Thursday, March 30, 2006

From that defencereview.com article

Wow this is a real scathing indictment against the Pentagon banning this Dragonskin armor.

It's Lt. Col. Charles' (Ret.) opinion that the reason the U.S. Army has chosen to outfit U.S. troops with Interceptor body armor over Pinnacle Armor SOV flexible body armor/Dragon Skin is that the U.S. Army suffers from "not invented here" syndrome. "The basic reason, as hard as this may be for your audience to understand, is not invented here: Bureaucratic turf protection because the Army people that were charged with providing this ten, fifteen years ago had a program -- it produced something beginning in 1998 I believe, 1999. But it wasn't this - and they didn't want to use this because they did not claim invention of it." Lt. Col. Charles (Ret.) continues, "We were told by several independent consultants who work for the Pentagon that cannot be named because of fear of losing their jobs that this was probably the best available body armor. It's what they would take to Baghdad. They do not have any financial ties with Pinnacle Armor. We're not saying it's the best. We're saying it ought to get a fair test."

In other words since they didn't make it then they need to ban it. Wow, sounds like pretty bad stuff. I think Dateline needs to get cracking. Boot up Stone Phillips and lets get the ball rolling already. They should hang up some Dragonskin on a dummy and fire an AK-47 at it already.

No comments: