Military's new bomb-resistant truck takes Capitol Hill

Can't Rove just take a cab to the Hill?

Is this a replacement for the RG-31 or 31M? they have on order or on hand 424 RG-31s now how many of these are ordered?

Nice set of wheels! Does it come in black?!

These trucks would make ideal taxi cabs in Chicago.

These trucks would make ideal taxi cabs in Chicago.

For some reason, the Pentagon has a history of being slow to come up with adequate equipment. We invaded Europe in 1944 with tanks that were completely inadequate to stand up to the German tanks.

Is this a hybrid?

The next weekness that the US Military will have to address is that very thing, slowness in creating and executing a plan or resolution to a problem. It may have been an issue of checking the relativity of the resolutions that caused these delays, but something would have been better then sending replacement humvees and more soldiers to their death!

It's an awe inspiring vehicle and, no doubt, our troops should have the best protection money can buy. From a journalistic perspective, though; how do you print an entire article and not address the cost? How do you fail to anticipate your readers' curiosity as to the expense of this item?

Children's healthcare,no way.

Billions of dollars to fight a war already lost is wonderful.They are 5 years late with this vehicle,great planning by the Neocons.

They should have crosses by that vehicle to show how many soldier deaths Bush and little dick are responsible for.

The latest surge is the Army's number of recruiters to fill the need to reinforce Dubya's failed Iraq Civil war.

Coming soon to suburban driveways, just like the Hummer did!

In the real world, there's no such thing as a 100% "mine resistant" vehicle. There are vehicles that are better protected than others, but no vehicle can offer complete protection.

In the real world, there are inevitable tradeoffs, tradeoffs it appears most Swamp readers are unaware of. For example, the more armour you put on a vehicle, the heavier and slower it is and the production is slower and more expensive. If a vehicle is too heavy, it tends to get bogged down in rough terrain. Too slow, and it might not get to the battlefield in time. You might also be better off with greater numbers of a less protected vehicle.

This was in essence the tradeoff the army chose in WWII with its Sherman tanks. We didn't try to match the German King Tiger tanks in size and protection, with the result that we were able to produce many more tanks than the Germans and make them mechanically more reliable.

How about we get our troops out of the middle of the Iraqi Civil War so the urgency of building these vehicles is reduced?

If the Iraqi Government doesn't care to the point of going on vacation in the middle of THEIR WAR then let's get the hell out of Dodge.

Waiting for the next "Big Time" Hip Hop artist to buy one and put the crappy looking rims / spinners and the HDVD system inside!

I wonder if I can get this in a hybrid???

It's a good thing they'll be using it near the oil fields, since it looks like you have to hook this thing up straight to the well. What do you think they get, about 12 miles on a full tank?

Doug, what does your nephew think? And be honest, if possible.

To offset cost we should make a deal with them, we free your country and help you setup a stable government and in return we get free oil. We go to war with Iraq and then it takes us about 5 years to come up with a real reason why we went to war. I think they get bored and take a wheel with a bunch of countries names on it and which ever country the needle lands on we go to war with. For the cost, found out they range from $600K to $1.2 million. I think the $1.2 million version comes with the DVD player and the cup holders.

But does it conform to the new EPA mileage requirements? I can't imagine 30,000 pounds getting 35 mpg.

MRAPs are much more expensive than Humvees. I saw an article estimating 10 billion for 20,000 MRAPs. That puts the cost per vehicle at $500,000 compared to $150,000 for an armored humvee. Another article estimated Humvees have cost us about 600-700 deaths that MRAPs might have prevented. That makes the MRAP look like a bargain to me.

John D.,

My nephew is showing signs of PTSD and doesn't want to talk about his take on the war. "I'm too busy thinking about picking up my friends' body parts."

I am able to be frank about this because his surname isn't mine and his mindset is about as far removed from any interest in reading Swamp posts as it could possibly be.

More on that in a minute. Assume for the sake of discussion that a particular soldier feels one way or the other about the Iraqi Civil War. That in no way dimishes your right or mine to come to a different opinion/conclusion.

Back to my nephew. John, what kind of jerk would you or I be to try to force our political views on a combat veteran just back from theater. I am not about to quiz my nephew like he's on a witness stand. My sister, his father, and the rest of our family have let him know we love him, thank him for his service to our country and if there is anything he needs or wants to please tell us.

