In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Body Armor-
J 1357
Member Posts: 283 ✭✭✭
Ok, first, I'm an old school army officer. My question is this. By the press and media and military advertisements, we are supposed to have the best trained and best equipped armed forces in the world. So
you guys go out there with all that fire power and get your * kicked by some rag heads. Rag heads with no body armor, a rifle and maybe an rpg.
How the hell can you fire and manuver, carrying all that weight? Wearing 40 pounds of body armor must make it hell, in an individual
hand to hand fight.
Last year, I watched a NBC news take by Richard Engle, in Afganistan.It was a fire fight, with the taliban. Engles hiding behind a wall, switch to a machine gunner firing 20,30, hell 40 round bursts. Switch to the end of the fight, Engle shows about six bullet hits in a wall. Supposedly 10-12 taliban attacked them. So, this platoon fires up thousands of rounds of ammo, supposedly has mortars, fires them. No enemy killed. Platoon goes back on the same
trail they came in on.
This little excerpt for the news, reaked of a set up, for the camera.
If it was real, I would have fired the platoon leader for being inept, I would have replaced the machine gunner for lack of fire discipline and where in the hell did a platoon of infantry get mortars?
All the firepower in the world didn't allow us to win in Vietnam. Why?
because the VC and the North fought for a cause, to them, worth dying for. No body armor, no air force, just plain guts. ya, have to respect people like that.
I'm not picking on current military. I'm just making a point. If my history serves me correctly, there hasn't been a sucessful military hold in Afganistan, ever. The russians got their * kicked and they didn't care about civilians getting in the way. Its just a matter of time before we get our * kicked, the same way.
you guys go out there with all that fire power and get your * kicked by some rag heads. Rag heads with no body armor, a rifle and maybe an rpg.
How the hell can you fire and manuver, carrying all that weight? Wearing 40 pounds of body armor must make it hell, in an individual
hand to hand fight.
Last year, I watched a NBC news take by Richard Engle, in Afganistan.It was a fire fight, with the taliban. Engles hiding behind a wall, switch to a machine gunner firing 20,30, hell 40 round bursts. Switch to the end of the fight, Engle shows about six bullet hits in a wall. Supposedly 10-12 taliban attacked them. So, this platoon fires up thousands of rounds of ammo, supposedly has mortars, fires them. No enemy killed. Platoon goes back on the same
trail they came in on.
This little excerpt for the news, reaked of a set up, for the camera.
If it was real, I would have fired the platoon leader for being inept, I would have replaced the machine gunner for lack of fire discipline and where in the hell did a platoon of infantry get mortars?
All the firepower in the world didn't allow us to win in Vietnam. Why?
because the VC and the North fought for a cause, to them, worth dying for. No body armor, no air force, just plain guts. ya, have to respect people like that.
I'm not picking on current military. I'm just making a point. If my history serves me correctly, there hasn't been a sucessful military hold in Afganistan, ever. The russians got their * kicked and they didn't care about civilians getting in the way. Its just a matter of time before we get our * kicked, the same way.
Comments
quote:Originally posted by J 1357
Ok, first, I'm an old school army officer. My question is this. By the press and media and military advertisements, we are supposed to have the best trained and best equipped armed forces in the world. So
you guys go out there with all that fire power and get your * kicked by some rag heads. Rag heads with no body armor, a rifle and maybe an rpg.
How the hell can you fire and manuver, carrying all that weight? Wearing 40 pounds of body armor must make it hell, in an individual
hand to hand fight.
Last year, I watched a NBC news take by Richard Engle, in Afganistan.It was a fire fight, with the taliban. Engles hiding behind a wall, switch to a machine gunner firing 20,30, hell 40 round bursts. Switch to the end of the fight, Engle shows about six bullet hits in a wall. Supposedly 10-12 taliban attacked them. So, this platoon fires up thousands of rounds of ammo, supposedly has mortars, fires them. No enemy killed. Platoon goes back on the same
trail they came in on.
This little excerpt for the news, reaked of a set up, for the camera.
If it was real, I would have fired the platoon leader for being inept, I would have replaced the machine gunner for lack of fire discipline and where in the hell did a platoon of infantry get mortars?
All the firepower in the world didn't allow us to win in Vietnam. Why?
because the VC and the North fought for a cause, to them, worth dying for. No body armor, no air force, just plain guts. ya, have to respect people like that.
