[TOMAHAWK9521]

I was never a fan of body armor. Started out in 2/75 back in the '80s where speed, violence of action and an unmerciful domination of the battlefield was the norm. I didn't get my first taste of body armor until A-Stan in 2001-02. My chassis was already due for a service overhaul for my fractured spine and chronically screwed-up knees. Frankly, I couldn't stand having to lumber around in all that "safety" crap. As for attempting hot pursuits of jackals in their man-dresses, unless you have legs like Tom Platz and the stamina of Lance Armstrong, you won't last long and the bugger will escape.

Men are not meant to be M2 Bradleys on 2 legs. IMHO I believe a majority of the body armor is BS. Yeah, I'm sure if I had ever taken a shot and walked away, my opinion might be different, but I believe armor should only be worn for specific missions. In Afghanistan, we never wore armor and drove around in Toyota Tacomas. If we knew we were going to hit a house or whatever, we’d pack our armor with us, stop outside town to put it on, and then hit it. After that, we’d toss the armor in the back and continue on.

Safety-focused critics may point out that the war was different because IED’s weren’t around back then, and that armor gives you a much greater chance of survival with it than without. However, I had a junior 18E for about 6 weeks in Khandahar. He and 3 of our EOD brothers were blown to pieces while trying to destroy a cache of 107mm rockets that had been rigged with a command-detonated booby trap. The only thing body armor would have saved would have been his upper torso.

I agree with the article in that we have lost our capability of speed, flexibility and mobility on the battlefield due to the added on armor. Quick, decisive military action is pretty much a thing of the past. Now, the US military moves with the speed and dexterity of a glacier. IMHO the body armor is symbolic of America’s current attitude towards warfare and the will to win. All one has to do is look at these sprawling “cities” the military has established in the two theaters. They’re bloated and top-heavy with bottom-feeders: REMFs; civilian and military bureaucracies; more field-grade and general-grade officers than you can shake a stick at; contractors; and support units that, IMO, don’t do enough to justify being there. I realize I’m going to be beset upon as that annoying little voice obliterated by the ensuing hurricane of scorn, but we really don’t need half that crap over there. The modern military, in general, is slow, fat and too safety-conscious. Dining facilities that are the envy of the Mall of America, Pizza Hut or Starbucks doesn’t make you a better warrior, it just allows you to become comfortable and therefore complacent and uneager (aka chicken-shit) to go outside the wire, do the job you were trained for, face the threat, and destroy it. War isn’t supposed to be safe and comfy. If you take away all the unnecessary luxuries and distractions then perhaps there will less incentive to linger around over there and the military will be more eager to go home to a real Pizza Hut.

But I digress.

As touched on in the article, another consequence of wearing all this junk is the long-term health issues. After 22 years of RGR/SF I am being medically retired for spinal damage and cartilage ground off of my knees. Some might say that after that much time, what would one expect? I'm an old guy by army standards, right? However, I believe the newest batch of young studs who are currently scampering all over the place with this crap on, will suffer similar physical problems but in a significantly shorter time frame.

One must also consider what will happen when this conflict opens up in a tropical theater. Body armor is a no-go. You try making guys wear that in someplace like Thailand, Indonesia or Panama, they’ll be dead or combat ineffective before sundown.