Malkin on the armor

Hillary wraps herself in armor

Michelle Malkin has a Jewish World Review article on the body armor craziness and notes some of the opinions of serving military personnel who are skeptical of the calls for more armor across the board.

She also has a post up on her blog (in which Murdoc gets a mention…thanks!) that is worth a look.

Critics of the war are trying to paint those who aren’t screaming “bloody murder” as cold-hearted warmongers who are insensitive to the loss of life. Which is stupid.

Comments

  1. I wouldnt use michelle Malkin as an endorser of your views on body armour,she remains like you a civilian with an agenda. In her case it is an attack on H clinton with you it most probably is that you are excluded from ever being a member of a’band of brothers’ who faced off to the enemy.Thats all.

  2. dave: You are correct in thinking that I am excluded from a military ‘band of brothers’ and that I feel as if I’m probably a lesser person for it. Please explain how feeling that way would fuel an agenda that leads to my position on the body armor story. Also, for bonus points, please explain why many members of the military ‘band of brothers’ say many of the same things I do about the body armor story. Looking forward to your response.

  3. I don’t like Malkin much but I never thought you a chickenhawk. I don’t bother w that noise. Nevertheless isn’t this getting blown out. Sure we could drape a troop from head to toe in kevlar, but then he/she would have to leave his rifle, ammo, com gear, med gear and anything else behind. I guess that would make them little more then a target. I like Hilary, yes I said that but this is just pandering for the cameras. Thats all we get anymore. We need more from both sides.

  4. Joseph: We need more from both sides. I’m a Conservative and a registered Republican. But you don’t often hear me saying good things about the GOP.

  5. chickenhawk’ is an ineffective argument. It’s along the same lines as calling someone a ‘poopy-head.’ Anyway I’m not sure what Dave’s point is. All of us bloggers have agendas, so what?

  6. The whole point of body armour is that if you are in a static postion say behind an MMG then some kind of body protection is needed the best in fact that can be given.But front line stuff such as street fighting then the last thing you need is body armour. I never wore armour or lid when in close contact with an enemy force ,speed was the essence move and move again but then I served with the Brit marines and we fight different to the USA.