Last year, Les Brownlee, the Army’s top guy and one of my very fine captains way back when, stated that all troops in Iraq would have the latest individual body armor (IBA) by Christmas. Three months after this declaration to Congress, there were still soldiers in Iraq without the lifesaving vests – some of whom might have suffered death or wounds as a result.

How could Secretary Brownlee make such a bad call? Easy.

For starters, the Pentagon’s top brass always focus ....

.... on big-ticket toys like the irrelevant F-22 fighter, the crash-and-burn Osprey helicopter, the redundant Joint Strike Fighter and the dubious Stryker combat vehicle.

These 18-karat klinkers might be ideal weapons to fight a now-extinct Soviet bear, but they aren’t worth a bucket of spit in our present long-term struggle against terrorism.

The price tag for just these four wonder weapons runs about half a trillion dollars – great for war racketeers, political slush funds and other pork, and the general officers’ big-buck, military-industrial-congressional-complex-sponsored post-military careers, but not so good for the GI Joes and Jills operating in the killing zones without the right stuff.

The other reason for the vest shortfall is standard senior brass stupidity. Two years before our troops waded into Iraq, those who planned the campaign and their top logisticians set the IBA production rate at a number based on vests for the “dismounted fighting soldier” and “combat vehicle crewman” – a mere 1,600 units per month. By jump-off time, the production requirement shot up to 19,000 sets per month – too little, too late – to provide all divisional- and separate regimental-level combat units with IBA.

The flawed conventional-war thinking must have been that the Pentagon's $400- billion-a-year “shock ‘n’ awe” machine would so flatten Saddam’s $1 billion-a-year ragtag army that the guerrilla war predicted by many military analysts wouldn’t happen. Because the tens of thousands of supporters providing the beans, bullets, medicine and maintenance wouldn’t be in harm’s way under this scenario, they wouldn’t need the new 16-pound vest that protects against fragmentation splinters and up to a .30-caliber armor-piecing rifle round.

The Army’s leadership owes a one-on-one apology to the families of the dead and the hundreds of support and service troops awarded Purple Hearts as a result of this criminal negligence. Not to mention the reimbursement that should be offered to everyone who purchased a vest for a serving loved one.

Last week, Maj. Gary Tallman, the Pentagon’s point man on IBA, told me, “The Army has allocated $420 million and assigned top priority to ensuring that every soldier in Afghanistan and Iraq or who will be heading that way has one of the new vests.”

The good news is that Tallman appears to be telling the truth. A platoon of sources in Iraq confirms that this isn’t another Pentagon fairy tale – it’s happening. Soldiers from newly-deployed units say they were issued the $1,500 vest before leaving the USA or in Kuwait just prior to heading for the badlands of Iraq.

Seven production lines, from Costa Mesa, Calif., to Pittsfield, Mass., are busy churning out 25,000 IBA sets – the vest and accompanying ballistic plates – per month. A year after the war started, production is finally meeting demand. Talk about ready, fire, aim on the part of the planners.

My guess is that the Pentagon brass pushed the pedal to the metal on IBA production because Congress, moms, pops and the media have been on their tails since this shameful shortfall came to light.

But many soldiers say that there’s now a musical-vests shell game in play. For example, when the 21st Infantry out of Hawaii replaced the Europe-based 173rd Airborne, the battle-seasoned paratroopers were ordered to give the newbies their body armor. An Airborne sergeant said: “Once we get back to Italy, we’ll again become the NATO fire brigade. What happens if we jump into a fight somewhere around the world and we don't have our vests?”

Tallman says such elite ready-force units that stay on airstrip alert at places like Fort Bragg, N.C., and Vicenza, Italy, are the next priority and will be properly outfitted before moving out.

Let’s hope so. For sure I’ll be watching with my whistle at high port.

The address of David Hackworth's home page is Hackworth.com. Sign in for the free weekly Defending America column at his Web site. Send mail to P.O. Box 11179, Greenwich, CT 06831. His newest book is “Steel My Soldiers’ Hearts.”

