Is the best body armor available too expensive to be provided to our troops?

http://www.military.com/opinion/0,15202,78927_1,00.html

I wonder if it is expense, or political connections that have prevented this armor from becoming standard. It would seem to me that if it is expense, one should consider the cost of the injuries that could be prevented. The disability payments over a lifetime for a severely injured soldier would easily outweigh the additional cost of the Dragon Scale Armor. The number of severely injured soldiers is far greater than the number of dead soldiers.

It seems to me, that we owe our soldiers the best equipment we can buy. We certainly are willing to spend large sums on the best airplanes and tanks. Why is it that the best body armor is just to expensive?

ya, that would be sweet. if we just didnt buy one F-22 we could supply this to everybody. It doesnt make sense.

Is the best body armor available too expensive to be provided to our troops?


No.

It's just that the Bush cabal could give a fuck less. (The scandal over the lack of armored HumVees is another example.)

However.......IF the Smirking Imbecile's brother or another close Corporate crony (that had made huge contributions to the Reichwing faction) happened to OWN Pinnacle Armor in Fresno, California, THEN we would not be having this discussion.

It's just that the Bush cabal could give a fuck less. (The scandal over the lack of armored HumVees is another example.)
When you finally got your wish, the Humvees rolled over because they were too heavy, killing many soldiers.
Leave it to people who know better, Ok?

http://www.daytondailynews.com/project/content/project/humvee/daily/0611humvee.html

When you finally got your wish, the Humvees rolled over because they were too heavy, killing many soldiers.
Leave it to people who know better, Ok?

I had no "wish".

I believe you are confusing me with someone who wanted the HumVees to be more armored.

Just because I commented on the fact that there was a bone of contention over the HumVees being poorly armored does not mean that I myself was deeply concerned (or concerned at all) over the issue.

I am perfectly happy to leave the issue of how well HumVees are armored to "those who know better".

No.

It's just that the Bush cabal could give a fuck less. (The scandal over the lack of armored HumVees is another example.)

However.......IF the Smirking Imbecile's brother or another close Corporate crony (that had made huge contributions to the Reichwing faction) happened to OWN Pinnacle Armor in Fresno, California, THEN we would not be having this discussion.

WTF is your problem freethinker? why is it always Bush's fault? He doesn't allocate money to individual pieces of equipment. I served all of my military time during the Clinton years, guess what? I didnt have any body armor. You know what I had? a flak vest. not designed to stop bullets at all, only shell fragments. Why is that? there were bullet proof vest around way back in 1993 right? Let me guess, George Bush somehow had a say in it because he hates the military and secretly wants them to die. The fact is the troops never have the right equipment or enough of it, ever. Your child like finger pointing is retarded. "tehy odnt have it becasue of the bush cabal" fucking grow up dumbass, learn some history before you go spouting off about "scandals" and things you know nothing about. Like you said, leave the military and its equipment problems to peole who know better and move on to something you know about, like conspiracys and saecret programs designed to steal our freedoms

Like the humvees, it may be as simple as the company cannot produce enough to satisfy the army's needs. given that the company only has 30 employees i doubt they can manufacture a whole lot.

Like the humvees, it may be as simple as the company cannot produce enough to satisfy the army's needs. given that the company only has 30 employees i doubt they can manufacture a whole lot.No matter, they'll just issue them to ranks E-7 and above. The rest of the grunts will just have to pray hard. :D

Like the humvees, it may be as simple as the company cannot produce enough to satisfy the army's needs. given that the company only has 30 employees i doubt they can manufacture a whole lot.

I agree completely that it's not as simple as just saying we want more and having them just appear. Just the logistics of moving them to Iraq from the U.S. takes quite a bit of time. But on the other hand, just throwing up your arms and saying it's a small company, what can we do, is silly. The Army can find other sources, it can do the work itself, etc. If it really wanted to, it's had plenty of time to come up with a better solution.

why is it always Bush's fault? He doesn't allocate money to individual pieces of equipment.

You're, of course, absolutely correct, but the buck stops at the top. Bush selects the people in charge and he gets to get rid of them if they're not getting the job done. Rumsfeld isn't get the job done, but he's still there.

