I googled it for you. There were lots of articles here earlier this week.
http://www.journalnow.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=WSJ%2FMGArticle%2FWSJ_ColumnistArticle&c=MGArticle&cid=1128769350367&path=!opinion&s=1037645509163Tuesday, January 17, 2006
Body Armor
Winston-Salem Journal
The U.S. Army will soon send additional body armor to protect American soldiers in Iraq. It's about time.
The Army announced its decision Wednesday, about three years too late. American forces should have never invaded Iraq without the body armor they need, and with which this country can certainly afford to provide them.
In the future, when the history of this period is written and when Americans are removed from the internal partisanship that so colors current views of the war, the body-armor issue may well be the biggest stain on the Bush administration's record.
There is no reasonable justification for the world's richest nation to skimp on armor that can protect the lives of its sons and daughters. If Congress were more interested in doing its job, rather than raising campaign funds and fighting partisan battles, it would be tearing the administration's defense budget apart and reworking it with adequate armor as the top priority.
The armor issue is just one more indictment of Bush administration performance in this war. The administration led the nation to war with bogus claims of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction and Iraqi ties to Osama bin Laden. Then it failed to adequately plan for the establishment of peace after major combat operations ended, leaving the Army and Marine Corps woefully understaffed. Amid all these mistakes was the negligence of inadequately protecting the men and women the administration sent into harm's way.more...