That's it. Case closed. The subject of my nephew is now officially off limits.

The MRAP gets about 3 miles per gallon of diesel fuel. So I am guessing it has to have at least a 85-100 gallon tank. Even with that said I think this is a step in the right direction, but not the answer we are looking for. We need to have an answer that removes the soldier from the machine. The Air Force just released the reaper, which is the first unmanned attack fighter jet, they said it carries about 2.5 tons of missiles and bombs. Why can't we put this technology into an unmanned ground vehicle, then the politicians can play war all they want without the cost of American Soldiers.

So...after all these many months and hundreds of our soldiers being killed, blown up, and permantly injured by IED's, the DOD is coming out with a mine resistant truck. How disgraceful and insulting.
By the way Peter Pace, nothing is 100% mine resistant. You need to resign.

we had the christie suspension, but the douchebag republicans wanted to make more profit... the soviets ended up using our american designed suspension in their war-winning t-34... we got stuck with a piece of trash thanks to the GOP...

we would have been better off just reverse engineering the t-34 and been done with it...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christie_suspension

can anyone deny that if the dems hadn't applied pressure on the repugs, our soldiers would still be riding around hostile urban terrain in glorified jeeps (humvees)??

basically the repug motto is "fü¢kem, it's just some poor people's sons"

and while these MRAPs are going to help our soldiers, years late rotten GOP bastards, they still don't offer protection from the EFPs, just the regular IEDs... i figure as we bring these MRAPs into iraq, iran will just supply more EFPs...

long story short, patrolling hostile urban environments will still be deadly dangerous...

let us now pray: god, jesus, allah, buddha, goodness, please strike cheney dead immediately... thank u.

How does someone (seth) get a post approved that advocates the death of the Vice President of the United States? Seriously, I don't like Cheney much at all, but ban this "seth" clown immediately.

As to the years-lateness of this vehicle due to "rotten GOP bastards" - c'mon. Are you going to blame the Sherman tank inferiority on the GOP too? Governments, business, procurement departements all make features vs. cost & cost vs. numbers decisions every day. It sucks, but it's reality.

We could outfit our troops with $5MM outfits & $1 bilion tanks, but the cold-hard truth is it's impractical whether you have the mental disorder called Liberalism or not.

"In the real world, there are inevitable tradeoffs, tradeoffs it appears most Swamp readers are unaware of."

For example, the tradeoff between saying the "the insurgency is in its last throes" or "you go to war with the army you have" and doing nothing or reacting to the situation and buying vehicles similar to those already in use in other countries.

This is actually the new Hummer. It gets 10 gallons per mile.

************

Doug Z,

Some general info regarding PTSD. It first appeared in large numbers in WWI, a byproduct of modern war.

The victims were so disoriented it was referred to as 'shell shock' and they were, in general, considered cowards, or weak.

That stigma lingered on through Vietnam, and now today in Iraq it may still be alive.

For some reason there are those in and out of the military that think PTSD victims are faking it.

Incredible.

chris,

i was praying to god... as for man on earth i am a firm believer of the rule of law... i would like to see him indicted for treason, and if convicted, then yes, let the sentence fit the crime...

as for the sherman, don't be so silly-- features vs. cost, and cost vs. numbers... sure-- what the hell does that have to do with producing the (by far) worst tank of the war? my point was that we already HAD the finest tank suspension system in the world and the big three used their capitalist muscle to get it nixed... we could have reverse engineered a t-34 with excellent features vs. cost, and cost vs. numbers performance... so yes, i blame that on the GOP-- thank goodness we had fdr, but don't forget there was a gop stabbing him in the back at every turn...

-- mental disorder called Liberalism-- lol... that's funny... it was liberlism that got us the TVA, the TVA got us mammoth output of electricity... that got us mammoth quantities of aluminum... that got us 100,000 warplanes built in wwii... that got us... hmmm... what did that get us? oh yeah, air supremacy over europe and the pacific... which i believe came in rather handy...