Like the humvees, it may be as simple as the company cannot produce enough to satisfy the army's needs. given that the company only has 30 employees i doubt they can manufacture a whole lot.

I'll bet that if they got a contract to produce more, they would hire some more people. It is logical not to expand before getting the contract. Little companies with a better product are supposed to get a chance to grow. It's called capitalism.

How often would the Defence Department tender for contracts,would they not be wed to a different contractor at present.

WTF is your problem freethinker? why is it always Bush's fault? He doesn't allocate money to individual pieces of equipment.

I did not allege that it was any one person's "fault".

But even a moron would have to agree that it IS the RESPONSIBILITY of someone in the Bush Administration. (note; Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld comes to mind)

You know what I had? a flak vest. not designed to stop bullets at all, only shell fragments. Why is that?

Becuase --as is exactly the case now-- those in charge of deciding whether or not to procure bulletproof armor for the troops made a decision; that it wasn't worth the cost to protect them in that way.

Let me guess, George Bush somehow had a say in it because he hates the military and secretly wants them to die.

I didn't say that.

I said that Bush and his people do not care if the troops have the best armor or not.

NOW........try to refute that. (and leave your silly strawmen arguments out of it next time)

_____________________________________________

The most cold-blooded, murderous people involved in the Iraq conflict are to be found in Washington D.C., atop the nation’s military-industrial and war media complexes – at the soulless pinnacles of Empire and Inequality, Inc. They stride in expensive suits through the safe, tranquil, air-conditioned corridors of power while brown-skinned children weep in anguish and U.S. soldiers lose their limbs in the sweltering bloodbath of “liberated” Iraq.

well, all I can say is, anyone who wants to cut defense spending and at the same time criticizes the military for not giving its troops the best equipment is a few eggs short of a dozen. I am quite sure I have seen you say you wanted to spend less on defense, have you not?

There is no excuse for our troops not getting the best equipment possible, no matter what the cost. If we expect them to fight & die in a mindless and useless war, the least we can do is provide bullet proof vests. Families are buying vests & sending them over there. If families can provide soldiers with vests - why the hell can't the US military do it?

The buck stops with Bush, he's the commander in chief. If he wanted all the troops to have vests - barring any delays in manufacturing them - they could be bought & flown over & on the soldiers backs in a matter of days. I don't buy the logistics argument - a transport plane can be in Iraq in 12 hours. Logistics is certainly a zero issue. Having enough of them might be an issue, but that again is just bad planning - we've been in Iraq since 2003 and the US military has been around for a long time.

well, all I can say is, anyone who wants to cut defense spending and at the same time criticizes the military for not giving its troops the best equipment is a few eggs short of a dozen.

The two are not mutually exclusive.

A few tens of billions less could be spent on nuclear bombs and used to purchase the very best armored vests for the troops.



I am quite sure I have seen you say you wanted to spend less on defense, have you not?


Absolutely.

Long after this country is nothing but a memory, future historians will look back and point out that the reason it bankrupted itself --and caused its own demise-- was its insane level of military spending.

There is no excuse for our troops not getting the best equipment possible, no matter what the cost. If we expect them to fight & die in a mindless and useless war, the least we can do is provide bullet proof vests. Families are buying vests & sending them over there. If families can provide soldiers with vests - why the hell can't the US military do it?

The buck stops with Bush, he's the commander in chief. If he wanted all the troops to have vests - barring any delays in manufacturing them - they could be bought & flown over & on the soldiers backs in a matter of days. I don't buy the logistics argument - a transport plane can be in Iraq in 12 hours. Logistics is certainly a zero issue. Having enough of them might be an issue, but that again is just bad planning - we've been in Iraq since 2003 and the US military has been around for a long time.

I still dont buy the "families are sending body armor to iraq" bit. can you find me a picture of a soldier wearing home bought body armor? DOnt get me wrong, it is sad they dont have the best, and I have gone over that already, its just that in the military you have to be in uniform, I just cant see a bunch of troops running around in store bought vests. I mean, if that were the case, why not buy better everything? you vant just go out buying whatever you want and wearing it around. hell , you cant even walk around with your chin strap undone without getting yelled at. I can see some platoon sergeants reaction when joe private shows up to formation in a civilian vest, lol

I still dont buy the "families are sending body armor to iraq" bit.

