To: Mr. Mulliner; Arioch7
I agree that the Col has changed, but, the gist of my post is, what if he is correct about our soldier's equipment not being able to withstand a chemical attack. My post was not meant as an endorsement of Hackworth, rather, I was more interested in the validity of his claim. If he is correct, then our young men are being set-up for an impossible task.
As you all know, some politicians have stated that it's ok to lie to the American people under the guise of "National Security". That, my friends, is BS. We should never be lied to.
FReegards
42 posted on
10/14/2002 8:01:04 PM PDT by
poet
To: poet
Your concerns about chemical equipment are probably overblown. During the time I spent in the Army, we received technical bulletins, I believe on a monthly basis, which told us, by production lot number, which protective mask filters, chemical protective suits, etc., were no longer good, and had to be destroyed or turned in. Each company had an NCO designated to maintain the chemical gear for the company, and to ensure that the gear was still operational. When we deployed to the Gulf for Desert Shield, we checked all this equipment very closely, and made damn sure that all lot numbers were good. It is safe to assume that our troops are doing the same thing to prepare.
50 posted on
10/15/2002 4:32:06 PM PDT by
rangerX
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson