[From Webmaster: Comment removed due to profanity]

The magic word (why MY would want to be in a Stryker) is "air-conditioning". The Stryker is fine for running up and down roads - providing that they are relatively straight. The problem derives from the fact that they are crap OFF the roads, so the terrorists know for sure that the Strykers are always going to be on the roads. Kind of makes it a much simpler task to set up ambushes. By the way, there is a difference in the armament of the Bradley and the Stryker. Yes, the Stryker can also blast a fleeing cab. The difference is that the Bradley an do it while moving ... the Stryker cannot.

All combat vehicles have their pluses and minuses. My major beef with the Stryker is the way Army leadership conducted the "competition" to select it. The result is that the Army gets equipped with a vehicle that cannot swim (not necessary now, but was for forty years?), cannot be carried aboard the C-130 (not necessary now, but was for forty years?), cannot efficiently cross country without roads (not necessary now but has been forever) etc etc. If wheels are so much better, one has to wonder why somebody ever spent the time to invent tracked systems. When we buy new vehicles, the new one should be better and more capable than the the old one, right?

I'll probably play like crap today thinking about the dishonest Army leadership. By the way, with fifty dollars, I could get ten soldiers to stand up in front of the cameras and tell the world that their mothers were whores, so one shouldn't believe the soldiers that are always seen on TV praising the Stryker.