I'm not picking on current military. I'm just making a point. If my history serves me correctly, there hasn't been a sucessful military hold in Afganistan, ever. The russians got their * kicked and they didn't care about civilians getting in the way. Its just a matter of time before we get our * kicked, the same way.
One thing I will say though, because it may be useful to others, is that by consistently training in my body armor I felt more comfortable in it then out of it. Even in the heat of Iraq when mortal thermometers stopped working... Once you spend enough hours in it it's as much a part of you as a turtle's shell. Laying on rocks? No problem! It also keeps the turret ring on a Humvee from digging into you and is a great holder for a bottle of frozen water to keep you cool and comfey. As a matter of fact I still feel like I'm missing something when I go outside and I ETS'd in '06.
Well said Hooligan. I choose not to answer someone who claims to have served, even claiming to be an officer (lol), and yet believes the media over the experience he should have as a soldier.
One thing I will say though, because it may be useful to others, is that by consistently training in my body armor I felt more comfortable in it then out of it. Even in the heat of Iraq when mortal thermometers stopped working... Once you spend enough hours in it it's as much a part of you as a turtle's shell. Laying on rocks? No problem! It also keeps the turret ring on a Humvee from digging into you and is a great holder for a bottle of frozen water to keep you cool and comfey. As a matter of fact I still feel like I'm missing something when I go outside and I ETS'd in '06.
Thanks for the comment. I was starting to think I pissed everyone off in this forum. Another thing about body armor that is often not mentioned is the confidence it instills in Soldiers. Anyway, I stopped looking at the vets forum 'cause most the things I read pi$$ed me off. General discussion is a better way to go. Good luck, take care, and thanks for your service.
Lol, +1 brother. Well said.
quote:Originally posted by hooligan1seven
In the end you stated that you were making a point. I must have missed it, unless that was for you to talk trash about service members currently serving overseas. You may be an "old school army officer", but I'd be willing to bet that you've never had anyone shoot at you. For you to say that we're getting our a$$es kicked is rediculous. How can we fire and manuever with body armor? I'm not gonna say it's effortless but as the Marines say you adapt, overcome, and conquer. Maybe you should have spent some time on the line and not drinking coffee in a CP while your Soldiers were sucking. Where did an Infantry platoon get mortars? Maybe you should look at the MTOE for a light fighter infantry company. You'll see a 60mm mortar section in there that goes out with the regular line dogs. One lesson that you should have learned in THE ARMY is that it is easy to watch and sharp shoot but very difficult to actually execute. Either way, what you say and how you say it is horrible. PLEASE COME TO FORT BRAGG and talk like this.
quote:Originally posted by J 1357
Ok, first, I'm an old school army officer. My question is this. By the press and media and military advertisements, we are supposed to have the best trained and best equipped armed forces in the world. So
you guys go out there with all that fire power and get your * kicked by some rag heads. Rag heads with no body armor, a rifle and maybe an rpg.
How the hell can you fire and manuver, carrying all that weight? Wearing 40 pounds of body armor must make it hell, in an individual
hand to hand fight.
Last year, I watched a NBC news take by Richard Engle, in Afganistan.It was a fire fight, with the taliban. Engles hiding behind a wall, switch to a machine gunner firing 20,30, hell 40 round bursts. Switch to the end of the fight, Engle shows about six bullet hits in a wall. Supposedly 10-12 taliban attacked them. So, this platoon fires up thousands of rounds of ammo, supposedly has mortars, fires them. No enemy killed. Platoon goes back on the same
trail they came in on.
This little excerpt for the news, reaked of a set up, for the camera.
If it was real, I would have fired the platoon leader for being inept, I would have replaced the machine gunner for lack of fire discipline and where in the hell did a platoon of infantry get mortars?
All the firepower in the world didn't allow us to win in Vietnam. Why?
because the VC and the North fought for a cause, to them, worth dying for. No body armor, no air force, just plain guts. ya, have to respect people like that.
I'm not picking on current military. I'm just making a point. If my history serves me correctly, there hasn't been a sucessful military hold in Afganistan, ever. The russians got their * kicked and they didn't care about civilians getting in the way. Its just a matter of time before we get our * kicked, the same way.
