Delay in supplying trucks led to Marine deaths

[Meemer]

A two year delay in procuring safer trucks has led to the deaths of countless Marines by IEDs. This goes to Bush and Company's skill at handling war. Where's the oversight? As more and more demands for safer trucks were made, who was in charge?
Some of you will no doubt suggest I just file this under "oops."

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/02/16/marines.mrap.ap/index.html

 

[nibor]

A two year delay in procuring safer trucks has led to the deaths of countless Marines by IEDs. This goes to Bush and Company's skill at handling war. Where's the oversight? As more and more demands for safer trucks were made, who was in charge?
Some of you will no doubt suggest I just file this under "oops."

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/02/16/marines.mrap.ap/index.html

For one thing this article is grossly incomplete...................it isn't just Marines dying in the unarmoured VIETNAM ERA VEHICLES THAT WE SENT OUR TROOPS INTO BATTLE WITH.....................

 

[Semper Fi]

For one thing this article is grossly incomplete...................it isn't just Marines dying in the unarmoured VIETNAM ERA VEHICLES THAT WE SENT OUR TROOPS INTO BATTLE WITH.....................

Like what? Humvees?

Since the government’s 1983 acceptance of the final production version of the Humvee, every Humvee (apart from some 3,000 upper-armored vehicles) has employed the AM General engineers’ front grille design consisting of seven vertical slots. AM General sent production versions of the Humvee to the military in 1984 for more testing, but didn’t begin shipping Humvees to the military until March 1985.

After being awarded a prototype contract in 1981, AM General was awarded a $1.2 billion contract to produce 55,000 Humvees over a five-year period (eventually increased to $1.6 billion to produce 70,000 Humvees). Also in 1983, LTV Corporation acquired AM General from American Motors, and established AM General as a wholly-owned subsidiary of the LTV Aerospace and Defense Company. AM General was awarded contracts for the production of more Humvees in 1989 and 1994.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/hmmwv.htm

Or LAV's?

Initially ordered in six differing versions with development for the US Marine Corps and the US Army, the process eventually saw the US Army eventually bow out of the program. This left the US Marine Corps alone in ordering no fewer than 758 units for delivery slated between 1983 and 1987. After production had completed, the LAV-25 was subsequently added to the inventory of the Canadian Armed Forces in 1993 to which 203 were produced as the LAV-25 "Coyote" in the form of a battlefield reconnaissance vehicle.

http://www.militaryfactory.com/armor/detail.asp?armor_id=57

Or maybe AAV's?

The LVTP7, which entered the Marine Corps inventory in the early 1970s, was a quantum improvement over the short-ranged LVTP5 of the Vietnam era. Weighing in at 26 tons (23,991 kg) combat-loaded, and with a three-man crew, it can carry 25 Marines. With a road speed of 45 mph (72 km/h), it is also fully amphibious with water speeds up to 8 mph (13 km/h). It is not as heavily armed or armored as the Army's Bradley infantry fighting vehicle; on the other hand, the M2A1 Bradley carries only seven troop passengers. In 1985 the Marine Corps changed the designation of the LVTP7Al to AAV7Al -- amphibious assault vehicle -- representing a shift in emphasis away from the long-time LVT designation, meaning "landing vehicle, tracked." Without a change of a bolt or plate, the AAV7Al was to be more of an armored personnel carrier and less of a landing vehicle.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/aavp7a1.htm

Yup. Vietnam era "unarmoured" vehicles our Leathernecks are cruising around in...

 

[rayboyusmc]

There was an article Friday that detailed that much of the problem was the Marine Corps civlian bureuacracy in the our supply pipeline. They wanted to keep ordering the armoured Humvees because they were cheaper and already in the pipeline.

Sort of like VA burrycrats who said agent orange wasn't real, and today they discharge kids for have "pre-existing" conditions after the conditions develop.

Take them all and drop them in Iraq or Afganistan with a fukking clipboard.

 

[nibor]

Like what? Humvees?

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/hmmwv.htm

Or LAV's?

http://www.militaryfactory.com/armor/detail.asp?armor_id=57

Or maybe AAV's?

