The Patriot Files Forums  

Go Back   The Patriot Files Forums > Branch Posts > Army

Post New Thread  Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 05-18-2010, 08:55 AM
revwardoc's Avatar
revwardoc revwardoc is offline
Senior Member
 

Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Gardner, MA
Posts: 4,252
Distinctions
Contributor VOM 
Default Shades of the Rumsfeld era

http://www.stripes.com/article.asp?s...&article=70050

Army can’t account for recalled helmets

The Army has recalled 44,000 helmets because they failed ballistic tests, but it doesn’t know where the helmets are, officials said Monday.

“They could be on some soldier’s head in Iraq or Afghanistan. They could also be anywhere else in the world,” said Brig. Gen. Peter Fuller, head of Program Executive Office Soldier, the Army’s center for advanced equipment.

Only 20,000 of the helmets have been fielded by soldiers. Another 24,000 were issued to the the Navy and Air Force via the Defense Supply Center in Philadelphia. Officials from the other services could not immediately say how many of the helmets they had distributed.

The recall was prompted by a Justice Department investigation into the company ArmorSource, Fuller said.

Some soldiers in Afghanistan have already exchanged their helmets, said Mike Brown of the Army Staff. And PEO Soldier is working to get replacement helmets to more remote bases in Afghanistan, said Col. William Cole, project manager for soldier protection and individual equipment.

Fuller said the helmet is not vulnerable to lethal penetration but rather a potentially dangerous fracturing under a worst-case scenario.

The Army has no reports of injuries involving the helmets, he said.

A Justice Department spokeswoman declined to comment Monday, citing the ongoing investigation.

ArmorSource posted a message on its website saying it not been officially notified about the recall and only found out about it from an Army news release issued late Friday.

“ArmorSource is, and has always been, committed to providing products that meet or exceed the government’s specifications. We intend to request additional information and to cooperate in whatever inquiries the government might have,” the statement says.
__________________
I'd rather be historically accurate than politically correct.
sendpm.gif Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2  
Old 05-18-2010, 11:23 AM
BLUEHAWK's Avatar
BLUEHAWK BLUEHAWK is offline
Senior Member
 

Join Date: May 2002
Location: Ozarks
Posts: 4,638
Send a message via Yahoo to BLUEHAWK
Distinctions
Contributor 
Default

What does that have to do with Rumsfeld?
sendpm.gif Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 05-18-2010, 02:35 PM
Gimpy's Avatar
Gimpy Gimpy is offline
Senior Member
 

Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Baileys Bayou, FL. (tarpon springs)
Posts: 4,498
Distinctions
VOM Contributor 
Default Duh!

Body armour............or lack thereof for just one.

There were countless other examples that I'm sure revwardoc can give you also.

Gimp
__________________


Gimpy

"MUD GRUNT/RIVERINE"


"I ain't no fortunate son"--CCR


"We have shared the incommunicable experience of war..........We have felt - we still feel - the passion of life to its top.........In our youth our hearts were touched with fire"

Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.
sendpm.gif Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 05-18-2010, 04:20 PM
BLUEHAWK's Avatar
BLUEHAWK BLUEHAWK is offline
Senior Member
 

Join Date: May 2002
Location: Ozarks
Posts: 4,638
Send a message via Yahoo to BLUEHAWK
Distinctions
Contributor 
Default

So, what does that have to do with Rumsfeld?
sendpm.gif Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 05-18-2010, 04:31 PM
Gimpy's Avatar
Gimpy Gimpy is offline
Senior Member
 

Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Baileys Bayou, FL. (tarpon springs)
Posts: 4,498
Distinctions
VOM Contributor 
Default ??????

If we have to s'plain it to ya, it ain't worth the effort.

My old Grandpappy used to have a saying, "When your at the TOP, you're in charge of the CROP".

Gimp
__________________


Gimpy

"MUD GRUNT/RIVERINE"


"I ain't no fortunate son"--CCR


"We have shared the incommunicable experience of war..........We have felt - we still feel - the passion of life to its top.........In our youth our hearts were touched with fire"

Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.
sendpm.gif Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 05-18-2010, 07:31 PM
BLUEHAWK's Avatar
BLUEHAWK BLUEHAWK is offline
Senior Member
 

Join Date: May 2002
Location: Ozarks
Posts: 4,638
Send a message via Yahoo to BLUEHAWK
Distinctions
Contributor 
Default

So, what does that have to do with Rumsfeld?
sendpm.gif Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 05-19-2010, 03:22 AM
revwardoc's Avatar
revwardoc revwardoc is offline
Senior Member
 

Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Gardner, MA
Posts: 4,252
Distinctions
Contributor VOM 
Default

In December 2004, Rumsfeld came under fire after a "town-hall" meeting with U.S. troops where he responded to a soldier's comments about inferior military equipment by saying "As you know, you go to war with the Army you have. They're not the Army you might want or wish to have at a later time."

