Welcome to PatsFans.com

Body Armor Cost Lives, An Internal USMC Reports Shows

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by DarrylS, Jan 7, 2006.

  1. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    42,766
    Likes Received:
    284
    Ratings:
    +717 / 20 / -30

    From Soldiers for the Truth Web Site, they documents that claim the current body armor is not effective and if the correct one was used there would have been 42% less casualties in the Marines deployed in Iraq. The SFTT web site is neutral and will criticize either side if our armed forces are not getting what they need because of the politics of DC.

    http://www.sftt.org/main.cfm?action...nKey=cmpDefense&htmlCategoryID=30&htmlId=4459

    A recent United States Marine Corps forensic study obtained by DefenseWatch slams the Interceptor OTV body armor system, claiming "as many as 42% of the Marine casualties who died from isolated torso injuries could have been prevented with improved protection in the areas surrounding the plated areas of the vest. Nearly 23% might have benefited from protection along the mid-axillary line of the lateral chest. Another 15% died from impacts through the unprotected shoulder and upper arm," the report says.
    The internally produced report revealed that a random sample of 93 Marine deaths studied for the report showed that 60 percent of the fatalities suffered by the Marines who were killed in Iraq between March 2003 and June 2005 died from gunshot wounds received while wearing Interceptor OTV body armor. Another 38 percent died from wounds sustained in Improvised Explosive Device (IED) attacks while wearing Interceptor gear and roughly two percent died from unknown causes.
    The findings in the inquiry, reportedly classified as "For Official Use Only," also bring into question the Pentagon's consistent assertion that the principle cause of death among war fighters in Iraq comes from IEDs the insurgents are using with ever increasing ferocity.
    Interceptor OTV body armor was designed by a joint US Army/USMC development team and issued by all the services beginning in 1999. After the Global War on Terror began in 2003 it was issued to the vast majority of the war fighters currently engaged in the fighting the Global War on Terror. Almost 2,200 American service members have died in combat since the war began and almost all of them were killed while wearing Interceptor body armor.
     
  2. All_Around_Brown

    All_Around_Brown In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,093
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

  3. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    42,766
    Likes Received:
    284
    Ratings:
    +717 / 20 / -30

    The reason I linked to that post is so there could be no yak, yak about the so called liberal media or something about George Soros. I would think a military site would have more credibility in this day and age and on this board.
     
  4. JLC

    JLC Practice Squad Player

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2004
    Messages:
    156
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    I read the MSNBC article, and got the distinct impression that this is an ongoing process of determining a balance between protection and mobility. As much as I respect those who have fought for this country, anytime someone says "__% of this or that would have happened if only...", you have to understand that that is a guess. I'm not saying they're wrong or right - the military is still trying figure out what the best balance is - I'm just saying the jury's out. It's just as possible that the weight and bulk of additional armor would reduce mobility to the point that more soldiers sustain mortal injuries from other causes.
    They need to take this information, along with the data from all the soldiers/injuries/wounds and hopefully come up with a better solution.
     
  5. All_Around_Brown

    All_Around_Brown In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,093
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    They'll have plenty of sampling data by the time this bloody thing's through.

    Now, where's Bin Laden?
     
  6. ELOrocks17

    ELOrocks17 Guest

    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0


    Hahahahah, good one NEM...Now i think its time to lay off the LSD.
     
  7. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    41,278
    Likes Received:
    255
    Ratings:
    +995 / 2 / -9

    Whatever happened to Chelsea Clinton.

    :mad: This is an Indian smiley, why do we not have "black smileys"
     
    Last edited: Jan 10, 2006
  8. FreeTedWilliams

    FreeTedWilliams pfadmins PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2005
    Messages:
    5,842
    Likes Received:
    185
    Ratings:
    +515 / 49 / -7

    #75 Jersey

    My Body Armour is made by Federal Prioners, how scary is that!

    We recently had half of our stock recalled due to some sort of chemical imbalance which causes the plates to lose strengh over time. My current vest is (they tell me) twice as strong as my original one (15 yrs ago) and weighs halfs as much (wish I could say the same thing about me). The science behind body armour is not exact and the problem is not limited to the military.
     
  9. wistahpatsfan

    wistahpatsfan Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    15,626
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -1

    #75 Jersey

    That's unbelievable that body armor is made by friggin inmates! What's next, the "made in China" models (don't laugh)? What do you think effect of cops wearing body armour in the field has on individual and group behavoir of the police? Do they feel more impervious and act differently than if they had no armor at all? Are overall procedures different? I just wonder if the armor protects to a certain degree that influences cops to put themselves in more dangerous positions than they would without it. Are gunshot injuries actually reduced? Just curious...
     

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>