It doesn't matter if you buy it or not. It's happening. Family's / churches / local groups etc are buying body armour for US troops and sending it over. It even mentions it in that article first posted in this thread.

I know, I have heard it mentioned, its just that I have never seen a troop in homebought gear, or heard any of my friends who went there mention it. For all I know it could have as much merrit as all those storys of attrocities at the Suuperdome that never happened.

I still dont buy the "families are sending body armor to iraq" bit. can you find me a picture of a soldier wearing home bought body armor? DOnt get me wrong, it is sad they dont have the best, and I have gone over that already, its just that in the military you have to be in uniform

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2004-03-26-body-armor_x.htm

Soldiers in Iraq still buying their own body armor
-------The Associated Press

Soldiers headed for Iraq are still buying their own body armor — and in many cases, their families are buying it for them — despite assurances from the military that the gear will be in hand before they're in harm's way.

Body armor distributors have received steady inquiries from soldiers and families about purchasing the gear, which can cost several thousand dollars. Though the military has advised them not to rely on third-party suppliers, many soldiers say they want it before they deploy.

Last October, it was reported that nearly one-quarter of American troops serving in Iraq did not have ceramic plated body armor, which can stop bullets fired from assault rifles and shrapnel.

The military says the shortfall is over and soldiers who do not yet have the armor soon will. But many want to avoid the risk.

"What we hear from soldiers is that they are told that they are going to get body armor just before they leave or just after they get there. But they don't want to take a chance," said Nick Taylor, owner of Bulletproofme.com, an online distributor of body armor in Austin, Texas.

Reliance Armor in Cincinnati, which makes armored vests for soldiers and police, has nearly doubled in size as a result of the shortage.

"We're getting people locally who are deployed National Guard and parents, specifically, coming in and buying," said Don Budke, the company's vice president of sales.

....


Dan Britt paid about $1,400 for body armor for his son, a medic stationed in Kuwait who had orders to move into Baghdad. He recently heard his son received it.

...

Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, who serves on the Armed Services subcommittee, said she knows soldiers who were told by the military to buy body armor before leaving, rather than risk arriving with nothing but their shirts.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

ya, like I said, I have heard this before, I want pictures of soldiers in civilian gear among soliders in issue gear

ya, like I said, I have heard this before, I want pictures of soldiers in civilian gear among soliders in issue gear

Who said it was civilian gear? It's not like the families went to walmart to buy it. They buy them from the same place the military do.

As for your comment about the superdome. My wife works with a woman who was in the superdome for 5 days with her daughter. Her account is the truth was quashed. Her account is that there was gunfire all the time, there were people being raped & there were dead bodies easily found, that people were going literally crazy. Hardly suprising 5 days in that heat & those conditions. Maybe we should be fixing our problems before we worry about Iraq.

and where would you go to buy military issue body armor drew?

and I did hear all those things about the superdome way out here in CA. Geraldo was crying outside of it for petes sake

I don't disagree that it would be optimal, if this is the best product. But attributing it to bush is rather mindless. Bush doesn't decide every micro-item about the war. If you want to beef about it it's the DOD who's responsible for that. They have their criteria. I'm sure it's a well thought out set of criteria and like any large organization is not very nimble. If you want to beef then i suggest that you concentrate on the process.

and where would you go to buy military issue body armor drew?

and I did hear all those things about the superdome way out here in CA. Geraldo was crying outside of it for petes sake

plenty of places I am sure http://www.armoroutlet.com/

I don't disagree that it would be optimal, if this is the best product. But attributing it to bush is rather mindless. Bush doesn't decide every micro-item about the war. If you want to beef about it it's the DOD who's responsible for that. They have their criteria. I'm sure it's a well thought out set of criteria and like any large organization is not very nimble. If you want to beef then i suggest that you concentrate on the process.

I'd hardly call having body armour a micro-item.

The problem is you guys can never just call it as it us. You have to defend a "position" at all costs buy coming up with the most obtuse and silly points imaginable - even if that position is indefensible.