When he found out that soldiers were attaching extra armor plate to their vehicles because the standard plate was inadequate defense against RPGs, Rumsfeld ordered the plates removed. Nice guy; sends you off to war then chastises you for trying to improve your defenses.

Rumsfeld stirred controversy by quarreling for months with the CIA over who had the authority to fire Hellfire missiles from Predator drones, although according to The 9/11 Commission Report, the armed Predator was not ready for deployment until early 2002.

Daniel Benjamin and Steven Simon note:

“ These quarrels kept the Predator from being used against al Qaeda.... The delay infuriated the terrorist hunters at the CIA. One individual who was at the center of the action called this episode "typical" and complained that "Rumsfeld never missed an opportunity to fail to cooperate. The fact is, the Secretary of Defense is an obstacle. He has helped the terrorists.

Following September 11, 2001, Rumsfeld was in a meeting whose subject was the review of the Department of Defense's (Contingency) Plan in the event of a war with Iraq (U.S. Central Command OPLAN 1003-98). The plan (as it was then conceived) contemplated troop levels of up to 500,000, which Rumsfeld opined was far too many. Gordon and Trainor wrote:

“ As [General] Newbold outlined the plan ... it was clear that Rumsfeld was growing increasingly irritated. For Rumsfeld, the plan required too many troops and supplies and took far too long to execute. It was, Rumsfeld declared, the "product of old thinking and the embodiment of everything that was wrong with the military."
[T]he Plan ... reflected long-standing military principles about the force levels that were needed to defeat Iraq, control a population of more than 24 million, and secure a nation the size of California with porous borders. Rumsfeld's numbers, in contrast, seemed to be pulled out of thin air. He had dismissed one of the military's long-standing plans, and suggested his own force level without any of the generals raising a cautionary flag.


In a September 2007 interview with The Daily Telegraph, General Mike Jackson, the head of the British army during the invasion, criticised Rumsfeld's plans for the occupation as "intellectually bankrupt," adding that Rumsfeld is "one of those most responsible for the current situation in Iraq," and that he felt that "the US approach to combating global terrorism is 'inadequate' and too focused on military might rather than nation-building and diplomacy."

In Rumsfeld's final television interview as Secretary of Defense, he responded to a question by Brit Hume as to whether he pressed General Tommy Franks to lower his request for 400,000 troops for the war by stating:

“ Absolutely not. That's a mythology [sic]. This town is filled with this kind of nonsense. The people who decide the levels of forces on the ground are not the Secretary of Defense or the President. We hear recommendations, but the recommendations are made by the combatant commanders and by members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and there hasn't been a minute in the last six years when we have not had the number of troops that the combatant commanders have requested. ”

Rumsfeld told Hume that Franks ultimately decided against such a troop level.

In an unprecedented move in modern U.S. history, eight retired generals and admirals called for Rumsfeld to resign in early 2006 in what was called the "Generals Revolt," accusing him of "abysmal" military planning and lack of strategic competence. Rumsfeld rebuffed these criticisms, stating that "out of thousands and thousands of admirals and generals, if every time two or three people disagreed we changed the secretary of defense of the United States, it would be like a merry-go-round." Commentator Pat Buchanan reported at the time that "Washington Post columnist David Ignatius, who travels often to Iraq and supports the war, says that the generals' and admirals' views mirror those of 75 percent of the officers in the field, and probably more." Bush responded to the criticism by stating that Rumsfeld is "exactly what is needed," and also defended him in his controversial decider remark.
__________________________________________________ _______

Is that enough for you?
__________________
I'd rather be historically accurate than politically correct.
sendpm.gif Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 05-19-2010, 04:50 AM
Gimpy's Avatar
Gimpy Gimpy is offline
Senior Member
 

Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Baileys Bayou, FL. (tarpon springs)
Posts: 4,498
Distinctions
VOM Contributor 
Default If it ain't

It oughta be!

The blood of untold numbers of heroic American troops will be forever on the hands of Rumsfeld.

