NBC recently reported that the commercially available Dragon Skin body armor performed better during tests than the Interceptor body armor given soldiers. A debate arose as a congressional hearing examining the situation as armor producers claimed the NBC study was wrong.
Frankly, the issue is why four years after initiating military action in Iraq is there an argument as to which type of armor is most effective? It is shocking that service people were issued less effective body armor, it is more shocking that those in charge haven’t immediately addressed the issue. Instead, we are treated to an argument as to who is to blame. During World War II, the initial Sherman tank used in combat proved less effective against German Panzer tanks. A massive program was put into effect to create tanks that would out perform German Panzer divisions. By the later part of 1944, we had such weapons. Body armor should not be a debate topic in June, 2007. For God’s sake, let’s get someone in charge in the Bush administration who will focus on ensuring members of the armed forces get the latest and most effective equipment.
Stars & Stripes, June 7, “Debate Over Body Armor Erupts at House Hearing”