I don't disagree that it would be optimal, if this is the best product. But attributing it to bush is rather mindless.

I haven't heard of anyone attributing it soley to Bush.

ya, like I said, I have heard this before, I want pictures of soldiers in civilian gear among soliders in issue gear first of all your being ridiculous. but worse than that is it will be hard to find because the military has banned soilders from wearing their superior armor. They would rather have soilders DIE NEEDLESSLY then have the otherr soilders feeling like they are inadaquately protected. and if you ask me for a source and I provide I would ask that you kindly stop being in such utter and perpetual ignorence of whats going on (Or at least admit that I know far more then you about the current situation in Iraq).

But attributing it to bush is rather mindless. Bush doesn't decide every micro-item about the war.

Of course not, but he put Rumsfeld in charge of DoD, and it all flows down from there. Rumsfeld bungled Iraq, but because Bush is insanely loyal to his friends, Rummy's still there.

first of all drew, I do want the best for all of our troops, period. its not about wanting it for them or not, or defending a position. I have been saying we ned the best since I can remember, no matter who is in charge.

and you can kick around rumsfeld all you want, and post as many sob stories and links as you want, men in the army dont jus twalk around wearing whatever they want, it doesnt happen like that. according to guerilla its because we would rather have them die, but guerillas a cluelsess idiot. he would probably believe it if thetruthisoutthere.com said we had gas chambers and ovens set up to exterminate all the arabs hiddin in the wastelands of iraq.

Trav, the original story said some generals had it. If it's not issued to the soldiers, but there is precedent for its usage in the military, could it be acceptable?

a unit could only use it if everyone had the same. generals have always done thier own thing. look at patton and his ivory revolvers. you think any grunts would get away with carrying those out in the open like that??

and where would you go to buy military issue body armor drew?

Maybe you missed this, Trav -------

Soldiers in Iraq still buying their own body armor
-------The Associated Press

Soldiers headed for Iraq are still buying their own body armor — and in many cases, their families are buying it for them. Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, who serves on the Armed Services subcommittee, said she knows soldiers who were told by the military to buy body armor before leaving, rather than risk arriving with nothing but their shirts.

Body armor distributors have received steady inquiries from soldiers and families about purchasing the gear, which can cost several thousand dollars. Though the military has advised them not to rely on third-party suppliers, many soldiers say they want it before they deploy.


you can kick around rumsfeld all you want, and post as many sob stories and links as you want, men in the army dont jus twalk around wearing whatever they want, it doesnt happen like that.


Maybe you missed this -------

Soldiers in Iraq still buying their own body armor
-------The Associated Press

Soldiers headed for Iraq are still buying their own body armor — and in many cases, their families are buying it for them. Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, who serves on the Armed Services subcommittee, said she knows soldiers who were told by the military to buy body armor before leaving, rather than risk arriving with nothing but their shirts.

a unit could only use it if everyone had the same.

Maybe you missed this -------

Soldiers in Iraq still buying their own body armor
-------The Associated Press

Soldiers headed for Iraq are still buying their own body armor — and in many cases, their families are buying it for them. Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, who serves on the Armed Services subcommittee, said she knows soldiers who were told by the military to buy body armor before leaving, rather than risk arriving with nothing but their shirts.

you cant just go out buying whatever you want and wearing it around. hell , you cant even walk around with your chin strap undone without getting yelled at.

Soldiers in Iraq still buying their own body armor
-------The Associated Press

Soldiers headed for Iraq are still buying their own body armor — and in many cases, their families are buying it for them. Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, who serves on the Armed Services subcommittee, said she knows soldiers who were told by the military to buy body armor before leaving, rather than risk arriving with nothing but their shirts.

Free, is that article referring to the soldiers purchasing the standard issue or the non-standard?

Free, is that article referring to the soldiers purchasing the standard issue or the non-standard?

From my understanding of it, it seems to suggest that the non-standard is being bought.

It hardly matters if they are buying standard or non standard. Only Trav would say - show me the photo's. The issue is they are having to buy or at least think about buying something the military should provide.

It's also very silly to infer that the troops are not getting Body Armour because people want them to die. The reason is incompetance. We have the money to buy these things. With one stroke of the pen Bush could make sure the troops have this stuff.

The bottom line is the people making decisions are idiots. This proves it. If you don't like that conclusion then delude yourself all you want and ask for photo's etc yada yada - anything to prevent the truth from sinking into your thick skull. The people in charge are IDIOTS. If they weren't our troops would not be searching for body armour on Ebay before they deploy

http://everythingelse.search.ebay.com/body-armour_Body-Armor_W0QQcatrefZC12QQfromZR10QQfsooZ1QQfsopZ1QQfs prZ0QQftrtZ1QQftrvZ1QQsacatZ102537

The bottom line is the people making decisions are idiots.

On this one issue, I don't think they are.

A nine year old could assess the situation and regognize that for the cost of one airplane or ship, ALL the troops could have been outfitted with the best body armor in the world.

The people making decisions do not care; they certainly care less about the troops having the very best body armor than they do having another umpteen billion dollar bomber.

I'm not cynical enough to believe that.

Either they are idiots or they are callously deciding that they don't give a shit. I can't think of any other options.

I think the 1st is more true.

From my understanding of it, it seems to suggest that the non-standard is being bought.I remember reading that since so many soldiers were buying different types of body armor, the Army gave an order that only standard-issue body armor could be worn by soldiers in Iraq. This was to stop them from, as Trav was saying, "wearing whatever they want."

I don't remember where I read it, so I won't be able to provide a link.

While doing business with the military is very lucrative, it is a rather lengthy process to get items approved for issue to the troops. Even the best of ideas take an "act of congress" before soldiers are using them.

It hardly matters if they are buying standard or non standard. Only Trav would say - show me the photo's. The issue is they are having to buy or at least think about buying something the military should provide.

It's also very silly to infer that the troops are not getting Body Armour because people want them to die. The reason is incompetance. We have the money to buy these things. With one stroke of the pen Bush could make sure the troops have this stuff.

The bottom line is the people making decisions are idiots. This proves it. If you don't like that conclusion then delude yourself all you want and ask for photo's etc yada yada - anything to prevent the truth from sinking into your thick skull. The people in charge are IDIOTS. If they weren't our troops would not be searching for body armour on Ebay before they deploy

http://everythingelse.search.ebay.com/body-armour_Body-Armor_W0QQcatrefZC12QQfromZR10QQfsooZ1QQfsopZ1QQfs prZ0QQftrtZ1QQftrvZ1QQsacatZ102537

yes, I agree, they arre idiots, and I am not denying that. I am simply saying they have always been idiots. They being whoever is in charge at the time. THere is this unstoppable urge for people like yourself to believe that all of this is unprecedented. I dont know if its a consciense effort to pretend it is so so as to make bush look bad, or if you are really just unaware of american military history. the fact is, troops have NEVER had body armor before. now that all of a sudden they dont have it it is an outrage? I could see your point about the idiots if they took the body armor and sold it to buy something else, but there has never been full body armor for all ever. Believe me, I want them all to ahve as much protection as they possibly can too, and I wish bush would demand they all get the same protection ASAP. Thats not going to happen. the combat troops will get it first, the typists who never leave the wire will probably go without. THats how its always been, thats how it will always be. this misinformed hysteria about the troops being denied body armor is insane. dont fall for the hysteria drew.

yes, I agree, they arre idiots, and I am not denying that. I am simply saying they have always been idiots. They being whoever is in charge at the time. THere is this unstoppable urge for people like yourself to believe that all of this is unprecedented. I dont know if its a consciense effort to pretend it is so so as to make bush look bad, or if you are really just unaware of american military history. the fact is, troops have NEVER had body armor before. now that all of a sudden they dont have it it is an outrage? I could see your point about the idiots if they took the body armor and sold it to buy something else, but there has never been full body armor for all ever. Believe me, I want them all to ahve as much protection as they possibly can too, and I wish bush would demand they all get the same protection ASAP. Thats not going to happen. the combat troops will get it first, the typists who never leave the wire will probably go without. THats how its always been, thats how it will always be. this misinformed hysteria about the troops being denied body armor is insane. dont fall for the hysteria drew.


