quote:

Armored troop carriers called unsafe for duty
++http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/nov/05/armored-troop-carriers-unsafe-for-afghan-duty/

KANDAHAR, Afghanistan | Staff Sgt. Daniel Paul Rabidou nervously rubbed the sweat from his palms onto his Army fatigues.

The tall, well-built 24-year-old from San Bernardino, Calif., had already survived two improvised explosive devices (IEDs) on convoys in the past six weeks, including one on the same road he was getting ready to traverse again from Forward Operating Base Ramrod near Kandahar to a small outpost in the heart of Taliban territory.

Since they arrived at the outpost on Sept. 13, the Blackwatch unit - Bravo Company, 2nd Battalion, 1st Infantry Regiment, with the 5th Stryker Brigade - had lost three soldiers and two civil affairs officers. IEDs had destroyed three of their four Stryker vehicles. Overall, 21 of 350 Strykers have been destroyed since the 5th Brigade deployed in southern Afghanistan in July; more than two dozen Americans have been killed and nearly 70 wounded.

Soldiers call the Strykers "Kevlar coffins," Sgt. Rabidou said.

(...)

The eight-wheeled Stryker, introduced a decade ago as a faster, more mobile alternative to tanks and other tracked vehicles, has had a controversial history. In theory, the Stryker's speed and capacity -- it can carry 11 plus a crew of two -- makes up for its lighter armor. But critics say its vulnerability to IEDs make it unsuitable for duty in southern Afghanistan.

The Stryker is "essentially a paramilitary police vehicle," said retired Army Col. Doug Macgregor, a specialist on tank warfare. "It's designed to transfer American light infantry down a road," not to fight an elusive enemy in treacherous terrain.

Col. Macgregor said the U.S. Army would do better to follow the example of Canada, which has bought German Leopard II tanks for use by ground forces in Afghanistan ...