Also Will there be an Exodus:

I fear there will be a mass exodus from the U.S. Army – AD, Res and NG -- in the next few years because the Pentagon is trying to do too much with too little resulting in one hardship tour following another hardship tour. Please let me know if this is true or I am all wet. Please give me specifics. I’ll not use your name unless you expressly want it published. Thanks -- Hack. Please contact Hack. [email protected]

© 2004 David H. Hackworth.

Story number 12.

Soldiers in Iraq Buy Their Own Body Armor

Friday March 26, 2026 8:16 AM

By RYAN LENZ

Associated Press Writer

Soldiers headed for Iraq are still buying their own body armor - and in many cases, their families are buying it for them - despite assurances from the military that the gear will be in hand before they're in harm's way.

Body armor distributors have received steady inquiries from soldiers and families about purchasing the gear, which can cost several thousand dollars. Though the military has advised them not to rely on third-party suppliers, many soldiers say they want it before they deploy.

Last October, it was reported that nearly one-quarter of American troops serving in Iraq did not have ceramic plated body armor, which can stop bullets fired from assault rifles and shrapnel.

The military says the shortfall is over and soldiers who do not yet have the armor soon will. But many want to avoid the risk.

``What we hear from soldiers is that they are told that they are going to get body armor just before they leave or just after they get there. But they don't want to take a chance,'' said Nick Taylor, owner of Bulletproofme.com, an online distributor of body armor in Austin, Texas.

Inquiries rise and fall with the rate of deployments, fueled by stories of units falling under attack as little as a day after being issued body armor. Whether they are true, the stories are prompting families to think about buying the equipment, Taylor said.

Reliance Armor in Cincinnati, which makes armored vests for soldiers and police, has nearly doubled in size as a result of the shortage.

``We're getting people locally who are deployed National Guard and parents, specifically, coming in and buying,'' said Don Budke, the company's vice president of sales. ``The military people don't want to advertise the fact that there are people doing this on their own.''

Dan Britt paid about $1,400 for body armor for his son, a medic stationed in Kuwait who had orders to move into Baghdad. He recently heard his son received it.

``In war, as we've learned through all our history, who gets killed and who doesn't is just happenstance,'' said the father from Hamilton, Ohio. ``But if I can raise the odds, then I'll feel better.''

Those that need the armor most are already certain to have it, said Army spokesman Maj. Gary Tallman, and families should not buy the equipment.

``What we have told family members who have contacted us is that the Army cannot attest to the safety or the level of protection of body armor purchased rather than issued for a soldier,'' Tallman said.

The Defense Department says it has contracted with one manufacturer for its armor. Point Blank Body Armor, which produces the Interceptor brand, has all but stopped selling to the public.

Nancy Durst recently learned that her husband, a soldier with an Army reserve unit from Maine serving in Iraq, spent four months without body armor. She said she would have bought armor for her husband had vests not been cycled into his unit.

Even if her husband now has body armor, Durst said she was angry he was without it at any time. Her husband also has told her that reservists have not been given the same equipment as active duty soldiers. ``They're so sick of being treated as second-class soldiers,'' she said.

Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, who serves on the Armed Services subcommittee, said she knows soldiers who were told by the military to buy body armor before leaving, rather than risk arriving with nothing but their shirts.

``We lagged far behind in making sure that our soldiers who are performing very difficult and dangerous missions had protective equipment,'' she said.

A bill being considered in Congress would reimburse families who bought body armor before the Army asked for increased production to bridge the gap between soldiers who had armor and those that did not.

Jonathan Turley, a George Washington University law professor who has talked with hundreds of families who bought body armor for soldiers in Iraq, said the military lost the trust of soldiers' families.

In that regard, it is not surprising that families bought body armor in spite of what military advised, he said.

``There still is a lingering level of mistrust with some families as to whether there are people thinking about the best equipment and needs of their loved ones,'' Turley said. ``No one that I know of has been truly held accountable.''

Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2004