So who's responsible? Nobody? Afterall they have always been idiots? That's your response?

I can see with attitudes like that why we don't have body armour for the troops.

Maybe you missed this, Trav -------

Soldiers in Iraq still buying their own body armor
-------The Associated Press

Soldiers headed for Iraq are still buying their own body armor — and in many cases, their families are buying it for them. Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, who serves on the Armed Services subcommittee, said she knows soldiers who were told by the military to buy body armor before leaving, rather than risk arriving with nothing but their shirts.

Body armor distributors have received steady inquiries from soldiers and families about purchasing the gear, which can cost several thousand dollars. Though the military has advised them not to rely on third-party suppliers, many soldiers say they want it before they deploy.





Maybe you missed this -------

Soldiers in Iraq still buying their own body armor
-------The Associated Press

Soldiers headed for Iraq are still buying their own body armor — and in many cases, their families are buying it for them. Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, who serves on the Armed Services subcommittee, said she knows soldiers who were told by the military to buy body armor before leaving, rather than risk arriving with nothing but their shirts.



Maybe you missed this -------

Soldiers in Iraq still buying their own body armor
-------The Associated Press

Soldiers headed for Iraq are still buying their own body armor — and in many cases, their families are buying it for them. Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, who serves on the Armed Services subcommittee, said she knows soldiers who were told by the military to buy body armor before leaving, rather than risk arriving with nothing but their shirts.



Soldiers in Iraq still buying their own body armor
-------The Associated Press

Soldiers headed for Iraq are still buying their own body armor — and in many cases, their families are buying it for them. Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, who serves on the Armed Services subcommittee, said she knows soldiers who were told by the military to buy body armor before leaving, rather than risk arriving with nothing but their shirts.


Try not to be so duplicitous with your posting. Your quote is from a USA Today article in 2004!:rolleyes:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2004-03-26-body-armor_x.htm

Thats the best you can come up with? I guess actually making a valid point is too much to ask.

So who's responsible? Nobody? Afterall they have always been idiots? That's your response?

I can see with attitudes like that why we don't have body armour for the troops.

I don't know who is to blame. I am not familiar with the giant beuracracy inside the pentagon, nor will I ever be familiar enough with it to say who is to blame. all I know is troops have never had good body armor or enough of it and to suddenly be outraged by it is disingenuous or ignorant.

Thats the best you can come up with? I guess actually making a valid point is too much to ask.

If that is directed at me the point that non was trying to make is not valid. reading his article and thinking it's current would lead people to beleive not all do have armour when in fact all soldiers in theatre have armour.

Try not to be so duplicitous with your posting.

I did it to make a point; that you have to beat some people over the head with the information before it begins to sink in.

all I know is troops have never had good body armor or enough of it and to suddenly be outraged by it is disingenuous or ignorant.


I would agree with that.

I don't know about anyone else, but I for one am not *outraged* over the issue of poor armor.

(The TROOPS however, should be livid. Yet watch them line up like the good little drones they are next election to vote for the same pack of uber-rightwing politicians who failed to provide said armor.)

I was simply pointing out that the people in charge care little about the soldiers lives.

Let a huge budget proposal come before the bunch in Congress tommorrow to spend 100 billion on some plane or ship, and the m0therf*ckers would stampede the desk trying to get in line to sign it.....especially if it were to be built in their district.

Yet the best armor for the troops is --evidently-- low on the priority list of the politicians safely ensconsed in their air-conditioned Washington offices.

all I know is troops have never had good body armor or enough of it and to suddenly be outraged by it is disingenuous or ignorant.
Human beings are not all knowing at birth, we pick up new information everyday. It is perfectly acceptable to suddenly get outraged over something like this, and outraged over the entire history. Unfortunately trav, that's history, this is now, you can't change the past but you can affect the future.

all I know is troops have never had good body armor or enough of it and to suddenly be outraged by it is disingenuous or ignorant.
Human beings are not all knowing at birth, we pick up new information everyday. It is perfectly acceptable to suddenly get outraged over something like this, and outraged over the entire history. Unfortunately trav, that's history, this is now, you can't change the past but you can affect the future.

