It was classified for a *reason,* you know

[telerib]

So the Washington Post got ahold of a classified Army report on the Stryker transport vehicle that outlines its shortcomings in combat.

"Eric Miller, senior defense investigator at the independent Project on Government Oversight, which obtained a copy of the internal Army report several weeks ago, said the critique shows that 'the Pentagon hasn't yet learned that using the battlefield as a testing ground costs lives, not just spiraling dollars.'"

Well enough. I understand the desire for a watchdog group to want a "smoking gun." I understand the desire of the free press to hold the military complex up for examination.

But the WaPo article reads like a how-to manual on making a successful attack on a Stryker. Rather than stick with generalities, they get pretty darn specific - which parts fail, under what conditions, and how often.

Tell me that that's not going to cost lives.

Comments

[cmccurry.livejournal.com]

Given how the U.S. military is typically vilified by our press, I think that they don't care if they cause a few extra deaths by the article.

I shudder just thinking....

[missbard.livejournal.com]

......about how many 18 year old boys will lose their lives because of that article.

I haven't read the article, but...

[(Anonymous)]

I know that around the lab, we _can't_ eliminate all the bugs through simulations or thinking about how equipment's going to work. Only real-world testing gets all the bugs out:

When someone's life depends on finding a new way to destroy your transport _right_now_, or when the folks who are using the transport are pushing it past design specs or trying to maintain the machine under stressful, dangerous conditions - that's when the bugs are going to show up.

Lab equipment gets tested on the benchtop, then in situ, then as part of a system. Every level of complexity reveals new bugs. Of course the transport's going to have shortcomings that show up in combat. That's why military _experience_ is valued over military _theory_ and battle-tested hardware's valued over blueprints.

I'm disappointed in the Post

-Sarah