DNC Press Release: Statement on Body Armor

[Adelante]

General Wesley Clark and Lt. General Claudia Kennedy Criticize Bush Administration's Failure to Protect Our Troops, Says DNC

1/10/2006 4:40:00 PM

To: National Desk

Contact: Kimberly Hunter of the Democratic National Committee, 202-863-8106 or [e-mail]

WASHINGTON, Jan. 10 /U.S. Newswire/ -- In his remarks to the Veterans of Foreign Wars, President Bush talked about the continuing need to ensure the protection of Iraqi civilians. President Bush should be making a similar effort to protect American troops who are fighting to keep us safe.

According to an internal government report obtained by the New York Times, "80 percent of the marines who have been killed in Iraq from wounds to the upper body could have survived if they had had extra body armor." The Times went on to note that, "such armor has been available since 2003," but the Pentagon declined to supply it to the troops despite "calls from the field for additional protection." (New York Times, 1/7/06)

General Wesley Clark, former NATO Supreme Allied Commander, issued the following statement:

"This study is but the latest example of the Administration's appalling disregard for the welfare and safety of our troops. President Bush's rhetoric doesn't match the actions of his Administration, and unnecessary combat fatalities are the result.

"This is a clear case where Congressional investigation is warranted. When were the needs for additional protection first expressed? Who knew what and when? And, why weren't the necessary steps taken to protect our soldiers? The American people deserve no less than full accountability and assurances that going forward our troops will not face unnecessary risks or danger caused by lack of resources, oversight or commitment from Washington."

Lt. General Claudia Kennedy, the first and only woman to achieve the rank of three-star general in the United States Army, issued the following statement:

"Since the beginning of the Iraq War, the Bush Administration has failed to keep our troops safe. They have not made sure they have all the resources they need to get the job done. It is unconscionable that numerous soldiers' and Marines' lives could have been saved if the Pentagon and the President had supplied them with armor that they already had. Our troops and their families deserve better. We need to immediately equip men and women in combat with every resource available, to keep them safe and help them defeat the enemy."

------

Paid for and authorized by the Democratic National Committee, http://www.democrats.org. This communication is not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee.

http://www.usnewswire.com/

-0-

/© 2006 U.S. Newswire 202-347-2770/

[shance]

1. Powerful statement.

n/t

[understandinglife]

2. dKos thread on Gens. Clark and Kennedy's responses to Bush:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/1/10/175339/011


Peace.

[Adelante]

3. Thank you nt

:hi:

[SlipperySlope]

4. Good page on armor

http://www.defensetech.org/archives/002068.html

[Lefty48197]

5. It's criminal that Team Bush can't get the body or humvee armor the troops

need.

http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/2004/tr20040513-secdef0747.html

" Q Sir, my unit, the 2nd Brigade -- (inaudible) -- Cav, we have five out of the six red zones in this country. And with the up- armored humvees, the new -- (off mike) -- humvees they're bringing over with the -- (inaudible) -- those doors are not as good as the ones on the up-armored humvees -- (inaudible). We even lost quite -- we lost some soldiers due to them, and we're trying to make a change -- (inaudible). The question is, are we going to get more up-armored humvees?
And the second question I wanted to ask is, they have the new -- (inaudible) -- vests out that covers your -- (inaudible). We need those because we have taken some casualties due to the shrapnel from IEDs going through the side. The front parts are good, but the sides are not."

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,101061,00.html

"...as many as 51,000 American soldiers and civilian administrators in Iraq have not yet been equipped with the gear, and have been asking friends and families at home to purchase and send them off-the-shelf models for protection.

As part of the inducement to get other nations to join coalition forces in Iraq, Washington has offered protective gear and other equipment to allied countries...

According to a source at U.S. Central Command (search), the U.S. Army Security Assistance Command has given away thousands of vests that match the description of the Interceptor body armor to protect foreign soldiers from small arms fire."

They're not getting enough bullets or radios either:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/10/31/60minutes/main652491.shtml

[Adelante]

6. "offered protective gear and other equipment to allied countries"

Holy shit - unbelievable.

[Dharma_Bum]

7. GREAT POST WES!

I only wish I read it earlier ...

When I was in Iraq we had to locate and pay Iraqi civilians to weld armor onto the sides of our vehicles.

Most troops rode in the back of these vehicles with no protection at all ... some drove with no doors: "...So's we can get our quicker in the event of an ambush." is what they tried to drill into us.

But going back to the vests.

They sucked. Their extremely lightweight kevlar with two very small porcelain plates in the front and back ...

See that wee pocket just below the carrying strap? This is the left-to-right width of these cheap $hits. (about 12 inches)
From one's tits to shoulder blades you have NOTHING to cover your vitals but hope!

Now, Later on in our Little Iraqi adventure, they gave SOME troops these shoulder-pad looking things that snap onto this Interceptor Body Armor (IBA)

What does this stop? Well, two things really ... Jack and $hit.

[Adelante]

8. DNC Press Conference Call today

This is ahead of Bush's speech today in Louisville, Kentucky.

http://a9.g.akamai.net/7/9/8082/v001/democratic1.download.akamai.com/8082/audio/20060111_confcall.mp3

[NightOwwl]

9. I remember reading an article in WaPo (I think) about a year ago...

Our troops could have had the armor had we contracted with someone with experience, but the administration chose to subcontract to someone who had absolutely NO experience with production of anything, let alone armor. But he was a Bush crony, so that took precedence. I'll keep looking for the article and post a link when I find it.

[Adelante]

10. Please sign to get Congressional hearings on this

Help get Congressional hearings started by signing this petition.

For almost three years now, tens of thousands of brave American service men and women have risked their lives in Iraq. And still, the Bush Administration has not provided our troops with the body armor they need to protect themselves.

As you know, an internal government report recently obtained by the New York Times and published in an article this past weekend confirms that "80 percent of the marines who have been killed in Iraq from wounds to the upper body could have survived if they had had extra body armor."

The Times report continued, noting that "such armor has been available since 2003," but the Pentagon declined to supply it to the troops despite "calls from the field for additional protection."

More than 1700 American troops have died during in combat. And according to the Times analysis, as many as 300 deaths could have been prevented if our soldiers were equipped with the right kind of body armor -- armor that costs as little as $260 per set.

If the Bush Administration can spend hundreds of billions of dollars on high-tech weapons systems, surely they can spare a few hundred dollars per soldier to equip our troops with the body armor they need to stay safe.

Clearly, Congressional investigation is warranted. Many serious questions demand real answers:

* When were the needs for additional protection first expressed?
* Who knew what and when?
* Why weren't necessary steps taken to protect our soldiers?

The American people deserve no less than full accountability and assurances that going forward our troops will not face unnecessary risks or danger caused by lack of resources, oversight, or commitment from Washington.

I urge you to hold immediate hearings into the Bush Administration's appalling disregard for the welfare of American troops on the ground in Iraq.

Sign here: Demand body armor for our troops in Iraq

http://ga4.org/campaign/bodyarmor