Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Cannoneer No. 4
I appreciate the arguments on the other side, but I think the troops want them and feel they would be safer, don't they?
28 posted on 01/02/2004 5:11:30 PM PST by doug from upland (Don't wait until it is too late to stop Hillary -- do something today!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies ]


To: doug from upland
The Army ain't Burger King. The troops don't always have it their way.

There is no end to what the troops want. The richest country the world has ever seen cannot afford to give every soldier everything he or she wants.

The troops already have the vehicles they are supposed to have. Great care and effort has gone into Tables of Organization and Equipment for each unit, specifying in infinite detail what this artillery battery or that mess kit repair platoon shall have. Our tankers have tanks, our mechanized infantrymen have Bradleys, our combat engineers have M113 armored personnel carriers, our artillerymen have self propelled howitzers, and our military police have M114 armored HMMWVs; almost every unit in the Army has enough vehicles to mount the entire unit and move out. The military term for that is deployable with organic transportation, meaning they don't need outside help to move.

The "shortage" of M114 armored humvees is a result of the "shortage" of military police.

You have heard of LTC West, who was put out of the Army for roughing up a prisoner. LTC West was a Field Artillery battalion commander. His battalion was given tasks which have nothing whatsoever to do with fire support. They were acting as infantry, performing stability and support operations and trying to be MPs as best they could. Most of the Army in Iraq is caught up in trying to retain their original capabilities while accomplishing constabulary missions. Our field artilleryman may be kicking down doors and searching houses one night and bringing down rapid and accurate counter-mortar fire on Hadji's head the next.

Much was made a while back ago of some of our troops using AK-47s because they had no rifles, as if the Army was somehow derelict in not providing these soldiers with the proper arms. Turns out these AK - armed soldiers were tank commanders and tank gunners who by TOE are armed with pistols, not rifles, but they were tasked to act as infantry and had to scrounge.

There are a great many units acquiring M1114 Armored HMMWVs who were never previously authorized them. Progress is being made. I think greater use could be made of other vehicles that would serve the same purpose, including former Iraqi vehicles.

But whatever we mount our constabulary troopers in, we can't let protection degrade our lethality. Our best protection is dead enemies.

29 posted on 01/02/2004 6:15:01 PM PST by Cannoneer No. 4 (Brave Rifles! You have been baptised in fire and blood and come out steel.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson