiers hate their (relatively) new Kevlar helmet. Yes, it's bullet proof, but they're not allowed to use it as a multi-purpose washbasin/water bucket/impromptu shovel/etc any more either.

Canadian soldiers do this all the time -- they have the stuff they're issued (which meets standards), but soldiers who have been "in" for any length of time collect the best kit (exceeding standards) for personal use. They end up with a mismatch of equipment produced by different countries - maybe British boots or a Gurka machete or whatever. At least, the soldier I lived with and all his friends did that. They considered it normal. Mind you, a lot of it was in addition to, and not replacement of, existing equipment.

For example, lots of Canadian soldiers hate their (relatively) new Kevlar helmet. Yes, it's bullet proof, but they're not allowed to use it as a multi-purpose washbasin/water bucket/impromptu shovel/etc any more either.

Minor pieces of kit in the US as well.

Your helmet, body armor, weapon, and uniform are usually considered something you can't replace on your own.

I preferred everyone in the squad to have the same webgear, as it makes it easier on everyone if you get hit.

http://www.sftt.org/main.cfm?actionId=globalShowStaticContent&screenKey=cmpDefense&htmlCategoryID=30&htmlId=4514

Now this is a story I am of two minds on this one
I can understand wanting to make sure that solders are given uniformly quality armor. Why should the army be responsible for paying out when the solder choose to use a potentially inferior piece of equipment and get themselves killed for it

How can you refund or insure equipment you didn't manufacture? Its like blaming Chrysler for third party brake failure.

But some of this third party armor may be of a higher standard
And I am all for saving peoples lives when possible

I don't know what do you all think


The problem is that the military isn't giving out enough armor. It's not that the soldiers are choosing to use armor that they picked out themselves and not choosing to use what the military gave them, it's that the military isn't giving many of them any armor.

http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=59026