Blackhawk down

[Disagreeable]

Maybe they'll make a movie and you Bush Groupies can be outraged.
Link below.

"An American UH-60 Blackhawk helicopter went down in northern Iraq late Saturday, killing all 12 aboard, and 5 marines were killed in fighting with insurgents throughout central Iraq over the weekend, the military reported today."

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/08/international/middleeast/08cnd-iraq.html?hp&ex=1136782800&en=e6b2fe88157cab8c&ei=5094&partner=homepage

 

[mp.freelance]

Maybe they'll make a movie and you Bush Groupies can be outraged.
Link below.

"An American UH-60 Blackhawk helicopter went down in northern Iraq late Saturday, killing all 12 aboard, and 5 marines were killed in fighting with insurgents throughout central Iraq over the weekend, the military reported today."

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/08/international/middleeast/08cnd-iraq.html?hp&ex=1136782800&en=e6b2fe88157cab8c&ei=5094&partner=homepage

This is a pretty disgusting thing to gloat about, Dis. But then, I've come to expect that from you.

 

[Disagreeable]

Maybe they'll make a movie and you Bush Groupies can be outraged.
Link below.

"An American UH-60 Blackhawk helicopter went down in northern Iraq late Saturday, killing all 12 aboard, and 5 marines were killed in fighting with insurgents throughout central Iraq over the weekend, the military reported today."

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/08/international/middleeast/08cnd-iraq.html?hp&ex=1136782800&en=e6b2fe88157cab8c&ei=5094&partner=homepage

This is a pretty disgusting thing to gloat about, Dis. But then, I've come to expect that from you.

Gloating? I'm angry. Angry at people like you who sit on the sidelines and cheer as people die. Here's a good article about how the Bush Bunch has "taken care of our troops":

"A secret Pentagon study has found that at least 80 percent of the marines who have been killed in Iraq from wounds to their upper body could have survived if they had extra body armor. That armor has been available since 2003 but until recently the Pentagon has largely declined to supply it to troops despite calls from the field for additional protection, according to military officials.

The ceramic plates in vests currently worn by the majority of military personnel in Iraq cover only some of the chest and back. In at least 74 of the 93 fatal wounds that were analyzed in the Pentagon study of marines from March 2003 through June 2005, bullets and shrapnel struck the marines' shoulders, sides or areas of the torso where the plates do not reach.

Thirty-one of the deadly wounds struck the chest or back so close to the plates that simply enlarging the existing shields "would have had the potential to alter the fatal outcome," according to the study, which was obtained by The New York Times.

For the first time, the study by the military's medical examiner shows the cost in lost lives from inadequate armor, even as the Pentagon continues to publicly defend its protection of the troops. Officials have said they are shipping the best armor to Iraq as quickly as possible. At the same time, they have maintained that it is impossible to shield forces from the increasingly powerful improvised explosive devices used by insurgents. Yet the Pentagon's own study reveals the equally lethal threat of bullets.

The vulnerability of the military's body armor has been known since the start of the war, and is part of a series of problems that have surrounded the protection of American troops. Still, the Marine Corps did not begin buying additional plates to cover the sides of their troops until this September, when it ordered 28,800 sets, Marine Corps officials acknowledge.

The Army, which has the largest force in Iraq, is still deciding what to purchase, according to Army procurement officials. They said the Army is deciding between various sizes of plates to give its 130,000 soldiers; the officials said they hope to issue contracts this month.

Additional forensic studies by the Armed Forces Medical Examiner's unit that were obtained by The Times indicate that about 340 American troops have died solely from torso wounds."

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/06/politics/06cnd-armor.html?ei=5088&en=b13c10bd70ee9190&ex=1294203600&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&pagewanted=print

 

[mp.freelance]

Angry at people like you who sit on the sidelines and cheer as people die.

You really never get tired of repeating yourself, do you?

And of course you're gloating. Your heart leaps each time soldiers die, because it's a chance for you to stick it to Bush. That's all you care about, not the troops. It's about time you admit it.

 

[Broke Cowboy]

Having worn my share of personal armour in various parts of the world, I have two comments.

1. Yes there is always better armour out there and available. But this comment leads me to the next comment:

2. There are ALWAYS trade offs as to what to wear. Some will use the provided equipment and some will supplement with their own add ons. Unfortunately no matter how good the equipment is and how it is worn it also always is a matter of weight, flexibility, ability to wear over long periods of time and so on.

I do not wish to enter into a debate on the present equipment in the field as I am not completely familiar with it. But, the fact remains there will always be weaknesses in personal armour.

And there is very little in the line of personal armour that will stop a projectile AND a knife, spear, bayonette, etc.

Anyone wearing personal armour that will stop a heavy projectile still stands a solid chance of dying due to the hydraulic effect of heavy impact.

In this day and age the 100% solution is simply not available.

I wish it was, but it is not. Still, it is far better than when I first started - in those days it did not exist at all.

In the end to use this as an excuse to rant is far from kosher - then again I suppose I will be put in my place by at least one person.

Thoughts and prayers to those in harms way,

B.C.