Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There's been bits of news about this the past couple of days, but tonight Dateline did a full story on it.
Brigadier General Mark Brown is in charge of the body armor for our soldiers. Dateline did numerous tests matching the "interceptor", which is the one being used now. "Dragonskin" is the alternative and fared much better in the tests. They went on to say that the man who did a seven year study on the armor was banned from the meeting when the final decisions were made to stick with Interceptor. But there are cases where Dragonskin is used for a few of the soldiers. The most appalling thing in the entire story was the fact that Dragonskin was banned for use in the military in March, 2006. The testing on it wasn't done until May, 2006.
Our tax dollars at work again? And what about giving our soldiers the best protection that is available?
I saw the show. I cannot begin to imagine how much this cost. The thought of any of our people not having the best possible protection sends me into a tailspin. One said that Dragonskin isn't that effective because it showed that full penetration occurred. And you are right about the study -- oh, it just makes me so angry - angry that the precious lives of any of these men and women have to be lost because we can not give them the protection they deserve.
JHL, I couldn't agree with you more. I found it just unbelievable that they'd actually not give our soldiers the best available.
Hawkeye, you're right. They had done their own tests, but the problem was that they banned the Dragonskins in March 2006 and then did the testing in May 2006 so I doubt they really even considered using them. The Brigadier General stood his ground when they questioned him and didn't seem to waver. Excellent quality for someone in his position if he's dealing with an opponent, but actually in this situation he's not dealing with an enemy.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,389,283 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jammie
Our tax dollars at work again? And what about giving our soldiers the best protection that is available?
The best protection for our soldiers would be a competent Commander in Chief.
Last edited by burdell; 05-21-2007 at 06:28 AM..
Reason: spelling
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