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/aavp7a1.htm

Yup. Vietnam era "unarmoured" vehicles our Leathernecks are cruising around in...

Maybe you'll also notice in those articles that you provided, who actually obtained those vehicles besides hummers.....................I wasn't referencing Marines........I was actually refering to the Tenth Mountain Division that deployed from where I live..................

 

[Semper Fi]

Maybe you'll also notice in those articles that you provided, who actually obtained those vehicles besides hummers.....................I wasn't referencing Marines........I was actually refering to the Tenth Mountain Division that deployed from where I live..................

No shit? Marines got "hummers", LAV's, and AAV's? Given the title of this thread, and the specific mention of Marines in the original post, I would have assumed the thread would be about the MARINE CORPS' dilemma concerning the MRAP trucks and their impact on the MARINE CORPS. Hmm, my clairvoyant skills must be going dry, for I was unable to see that this whole time you were talking about Tenth Mountain Division SOLDIERS.

 

[rayboyusmc]

The article I read was specifically on the Corps. The supply side did not order the MRAPs because of cost and that they were new to the system.

 

[nibor]

No shit? Marines got "hummers", LAV's, and AAV's? Given the title of this thread, and the specific mention of Marines in the original post, I would have assumed the thread would be about the MARINE CORPS' dilemma concerning the MRAP trucks and their impact on the MARINE CORPS. Hmm, my clairvoyant skills must be going dry, for I was unable to see that this whole time you were talking about Tenth Mountain Division SOLDIERS.

I wasn't trying to dimminish your plight, just to say that you're in no way alone in it..................

 

[Gunny]

A two year delay in procuring safer trucks has led to the deaths of countless Marines by IEDs. This goes to Bush and Company's skill at handling war. Where's the oversight? As more and more demands for safer trucks were made, who was in charge?
Some of you will no doubt suggest I just file this under "oops."

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/02/16/marines.mrap.ap/index.html

What is this? Monkey see - monkey do? Bush is not in charge of military procurement. DoD is, then the service secretaries. THERE is your oversight. If you want to point fingers, point them in the right direction.

What is it you think they should have? AL Capone's vehicle? Wouldn't get very far in the sand it was so heavy with armor. Don't need IED's for sitting ducks. RPG's work just fine.

And no matter what you do to armor, someone will figure out a way to blow it up.

I suggest you file it under "Don't know what the Hell I'm talking about."

 

[Gunny]

For one thing this article is grossly incomplete...................it isn't just Marines dying in the unarmoured VIETNAM ERA VEHICLES THAT WE SENT OUR TROOPS INTO BATTLE WITH.....................

Which Vietnam-era vehicles would those be?

 

[nibor]

Which Vietnam-era vehicles would those be?

Quite a few of their trucks and transport vehicles............... were worn out JUNK.................and it was worse than that according to the kids coming back, but I ain't saying it here...........

 

[Gunny]

Quite a few of their trucks and transport vehicles............... were worn out JUNK.................

Prove your allegation. You said "Vietnam-era vehicles."

And what are you calling junk? The Corps has traditionally prided itself on making do with whatever we get, and making it work. I didn't notice everytime the Marines had to stop and wait on the right for the army to catch up on the left that anything was lagging.

But perhaps you were there and know better?

Be that as it may, it is not the President of the United State's responsibility to test and procure weapons, equipment and matieriel for the US military.

 

[nibor]

Prove your allegation. You said "Vietnam-era vehicles."

And what are you calling junk? The Corps has traditionally prided itself on making do with whatever we get, and making it work. I didn't notice everytime the Marines had to stop and wait on the right for the army to catch up on the left that anything was lagging.

But perhaps you were there and know better?

Be that as it may, it is not the President of the United State's responsibility to test and procure weapons, equipment and matieriel for the US military.

I guess it could only be proven in the junk yards left in Afghanistan..........I can only remark on was I was told directly, I was not there.............

 

[Gunny]

I guess it could only be proven in the junk yards left in Afghanistan..........I can only remark on was I was told directly, I was not there.............

That's your evidence? Couldn't be that it was perfecty fine if not used equipment when it got there?

