Quote Originally Posted by Schmedlap View Post
I meant easier to conceal during movement and less arduous to conceal during emplacement - see JC's previous post; it takes 2 minutes. I suspect that digging a hole for 155's takes a bit longer.

See JC's prior post:

They also often look like rocks. If Ali, the local EFP emplacer, has one of these in his trunk and suddenly finds himself surrounded by coalition forces who are searching vehicles and closing in, he can pop the trunk, and put the EFP on the side of the road before they get to his vehicle. JC gives lots of examples in his post of easy concealment as well. Since it looks like a cement block, rock, etc, there is a good chance that the focus of the search element is on the vehicle. They look into the trunk, see nothing, and continue on their way. On the other hand, if the trunk has 4 155mm rounds, then leaving them in the trunk or tossing them on the side of the road will probably result in either some zip ties or a bullet.
Thanks for the clarification to your previous post. JC's post came well after my inquiries, hence my questions regarding your comments.

Anti-terrorism courses in the US and UK for vehicle searches typically include turning over every stone (pun intended) and bagging every cigarette butt. It shouldn't matter if the trunk is filled with stones or 155 projectiles; a search is a search. Sounds sloppy to me.

Quote Originally Posted by Schmedlap View Post
My information may be dated. If that is all that was in the public record as recently as late 2007, then I am not going to add to it.
If you have access to AKO, FBI/LEO and/or the International Bomb Data Center, you can see that there's very little to substantiate the profound comments from politicians.

Regards, Stan