As for equipment do we have the best probably not, do we have better equipment than other countries are equipped with probably. As far as body armor there are better versions of the vest out there but they cost to much and there to much politicing that goes into Army acquisition.
Ok, first, I'm an old school army officer. My question is this. By the press and media and military advertisements, we are supposed to have the best trained and best equipped armed forces in the world. So
you guys go out there with all that fire power and get your * kicked by some rag heads. Rag heads with no body armor, a rifle and maybe an rpg.
How the hell can you fire and manuver, carrying all that weight? Wearing 40 pounds of body armor must make it hell, in an individual
hand to hand fight.
Last year, I watched a NBC news take by Richard Engle, in Afganistan.It was a fire fight, with the taliban. Engles hiding behind a wall, switch to a machine gunner firing 20,30, hell 40 round bursts. Switch to the end of the fight, Engle shows about six bullet hits in a wall. Supposedly 10-12 taliban attacked them. So, this platoon fires up thousands of rounds of ammo, supposedly has mortars, fires them. No enemy killed. Platoon goes back on the same
trail they came in on.
This little excerpt for the news, reaked of a set up, for the camera.
If it was real, I would have fired the platoon leader for being inept, I would have replaced the machine gunner for lack of fire discipline and where in the hell did a platoon of infantry get mortars?
All the firepower in the world didn't allow us to win in Vietnam. Why?
because the VC and the North fought for a cause, to them, worth dying for. No body armor, no air force, just plain guts. ya, have to respect people like that.
I'm not picking on current military. I'm just making a point. If my history serves me correctly, there hasn't been a sucessful military hold in Afganistan, ever. The russians got their * kicked and they didn't care about civilians getting in the way. Its just a matter of time before we get our * kicked, the same way.
You have the situation right my friend. I did 3 tours over there. IMO that body armor sucks, it only makes sense to wear it, when you are traveling in a vehicle and there are IEDs out there, then if you are unlucky and hit one, it might actually save your life. I was a ranger, and SF, and I trained to sneak around mostly at night, and to fight that way. You have heard the old saying "travel light to fight, freeze at nite" It is all because of the way we fight right now. In the desert you must be mobile. So we ride in on armored vehicles. A humvee was not made to be armored, it was made to replace the jeep. Case in point, if we have to get engaged in south america, say like Venezuela, those up armored vehicles and body armor, are going away. The vehicles will sink in the mud, and soldiers will not be able to take the heat and humidity and wear body armor. Hooray for common sense.[^][^]
Anyway, we had no problem running to cover or executing our battle drills, even with all of that stuff on. I dont know what news clip was watched or what was said. I know that when you are ambushed by enemies behind cover and from an elevated (understatement) position, you unload a lot of ammo while you maneuver your men around at known and suspected enemy positions.
I am a poorly educated infantry NCO but I think the geeky dudes who wrote the manuals call that Suppressive Fire and Fire Superiority. We didn't waste ammo but you sure as hell don't want to take too much time finding targets with well aimed shots, when all hell just broke loose...rpgs and rpks are raining down on you from the top of a freaking cliff and all of your men are relatively exposed.
A lot all of our battles start as ambushes, it's the nature of our enemy. They have the luxury of picking when and where they engage. When ambushed and you are in the kill zone, you return fire and move.
Winning or losing? My job as an NCO is to accomplish my mission(s) and take care of my men. I did both, I don't view that as a loss. All my men came home this time (thank God) and we accomplished everything we were asked to do.