--everyone, lower your heads for a second and thank goodness we had fdr at the helm during those times... god forbid we had a dry-drunk moron like bush in charge back then...

same old story of reactionary BS... Willy Messerschmitt was able to use his capitalist might to nix Ernst Heinkel's jet aircraft which flew a successful test flight i believe in 1939...

he stood to make a ton of money selling the bf-109 and the rest is history...

if u want to be a right winger, be my guest, just try to learn a little history before u open your mouth, there is no shame in admitting u don't know what the hell u are talking about...

the united states arsenal was formidable in quality (onviously in quantity) during wwii with the exception of the sherman... the garand was the finest battle rifle in the world thru the bulk of wwii, our fighter and bomber aircraft were excellent, our naval ships were the best overall in the world... why the aversion to admitting the sherman was a galling failure... one which should not have been allowed to happen...

all u have is platitudes like: $5MM outfits & $1 bilion tanks... you are the only one who suggested anything remotely like that...

try to stay within the bounds of reason... u may like cheney, and think him a fine VP... ok, but i don't... my language was harsh, but only because i truly believe him guilty of willful traitorous actions... and for that reason alone i said what i said...

i criticize the united states harshly, but u wouldn't believe what i ahve to say about other countries... in terms of potential the USA is far and away the most promising beacon of freedom and justice in the world...

and i am prepared to fight with my life to preserve those freedoms which underpin the entire system...

"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety" -- BF

have truer words ever been spoken?

"Tom O" decries our army for waiting this long before "buying vehicles similar to those already in use in other countries."

Tom knows as much about military equipment as he knows about quantum physics. If he read what foreign experts are saying about the equipment used by other armies, he'd understand that the U.S. army's equipment is the "gold standard" which other armies aspire to. To give but one example, critics are really going after the British army troop carrier (the Pinzgauer Vector) for their poor performance. See

http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/

To reiterate: while heavier armour might mean more protection against land mines, it will make for a slower vehicle. And if you're drying to dodge an incoming mortar barrage, you might want that extra speed. That is the tradeoff. Soldiers understand this. Armchair analysts don't.

off on a tangent--

amazing how the mainstream/center-right press covers for these criminals...

with regard to gonzales, the obvious story is nowhere to be found...

articles pondering how he has the longevity he has, how bush is ABLE to continue to support him with where everywhere else there is zero confidence...

the answer is obvious...

bush co. has NO CHOICE WHATSOEVER... there crimes have been so serious and so rampant that nothing short of a full-court press of blatant lying and sone-walling could do... along with 6 years of full tacit support from the GOP in congress along with the DNC democrats...

but try to imagine if u will, a new attorney general... one that would pass this dem led congress, gop-lite tho they are-- this new AG would have to be a somewhat reasonable person-- the shit would fü¢kiñg hit the fan then for sure...

bush/cheney couldn't allow an AG with integrity or the whole show would be up... they would sooner start a war then allow gonzales to be pushed out...

"try to stay within the bounds of reason.."

Seth,

They are not able to do that. It's their whole method of argument. It's what 'the base' feeds on.

Bruce says!
"In the real world, there are inevitable tradeoffs, tradeoffs it appears most Swamp readers are unaware of."

Of course most of us are aware of those factors. Most of us were in the military, you twit.

"bush/cheney couldn't allow an AG with integrity or the whole show would be up... they would sooner start a war then allow gonzales to be pushed out...

Posted by: seth | July 27, 2007 6:13 PM"

You got to the truth of the matter there..

Too little too late. At least in the next few years when these vehicles will be fully available, it will help our soldiers in Iraq.

Of course most of us are aware of those factors. Most of us were in the military, you twit.

Posted by: C.Morris | July 27, 2007 9:26 PM

Judging by the level of military expertise shown on this website, I bet most of the twits that post at the Swamp have as much military experience as Dick Cheney and Bill Clinton combined.

Bruce, I'm just an engineer, so I don't know much about quantum physics. But I do know the requests for MRAPs came from officers in the field as early as 2004. Are they ignorant of the tradeoffs in vehicle performance too?

You work so hard to defend the imbeciles who started this war and then failed to adapt to the reality on the ground. But you need to find an argument that holds water. For example, mortar fire is way more effective against infantry and unarmored or lightly armored vehicles (like a humvee). Even GOP keyboard warriors like you should know that.

