Soldiers preparing for deployment to Iraq were told on Friday that the Dragon Skin body armor that some had spent over $4,000 on, could not be used once they touched down in theater. Penalty for using non-issue body armor 'could' include forfeiture of the $400,000 life insurance payment their families would be owed if their life ended on the battlefield. These soldiers, along with one of their mothers confirm that the unit's commander "
expressed deep regret" in issuing the order, explaining that he "had no choice because the orders came from very high up". Having been a US Army soldier myself, when the word 'very' is attached to 'high up', it's basically code for 'some civilian punching a timecard'. Because no man or woman who'd ever been in those soldiers' shoes at some point would sell out like this.
http://deadissue.com/...
So why would the Department of Defense shift from a policy of reimbursement up to $1000 for this body armor, to a policy of "if your corpse is found wearing Dragon Skin, your family is in the poor house"? Look no further than the Pentagon's own secret report, leaked to the media, that stated 80% of Marine casualties could have been prevented with top of the line body armor. As politically insensitive as these findings may have been, to someone with access to the study, it was obviously too serious to keep under wraps. Perhaps the release of this information had something to do with the internal perception of its results. After all, for the past several years, the US Army Soldier Systems Center-Natick has known that the Interceptor body armor it had developed (standard issue for troops deploying) was significantly less effective than other civilian alternatives.
The mainstream media has played dumb for quite some time when it comes to this, as reports of military personel having to purchase their own body armor prior to deployment have mostly been something you've had to go looking for. Surely, the story wasn't compelling on the level of Scott Peterson, Natalee Holloway or the 'War on Christmas', but even the fact that Congress had to get down and dirty for just the $1000 reimbursement didn't make waves nationally. Indeed, in this instance, 'support' and being accused of providing aid to the enemy was apparently too close for comfort.
Up until now, if you were serving in the war, you could spend your own money for sufficient body armor and recoup 10-25% of the cost, but only a fool would expect anyone to cry a tear about it back home. 'Better you than me' has been the unspoken national theme for the Iraq War, as the US political arena is apparently no place for trivial matters like life or death unless the church can somehow play a role. Case in point, Terri Shiavo with a half liquefied brain gets hers before soldiers lacking adequate armor get theirs. Indeed, a good portion of the population has been trained like a dog, responding to reports that 10 troops died on a given day with the words "damn you liberal media!"
So here's a message to those being forced to deploy without the body armor they took out a loan for, "carry on if you want to, but nobody's hearing the body armor blues". Confidence in this statement is what allows for high level Department of Defense officials to simply ban the use of the most effective body armor under the threat of life insurance forfeiture. Someone is banking on the fact that America could care less about anything negative that happens in Iraq, and if word goes out that politics came before the safety of those we're sending over there, so be it. The story won't be covered on conservative programs, won't be an discussion topic on any of the Sunday morning talk shows and most definitely won't be mentioned during any of the President's staged events.
I know this much to be true, and to be honest, tonight it's probably driving me to drink. Knowing that fate spared me from being one of these poor souls provides little comfort now that I'm in a position to speak freely about it on their behalf. Make no mistake, after my experience in the Army I made a pledge to advocate on behalf of soldiers, but the sad and honest truth is nobody's listening. 'Support the troops' is a phrase that will live forever as an example of how empathy in the new millennium became the official vice of suckers. John Murtha, a champion of such empathetic sentiment, is described as a traitor or circus clown by the same people who could care less about the body armor we're providing.
This story is merely another brick in the wall alongside underfunded VA health facilities, unrealistic pre-war predictions, unmet recruitment goals, activation of the Individual Ready Reserve, stop-loss and the label of "coward" applied to anyone who fought and happens to bring any of this up in public. The saddest aspect of this body armor issue though, is the fact that our government is too cheap to provide our troops with the same Dragon Skin body armor worn by "the Secret Service Presidential Protection detail, CIA, NSA, DoE, journalists and contractors in Iraq, U.S. Air Force, Special Ops forces, and several generals in the field."