Boys in defense of J 1357, (and I know nothing about him) he is right about a lot of things. On my second tour I went over as a LNO, myself, a field grade officer, and a couple of Senior NCOs. I served on a PTT team so I was out in the do do. Half way through, my tour, because of my rank E-9 and Credentials, I got scarfed up to serve in a Higher HQ. At first as the senior battle NCO, and then as the Battle Captain. I hated this job, I am a field soldier, but I had to follow orders. The only good thing that came out of this, was I had the inside scoop all the time. I had to gather information, do reports, listen to briefings, and make decisions all the time, and put up with a lot of whining rear echelon idiots, one a female colonel,who loved chewing officer and senior nco *. She was a bully, she left me alone though, which was good, because my morale was so bad working there, I might have had to time in FT Leavenworth, if she had of tried to work me over like some of the others. So back to the story, I am handling the battle desk one night and I get a report of an MP patrol, that has engaged the enemy, so they say, and they have fired 4,000 rds of SAW ammunition. Know what they hit, nothing, that"s right nothing. I blew my top. So did the General. If these MP cats had to hump that 40 hundred rd boxes of ammo on their backs, they would not have blown through that much ammo. I saw a Division Commander stop a briefing one day, because his troops pulling wall duty fired 47 rds of ammo at insurgents. They hit nothing. The general told his staff, the next time his people fire 47 rounds of ammo at insurgents, someone needs to be dead or wounded. This went on all the time. My little tour there had me so frustrated and disgusted with the way we were running things, that when I finally got back home, I wanted to burn my uniform and go be by myself. Now I got over that, but it took awhile. So cut the guy some slack, If he was an OLD TIME Army Officer he at least understands the concept of tactical operations and winning. Well that is how I see it. Think I am a bitter FOOL? 10 years later why are we still in Afghanistan? MAS is back in Iraq. Muqtada al-sadr, Shiite cleric, aka Iranian punk boy, is back in Iraq to cause trouble. We could have and should have killed him back in 04.
you realize during wars like WWII and veitnam the amount of rounds to kill one enemy soldier was like in the hundreds of thousands of rounds? Crazy huh.
Today with auto gone off rifles and the emphasis off of spray and pray, I would bet soldiers kill ratio per bullet capita lol, is probably a lot less.
One of my teachers in college pointed out in the 90's that most of the guys in Iraq were in better shape than most of the guys he served in Vietnam with. He said they didn't work out near as much as the younger guys today do.
I know for a fact Navy boot camp for me in 1976 was more mind games than physical. I could see the difference when my youngest son went through Navy boot camp in 2006. The sailors then were in better shape than we were.
We own that country.
Taliban attacks are politically effective - but we aren't taking many casualties over there.
Well - it's hell!
1. We are far more mechanized than we were in the past.
2. We move slower.
3. We accept less tactical risk.
Ok, first, I'm an old school army officer. My question is this. By the press and media and military advertisements, we are supposed to have the best trained and best equipped armed forces in the world. So
you guys go out there with all that fire power and get your * kicked by some rag heads. Rag heads with no body armor, a rifle and maybe an rpg.
Does he have a point? Notice the term "advertisement" -- don't we all remember watching the "reporters" hiding being logs while talking about how bad it was??? And also consider how we were using Hummers as tactical vehicles -- hummer vs IED is a bad matchup
This little excerpt for the news, reaked of a set up, for the camera.
Remember the "60 Minutes" hatchet job on the Abrams? He sounds line one of us who saw that and the resultant political fallout
I'm not picking on current military. I'm just making a point. If my history serves me correctly, there hasn't been a sucessful military hold in Afganistan, ever. The russians got their * kicked and they didn't care about civilians getting in the way. Its just a matter of time before we get our * kicked, the same way.
Who's ever read Kipling's poems about fighting in that area? He has some vivid images about such fighting.
I made the same observation after watching a news report on an ambush over there. The news folks showed a bird colonel and his SGM standing behind a hummer talking about throwing grenades.
The vehicles were sitting still Back when they were indoctrinating me for service in VN we were taught to move move move! when ambushed.
Is it different now? With IED's around do we stay on the road and fight back from stationary vehicles?
The question the original poster was asking is are our grunts so heavily loaded that they can't move like troops did in the jungle?
Did the troops in VN need to carry all that weight?
Again he was not putting our current troops down, he was trying to get some help understanding the "new" reality.
I was commissioned right at the end of VN. Got the "Thanks for your service but don't let the door hit you on the way home" letter at the end of my obligation and transferred to the Reserves to study how to use nukes and survive gas/bug attacks.
We've all spent time in different armies and should remember that before returning fire from a perceived attack.
So back to his question: How the hell can you fire and manuver, carrying all that weight?
So let's sit down and think for a moment -- how often have we sent troops into a conflict with too much gear?
And how much is too much ammo?
Remember we got the M-16 when they realized normal engagement ranges were under 200m so who needs an 800m weapon?
Consider his message again. Did you react to what he was saying, or to what you've heard from others?
We need to write the history of the VN era before we get too old.
And we also need to remember to explain that everyone's experience was different but that doesn't make one "more real" or "more right" than another's experience.