I assume your personal vehicle is fine today? If you total it this afternoon, where does it go?

 

[rayboyusmc]

Although none of my posts so far on this thread mentioned Bush as responsible, he as the CIC does bear some blame.

Rummy, as the SECDEF, should have competent people briefing him on the state of our equipment. When he said that we go to war with the army we have, that was the beginning of the end for his leadership.

If we had not rushed into this war and done a little more planning and listening to our Generals, maybe we would not have lost as many troops to the frigging IEDs. Read some of the pre war blogs on the internet. They predicted exactly this kind of war in Iraq.

Throw in the fact that they sent a 400,000 Iraqi army troops home unemployed with their weapons when some of the military advisors told Bremer not to do this. Please, they fukked this war up from the beginning because they fought it by sticking with what they wanted not what they were told.

You don't have to be prescient to simply plan a little bit better.

This is a classic bureaucrat over the military experts for execution.

 

[CSM]

Although none of my posts so far on this thread mentioned Bush as responsible, he as the CIC does bear some blame.

Rummy, as the SECDEF, should have competent people briefing him on the state of our equipment. When he said that we go to war with the army we have, that was the beginning of the end for his leadership.

If we had not rushed into this war and done a little more planning and listening to our Generals, maybe we would not have lost as many troops to the frigging IEDs. Read some of the pre war blogs on the internet. They predicted exactly this kind of war in Iraq.

Throw in the fact that they sent a 400,000 Iraqi army troops home unemployed with their weapons when some of the military advisors told Bremer not to do this. Please, they fukked this war up from the beginning because they fought it by sticking with what they wanted not what they were told.

You don't have to be prescient to simply plan a little bit better.

This is a classic bureaucrat over the military experts for execution.

Being a former Marine, you know how it works. You go with what you got. If you are a pilot, you don't say "I can't fly this mission with my F-16 because I am waiting for the new TIE fighter to come out...out will be much better for this mission." Maybe you were in a different Marine Corps....

 

[rayboyusmc]

You go with what you got. If

True, but if the people who are supposed to spend the money on the best gear and they have the money but don't take care of the troops because they are incompetent or paper shuffling beauracrats, then they are to blame and should be held accountable.

The storyline was that a one star general in Iraq told them the Corps needed MRAPs and they didn't act on the request.

 

[mattskramer]

What is this? Monkey see - monkey do? Bush is not in charge of military procurement. DoD is, then the service secretaries. THERE is your oversight. If you want to point fingers, point them in the right direction.

No. The buck should stop with the commander in chief. Not with the Democrats in congress. Not with the Department of Defense. Bush is the one who ultimately pushed the button. As I said before, he charged in way too soon without sufficient forethought about preparedness or consequences. It would not have taken too much time and trouble for him to network with the defense department and ask if they were ready.

What is it you think they should have? AL Capone's vehicle? Wouldn't get very far in the sand it was so heavy with armor. Don't need IED's for sitting ducks. RPG's work just fine.

They should have had more than enough appropriate vehicles for the terrain more than adequately armored for what they would likely face.

And no matter what you do to armor, someone will figure out a way to blow it up.

Oh well. Then I guess that we should have run it even more cheaply and just supply them with Yugos.

 

[mattskramer]

Being a former Marine, you know how it works. You go with what you got. If you are a pilot, you don't say "I can't fly this mission with my F-16 because I am waiting for the new TIE fighter to come out...out will be much better for this mission." Maybe you were in a different Marine Corps....

Of course being an underling you go with what you are given. Yet, you hope that your boss makes sure that you have all that you need – especially if your life is on the line.

 

[CSM]

Of course being an underling you go with what you are given. Yet, you hope that your boss makes sure that you have all that you need – especially if your life is on the line.

Lets see...who controlls the purse strings? Last time I checked it was Congress....hmmmm.....I dont remember seeing all the latest and greatest flowing to the military when the Dems were in power (not that the Repubs are any better) and now that they have a majority I dont see them making any larger allocations for R&D for the military equipment that could be even better than what we have now....*hmph* I guess the next war will be fought with what they have on hand snd not what they could have had. I think one of those light sabres would be pretty cool for soldiers to carry...