I.E.D. Answer: New Roads?
I've spoken to a couple of company commanders in Iraq who say they don't have much of a problem with roadside bombs. The big reason why: they avoid the main streets in their neighborhoods, travelling where their enemies aren't.
Now, the Pentagon is looking to use that technique all over Iraq, according to Inside Defense. "Rather than trying to defeat improvised explosive devices (IEDs) head-on with new technologies and tactics, the Defense Department is looking to... construct new roads for supply convoys that simply bypass densely populated, high-threat areas."
The Army is seeking $167 million in military construction funds as part of the Pentagon's soon-to-be detailed $65.3 billion supplemental spending request for fiscal year 2006 to pave roads capable of supporting two-way traffic, complete with shoulders, drainage structures and interchanges to connect with existing supply routes, according to a draft version of the request.
“Failure to provide these routes will result in continued exposure of U.S. and coalition forces as well as Iraqi non-combatants to unacceptable insurgent threats to include IED and vehicle borne IED and direct fire exposure,†states the draft budget document obtained by InsideDefense.com and set to be delivered to Congress soon....
There have been approximately 28,000 IED incidents in Iraq between April 2003 and November 2005, according to Jan. 24 briefing slides prepared by Multi-National Force-Iraq.
Seems a unit that i may or may not have been in arrived in Iraq in some year in the Christmas month. Seems that the previous unit had spent millions constructing a new road. Seems that many of the ieds that were employed against the unit I may or may not have been in were emplaced during the road construction, bought with american greenbacks in the hands of the contractors, and cast in concrete curbs, or placed upon the hardpack and then asphalted over. Unless it is US citizens doing the road construction, everything is suspect over there.
Posted by: Dee at November 3, 2006 11:53 AM