", I bet most of the twits that post at the Swamp have as much military experience as Dick Cheney and Bill Clinton combined.
Posted by: military spouse | July 28, 2007 6:43 PM"

Yeah, that would definitely fit Bruce and John D.

I was also talking about people who claim to have been in the military.

Military experience doesn't equate to military expertise.

Real military experts are more concerned with doing the right thing instead of trying to take political advantage of the situation.

How many times has it been said it would be political suicide to take action, one way or the other. Way to put the troops first!

Politicians and their supporters on both sides are more concerned with winning primaries and elections by blaming the other side, than fixing the problem.

The Republicans had the worst possible person running things in Iraq. Paul Bremmer couldn't have screwed things up more horribly than if he's been working for Osama Bin Laden. Rumsfeld should have been fore years before he was allowed to quit.

The Democrats elected last year to end the war have done nothing but send the message to our enemies that we will cut and run.

Both sides have failed miserably. The Republicans executed a incompetent plan and the Democrats have managed to make it worse.

And while they continue blame each other, my husband is in Iraq on his third tour.

"And while they continue blame each other, my husband is in Iraq on his third tour.

Posted by: military spouse | July 29, 2007 12:56 PM"

That's the travesty. Bring back the draft.

Draft armies have fought well, when the cause was righteous.

Guess we would then find out about Iraq??

Forcing people to join the military; that’s a great idea.

The problem isn’t quality or number of people in uniform. The problem is the Republicans not being able to come up with a winning plan and the Democrats wanting legislate defeat.

The draft won’t fix the problem of partisan politics.

And I hope your not saying my husband and the men and women he serves with in Iraq haven't 'fought well', or they'd be doing a better job if they were in Afghanistan(the 'righteous' war)instead.

I believe in US history draft armies have always fought well.

Again the problem isn't the military, it's the fools on both sides in Washington.

"The draft won’t fix the problem of partisan politics.

Posted by: military spouse | July 29, 2007 9:17 PM"

It would fix the problem of your husband serving three tours in a hostile fire zone!

Who said they weren't fighting well!

Forget it. Get read for the fourth tour.

"Draft armies have fought well, when the cause was righteous.

Guess we would then find out about Iraq??"

What exactly does that mean then?

After you answer that Patton, you can tell me about your vast experience that made you an expert in all things miltary.

Was any of that experience in this century?

"What exactly does that mean then?"

It means that lots of people that claim to support the troops don't have to lay anything on the line, do they? They just drive around with a decal on their bumper.

With a draft their children, nieces, nephews, themselves, would be subject to the draft thus involving them more closely with their professed support.

US Army, Feb 69 - Feb 72. Had it easy compared to many, BTW. That's all the personal info I wish to pass out here.

Not sure why it matters regarding my desire for your husband to come home post haste.

I'm not interested in what the people that don't support the troops think.

I certainly don't want them in the military with my husband.

The Iraqi people live in fear; they don’t know who will be controlling Iraq next year. If they support the wrong side, they and their families will be slaughtered. We can’t expect them to stand up with us and take over the security for their country when we’ve told them and the rest of the world we want to cut and run. They don’t want to be seen supporting the Americans or the American installed government when we may abandon them. This is what the Iraqis tell my husband every single day.

They’ll sit on the sidelines and watch what happens, they’ll wait and see who will come out on top, and then they will choose the ‘winning’ side.

The President may finally started to move in the right direction with the surge. (Notice the word ‘may) Congress sent Gen Patreous on a mission and has given him until September to report on any progress. Why not wait until the report comes out before telling the world we’ve lost and we need to cut and run now.

People are free to disagree, and I’ve disagreed with the way the war has been handled as much as anyone else, but when one side of our political system has based all of their hopes on the next election on defeat, it makes it more dangerous for my husband and the other troops. It makes it more likely it will take the Iraqis longer to stand up on their own, and it make it more likely my husband will have to go back to Iraq again and again.

I want my husband to come home post haste, so does he. He wants to win and come home for good.

He and his people, they know they can win.

The draft won't make any of those things happen.

The assertion that people that support the troops (even if they don't support the war) would behave differently if there was a draft is an insult to the troops and those that have someone in the fight (and have stickers on their POVs too).

:::::: IMPEACH BUSH & CHENEY! ::::::