The new MRAP(Mine Resistant Ambush Protected) vehicles are the solution to lowering Marine casualties in Iraq. At least that’s what the Associated Press’s article found on Fox News’s website of Franz J. Gayl’s report would have you believe. In the article his report blames upper level Marine generals failure to buy and field the expensive MRAP vehicles resulted in hundreds of deaths of Marines in Iraq and Afghanistan. What the article fails to state is the Marine Corps’ policy and practice as a mobile amphibious force which the MRAP does not conform to. By increasing armor and ground clearance the vehicles sacrifice speed, maneuverability, and range, which are key to the Corps’ war fighting doctrine. Great if you are fighting an enemy that relies solely on mines but useless in a fast paced ground offensive. Heavy and with limited combat roles, as opposed to other vehicles in the Marines’ arsenal, they would have no place in the post Iraq/Afghanistan fleet.
Though they do increase survivability for the crew, these vehicles are just as vulnerable as any vehicle in Iraq to roadside bombs. This solves nothing unless our strategy is just to drive around and get blown up, and that is not a strategy the Marine Corps wishes to use. These vehicles are a short term solution to a long term problem. The Army, who fields thousands of the MRAPs, have begun to see that the enemy has already adapted to them. IEDs(improvised explosive devices) are not a static weapon, and will continue to change as our combat vehicles change. They are already capable of defeating any armor system we have. A perfect example of this is the M1A1 Abrams Tank, one of the most highly armored vehicles in the world. Several of these have been destroyed in Iraq by a variety of IEDs which also resulted in the deaths of some their crew. By increasing armor you increase the size of bomb needed to destroy the vehicle, which increases the danger and injuries of those using the heavily armored vehicles, but is a death sentence to those not using the vehicles, like our support troops and Iraqi allies.
Also, Spending millions of dollars on new vehicles shows that Washington has no intention of solving long term issues in Iraq. As a Marine I saw first hand our inability to overcome IEDs even with advanced technology. Throwing billions of dollars at one part of an issue does not solve the whole issue. A combat zone is a combat zone, dangerous and deadly. It is a place where people get hurt and die. The only way to stop casualties and deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan is to not be there. Marine Corps leadership should not be blamed, as this article would have you think, for the dangers of a combat zone or for thinking about what is best for the long term. The true blame rests squarely on those who continue to put service members in harms way.
No comments:
Post a Comment