Thanks Doc
__________________


Gimpy

"MUD GRUNT/RIVERINE"


"I ain't no fortunate son"--CCR


"We have shared the incommunicable experience of war..........We have felt - we still feel - the passion of life to its top.........In our youth our hearts were touched with fire"

Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.
sendpm.gif Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 05-19-2010, 05:29 AM
BLUEHAWK's Avatar
BLUEHAWK BLUEHAWK is offline
Senior Member
 

Join Date: May 2002
Location: Ozarks
Posts: 4,638
Send a message via Yahoo to BLUEHAWK
Distinctions
Contributor 
Default

Thanks Doc...

Of course I'd read and heard all that in long ago years, too.

At the time, and still today, I'd urge us to recall the condition of our military forces in 2001 when Rumsfeld and Dubya came into office - not only as to numbers, but also as to their budgets then AND what kind(s) of battles they had been planning for strategically and logistically in the previous 8 years of the so-called "Peace Dividend."

In other words, once underway one does not turn or stop a flagship on a dime. The momentum had to be overcome, and it took some time - a lot more time than any of us would have preferred; including Rumsfeld and field grade officers.

Never once have I doubted Rumsfeld's comment about going to war with what you have available, not once. It was true then and is true now, and was true in the mid-18th century.

As well, I have long been proud of the way American industry geared up as fast as humanly possible to retrofit those vehicles and do any and all things necessary to supply our troops in the field. It took too long, as it always does, but the effort was made and put into effect with all haste.

As for the helmets in question, evidently ArmorSource claims that they have not heard from the DoD as to the complaints and I'm confident they will immediately correct any difficulties; as anyone would - whether the distinguished Mr. Rumsfeld were SECDEF or not.

His greatest shortcoming, if it could justifiably be termed that, was his short temper and acerbic speech - but putting myself into his shoes, I wouldn't have as much patience as he did with the inane ludicrous back stabbing his office was forced to endure in his tenure. It was shameful how he was treated by certain members of Congress, and as to how he handled his General staff, I wasn't there, and don't know what went on.

What I DO know for certain is that flag officers are as capable of being scapegoating jackasses as anyone else in the mix.
sendpm.gif Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 05-21-2010, 07:21 AM
BLUEHAWK's Avatar
BLUEHAWK BLUEHAWK is offline
Senior Member
 

Join Date: May 2002
Location: Ozarks
Posts: 4,638
Send a message via Yahoo to BLUEHAWK
Distinctions
Contributor 
Default update

Air Force directs immediate inspection of advanced combat helmets

Posted 5/20/2010 Updated 5/20/2010

by Tech. Sgt. Amaani Lyle
Secretary of the Air Force Public Affairs

5/20/2010 - WASHINGTON (AFNS) -- Air Force officials here directed an immediate service-wide inspection, recall and reporting of defective advanced combat helmets May 19.

Logistics officials said evidence indicates some helmets were produced using unauthorized manufacturing practices, defective materials and improper quality procedures that could potentially reduce ballistic and fragmentation protection.

"When it comes to the safety and protection of our Airmen, we act swiftly and we take no chances," said Col. Steven Morani, the Air Force Directorate of Logistics materiel support division chief. "The importance of the recall warrants not only immediate action, but ongoing follow-up as we complete a one-for-one exchange of defective helmets."

Colonel Morani said major commands must complete a 100-percent inspection of advanced combat helmets, manufactured by Rabintex and Armorsource, and identified by a designated Army procured contract number. In cases in which the contract number can't be determined, units are using specific visual inspection criteria to ascertain whether or not the helmet is affected by the recall.

The colonel emphasized that deployed and pre-deployment Airmen are the first priority for the exchange that will occur from stock in theater. As more helmets are made available, the remainder of Airmen also will make the exchange.

"Any affected helmets that units discover will be immediately removed from service and if shortfalls occur, we'll work diligently with Defense Supply Center Philadelphia, the Air Force's source of supply, to close the gaps," Colonel Morani said.

The exchange timeline is contingent upon the swiftness of the mandated inspections, the colonel said.

"Inspections are underway right now," Colonel Morani said. "Once we know the total number of helmets affected, we can better estimate a completion timeline."
sendpm.gif Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Rumsfeld Must Act thedrifter Marines 0 05-16-2004 05:18 AM
Rumsfeld and Dan Rather in business together... MORTARDUDE Political Debate 1 12-22-2003 07:32 AM
Rumsfeld has some explaining to do! Gimpy General Posts 10 05-03-2003 09:44 AM
Shades of Mogadishu Seen in Iraq's POW Treatment thedrifter Marines 0 03-24-2003 06:23 AM
Rumsfeld was asked - Boats General Posts 9 11-15-2002 01:29 PM

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:28 AM.


Powered by vBulletin, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.