Good post.

It seems a bit redundant to say as a response to this issue "to suddenly be outraged by it is disingenuous or ignorant." That makes zero sense to me. Of course we should be outraged - maybe the reason WHY they don't have the arnour is thinking like Travs "It's always been that way so don't get outraged and actually fix it"

My guess is that the company with the best armor isn't politically connected. There is a tendency for military procurement officers to retire and get jobs with major defense contractors. They then sell the companies products to their old friends at the Defense Department. The officers at the Defense Department buy those products in expectation of lucrative employment when they retire. The dragon scale body armor is produced by a small company without the connections to get the contract.
It is shameful that this corrupt system is giving our troops inferior body armor. As citizens, it is our job to oversee the actions of our government. We need to put pressure on congress to demand real reform. If they don't respond, we need to elect a congress that will.

Exactly. The only way things get fixed in the US is WHEN people get outraged. Saying we shouldn't get outraged is just going to result in needless deaths & families crying for their dead children at funerals.

The dragon scale body armor is produced by a small company without the connections to get the contract.

Exactly.

It is shameful that this corrupt system is giving our troops inferior body armor. As citizens, it is our job to oversee the actions of our government. We need to put pressure on congress to demand real reform. If they don't respond, we need to elect a congress that will.

Nice idea.

All that's required is to throw out virtually every Repub and every Democrat in Congress.

You and I both know that's never going to happen.

Talk of "reforming" the Corporate oligarchy currently running the USA is like talking of making the wind stop blowing.

you arent going to affect anything by posting about it in allforums.net. perhaps your congressman can help. you get it on the ballot and I will vote for it without hesitation.

Exactly.



Nice idea.

All that's required is to throw out virtually every Repub and every Democrat in Congress.

You and I both know that's never going to happen.

Talk of "reforming" the Corporate oligarchy currently running the USA is like talking of making the wind stop blowing.

The Republicans and Democrats would both like everyone to think that there are no other options, that the two parties are the only option available. If any signifigant number of people start supporting a third party, one or both parties will adopt the position of the third party. That is what happened when Ross Perot ran his first campaign with the major issue being the deficit. About the time he reached 30% in the polls, the Graham-Rudman Act was passed, requiring Congress to reduce the deficit.
If a large number of voters demand reform in military purchasing, and demonstrate that they will vote out those who won't support those reforms, reform will happen. It won't be permanent, just as the idea of fixing the deficit wasn't permanent. What we really need is activist citizens who will demand Congress do what they want, and not what the activist corporations want. Basicly, we get the government that we deserve, based on what we do about it.

If a large number of voters demand reform in military purchasing, and demonstrate that they will vote out those who won't support those reforms, reform will happen.

That encapsulates the problem.

Yes, the system we have now -- a government of the Corporation, by the Corporation and for the Corporation -- is a horrible form of governance.

But simply changing the system to what the unwashed masses prefer would be a disaster of a different kind. The American Public --collectively-- is too superstitious and too ignorant to be in charge of anything.

They believe --by a huge majority-- in angels, they think it really doesn't matter if we pollute this planet to the point it is destroyed, since we have a "paradise" waiting for us in some ethereal afterlife, and they believe that spending a half trillion dollars a year for our so-called "defense" is perfectly reasonable.

Some of them are so delusional that they think a half trillion taxdollars thrown down the black hole of the Pentagon every year is not enough.

Giving the simpleminded, Bible-believing, flag waving Joe and Jane Sixpacks of the world what THEY want might bring about the demise of this country even quicker than the coin-op-Congress (iow, the system of legalized bribery) that currently prevails.

the only thing that can saved us is if freethinker becomes dictator since he knows whats best for all us idjuts

Agreed. FT's way is the only correct way to lead us out of dire straits...Eat a peach, FT.

the only thing that can saved us is if freethinker becomes dictator since he knows whats best for all us idjuts

Stated tongue in cheek, I'm sure.......but certainly, being an idjut of your caliber is the sine qua non of being the sort of red-white-n-blue, patriotic Amuuurican that you exemplify.