« The Durbin Remarks | Main | Defining Deviancy Up »

June 21, 2005

The Army You Have

Via John Cole I see that tales of Soldiers and Marines being required to buy their own gear for use in Iraq remain popular. While I can't speak for the Marine Corps, I am going to step up for the Army in defense of this type of claim.

My entire career the Army equipment you're issued has always been supplemented with gear bought from military suppliers like Lightfighter.com and U.S. Cavalry. Why didn't the Army provide Soldiers with this gear? Because they were forbidden to do so by Congress. Not because Congress or the Army wants to prevent people from getting the best possible equipment, but because they're trying to be good stewards of the public's money. The Army (and all the military services) can't buy equipment until it has gone through vigorous testing and bidding systems designed to minimize fraud, waste and abuse. These processes probably do prevent money from being spent on boondoggles, but the cost is the time it takes to get equipment approved for military purchase. We never have truly cutting edge gear issued to us, because by the time it's properly vetted, it's no longer cutting edge.

So many of us spend our own money to buy better gear that isn't approved for military use because we feel it is worth it and we don't have to jump through the hoops required of the Army. I've bought my own rucksack, helmet, Camelbak, gloves, GPS, and various other gear because I like it better than what I'm issued.

That leaves the valid objection regarding issues like body armor, however. A Camelbak or rucksack of a particular type may be a nice-to-have item, but when it comes down to protecting the lives of our Soldiers, they ought to have the best protection money can buy. Under Congress' rules, that wasn't an option. So the Army worked with Congress to create the Rapid Fielding Initiative. Most of the Soldiers we train here at Fort Carson are given all of this gear shortly after they arrive, while the rest have it issued to them in Kuwait before they head north. The program helps to ensure that all Soldiers are equipped with the latest in battlefield technology to include both IBAS (Interceptor Body Armor System) and SAPI (Small Arms Protective Inserts) plates, two items which weigh Soldiers down considerably but which help to minimize the number of fatalities and serious injuries.

Does this mean that people aren't necessarily still buying some equipment for themselves? Almost certainly not. I know I'll be keeping my civilian GPS in favor of the military-issue one if I go over there, for example. But American Soldiers are not having to choose between spending their own money for protective gear or going without, and I suspect that neither are Marines.

Posted at June 21, 2005 08:59 AM

Andrew Olmsted

Advertisers

Cat Medicine
Refrigerator Repair Parts
Best Price Cars
Account Money Market
Detailing Supplies

Comment policy

I apologize for only allowing authenticated commenters, but comment spam overwhelms the site if I don't use those measures to prevent it. I reserve the right to delete any comment, although generally comments will only be deleted due to use of profanity or personal attacks on people. I have no objection to vigorous argument, but when name-calling begins, I'm putting a stop to it. In the immortal words of Eugene Levy, "People, people, let's stop this before somebody says something untrue!" If you want to call people names, I recommend you get your own blog.

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://andrewolmsted.com/mt/pings.cgi/1045

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The Army You Have:

» Dawn Patrol from Mudville Gazette
Iraq Notification [Phil and Becky - in Iraq] I performed one of the less than pleasant duties of mine this morning: notifying a spouse that her husband had been wounded in action. First, some clarification. You might be asking yourself... [Read More]

Tracked on June 22, 2005 05:54 AM

» from Mudville Gazette
THE POST EXCHANGE: I've asked my fellow MilBloggers to submit "notable posts" they've written in the recent past for inclusion here, with a quick summary in their own words. I've taken the liberty of linking to some of their stuff... [Read More]

Tracked on June 22, 2005 10:52 AM

Comments

Great post, Andrew.

Posted by: John Cole at June 21, 2005 10:07 AM

I found the original article to be almost criminaly misleading. Most folks have never served and don't know the joys of standing in the CIF line and getting weighed down with lots of issue stuff. We get all the gear that is absolutely necessary to do the mission. If I want something sexier, I have to buy it myself (ie, that would be stuff like high speed hydration systems, civilian GPS, cool Oakleys, etc). And most of the gear that was mentioned in the article, unless you are a light fighter, YOU DON'T NEED IT!!!

Incidently you can't buy military grade body armor or SAPI plates on the open market. It's illegal, unless you are an official purchasing agent for law enforcement or the military.

Posted by: armynurseboy at June 22, 2005 09:41 AM

Right you are: My son -- a soldier currently stationed in Iraq -- relies on us as his back-channel supply source for the appurtenances he likes. As needed, we supply him with things like replacement parts, as well as spare batteries and bulbs, for his SureFire flashlight, and spare batteries for his Suunto wristwatch, etc. We are glad to help him out in this way. As you point out, however, the Army does a VERY good job of providing him with the *protective* gear he needs to stay alive outside the wire. God bless the USA. Gunjam.

Posted by: gunjam at June 22, 2005 12:23 PM

I am tired of people like John Cole rabbiting on. I served 27 years in the military. Most everyone in Vietnam supplemented their equipment with private purchase items. This occurs in every war because the military doesn't buy or use the best, just look at boots. Cvilian issue boots are usually light years ahead of what the military issues. The same with weaponry. The current pistol is a joke, I have always loved the .45. The same for the M-16, which was hard to keep clean, underpowered and not soldier proof. The g3 or FAL were superior in every respect. Even the AK was better though not as good as the other 7.62 weapons. Most bought civilian filtraton systems, freeze dried food rather than k rations.

Posted by: TJ Jackson at June 25, 2005 01:47 AM

Post a comment

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)


Remember me?