Our casualties have been really low in the latest unconstitutional conflicts in AFG and IRQ...in part due to that heavy body armor. What would the author have them do, get rid of it?
Any indication from the historians about how you can get men to rest whilst knowing they are about to compete for their lives in very close and very bloody combat?
Hell, I have ahard time getting my pre-school aged chiildren to sleep.
Anon 2:26 you are dead wrong on this. The numbers KILLED have been lower than previous wars. But the numbers of maimed , totally disabled and with hopeless untreatable brain damage is actually HIGHER than all previous US wars. The only thing "body armor" gives is a lower body count at election time. Because of quick clot and body armor men who would otherwise died in previous wars are being sent home with no arms no legs and half a brain to burden their wives and children as life long helpless cripples. This is the price of the unjust and unjustifiable wars of the last 25 years. It is a price that "body armor" hides from the uncaring and disconnected public, who can comfort themselves thinking; "only 6000 died". They get to ignore the 2.5 MILLION wounded since the "war in perpetuity" was started in 1983.
My apologies...I used the word casualties....should have said killed.
We are in complete agreement on the fact that these low KIA numbers hide from the uncaring public the true price of these unjustifiable wars.
I may be in the minority on this but I'd personally rather be dead than be crippled or a burden to my family.
That said, if the SHTF here at home, I have a plate carrier in hopes that a hit will allow me to continue to fight and defend my loved ones.
I think it may be very well worth the extra weight in a defensive position. In an offensive one, where mobility may be key to strategic advantage, it's more debatable.
I might be wrong here but I suspect that "soldier's load" issues might be - at least in part - the impetus for development of powered exoskeletons. If I am wearing an exoskeleton which carries 90% of the load my muscles would otherwise be carrying, I would expect to arrive at the target area much less debilitated than I otherwise would have. If that exoskeleton also had ballistic armor incorporated, that "should" improve things for the average dogface.
To Anon@ 3:8pm, I don't know if you were ever in service, but one of the first things I learned in my stay at the quaint USMC resort called "Camp Upshire" was how to sleep. Any time I had nothing more pressing to do, I slept. If I had 15 free minutes, I could get in at least 13 minutes napping. I have retained that skill until today. I promise, most G.I.s acquire that skill. There two things no G.I. worth his salt wastes; 1) a chance to take a leak and 2) a chance to sleep since in both cases you never know when you'll get the chance to do either again.
5 comments:
Our casualties have been really low in the latest unconstitutional conflicts in AFG and IRQ...in part due to that heavy body armor. What would the author have them do, get rid of it?
Any indication from the historians about how you can get men to rest whilst knowing they are about to compete for their lives in very close and very bloody combat?
Hell, I have ahard time getting my pre-school aged chiildren to sleep.
Anon 2:26 you are dead wrong on this. The numbers KILLED have been lower than previous wars. But the numbers of maimed , totally disabled and with hopeless untreatable brain damage is actually HIGHER than all previous US wars. The only thing "body armor" gives is a lower body count at election time. Because of quick clot and body armor men who would otherwise died in previous wars are being sent home with no arms no legs and half a brain to burden their wives and children as life long helpless cripples. This is the price of the unjust and unjustifiable wars of the last 25 years. It is a price that "body armor" hides from the uncaring and disconnected public, who can comfort themselves thinking; "only 6000 died". They get to ignore the 2.5 MILLION wounded since the "war in perpetuity" was started in 1983.
My apologies...I used the word casualties....should have said killed.
We are in complete agreement on the fact that these low KIA numbers hide from the uncaring public the true price of these unjustifiable wars.
I may be in the minority on this but I'd personally rather be dead than be crippled or a burden to my family.
That said, if the SHTF here at home, I have a plate carrier in hopes that a hit will allow me to continue to fight and defend my loved ones.
I think it may be very well worth the extra weight in a defensive position. In an offensive one, where mobility may be key to strategic advantage, it's more debatable.
Thank you for the correction though. :)
I might be wrong here but I suspect that "soldier's load" issues might be - at least in part - the impetus for development of powered exoskeletons. If I am wearing an exoskeleton which carries 90% of the load my muscles would otherwise be carrying, I would expect to arrive at the target area much less debilitated than I otherwise would have. If that exoskeleton also had ballistic armor incorporated, that "should" improve things for the average dogface.
To Anon@ 3:8pm, I don't know if you were ever in service, but one of the first things I learned in my stay at the quaint USMC resort called "Camp Upshire" was how to sleep. Any time I had nothing more pressing to do, I slept. If I had 15 free minutes, I could get in at least 13 minutes napping. I have retained that skill until today. I promise, most G.I.s acquire that skill. There two things no G.I. worth his salt wastes; 1) a chance to take a leak and 2) a chance to sleep since in both cases you never know when you'll get the chance to do either again.
Post a Comment