Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Impeach George W. Bush -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: sea_biscuit who wrote (80704)	5/28/2007 5:05:01 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 93284

And if they had extra body armor, they might not have been able to move for long in the heat of the dessert. And if your talking about the main type of body armor that most people are talking about, body armor that works well in perfect conditions, but which has faulty adhesives, and which after long periods at high temperature (quiet normal in Iraq) can fail to provide sufficient protection. You throw out headlines without the context and the facts. Body armor “has been available since 2003, but until recently the Pentagon has largely declined to supply it to troops despite calls from the field.” Body armor has been supplied for some time. At first some of it was older body armor, but that's always the case with armies. You can't instantly have all the latest developments at a moments notice. As I said before it takes time to develop, test, fund, build, and deploy new equipment. But the older body armor was widely available. Now newer armor is widely available. Presumably some even better type will come along, and then it will take time to fully deploy that armor. You don't go from prototypes to mass deployment in a very short time.