Abrams Tank Attacked And Destroyed By Insurgents In Iraq

news wires | 11/04/2004 | Outspot

[OutSpot]

Can anyone tell me how the Iraqi insurgents are able to penetrate our invincible Abrams tank?

[hershey]

The longer we allow this, the weaker we appear. We need to drop a few MOAB's. That's all they understand.

[Iris7]

Since this Iraq business started I have been hearing a lot of talk about the "invincible" Abrams. I decided to investigate this, because the popular view, that the Abrams was "invulnerable", had to be wrong, as the popular view always is.

Anyway, the bottom line is that the Abrams is pretty easy to take out by someone either lucky or skilled. I will not get any more specific.

I have been quiet about this stuff, since the enemy most certainly reads the Free Republic, but the cat is now out of the bag, the horse has run off, and the milk is spilled.

The very unfortunate reality is that US training and doctrine and the resulting combat hardware are not suited for the current war. The Fallujah operation we have been watching over the last few days has had many casualties without much good effect, very unfortunately. Totally unnecessary American deaths are happening, maybe one half to two thirds of the combat casualties. Very not good. Encourages the bad guys besides.

[meenie]

The high speed, mobile, army is very hard to beat in a pitched battle against another force where the targets are plentiful. The Rommel and Patton model of armored warfare is incompatible with urban warfare. In urban warfare, the GI with the hand grenade and individual weapon with the support of an occasionable mortar round is the best you can do.

[been_lurking]

The Fallujah operation we have been watching over the last few days has had many casualties without much good effect, very unfortunately. Totally unnecessary American deaths are happening, maybe one half to two thirds of the combat casualties.

Your statement smells of an agenda.

Published reports by the left-leaning biased media indicate a greater than 10-1 kill ratio for the Marines. Under any circumstances, this would be an terrific accomplishment for a military force. Given the urban nature of the current conflict, and the asymetrical attacks by the insurgents, the Marines have done the impossible.

[vbmoneyspender]

The Fallujah operation we have been watching over the last few days has had many casualties without much good effect, very unfortunately.

What's the basis for this statement. My understanding is that we have lost less than 10 Marines in retaking Fallujah, which is a city with a population of 300,000. I'd like you to point to a battle in the past where an armed force attacking a city of a similar size took less casualties than our Marines have taken in recapturing Fallujah?

[Army Air Corps]

"WU=EU. boy am I sleepy"

No, it was a Freudian slip. WU = Wussy Union.

[Poodlebrain]

Not true, infantry supported by armor is more effective in urban combat than infantry without armor support. The armor provides much more concentrated firepower for pinning opponents and allowing the dismounted infantry to maneuver. As well as providing covering fire, the tank is also capable of dispensing smoke to provide concealment for the maneuvering infantry.

I would gladly trade the effect of a mortar round for the effect of a tank main gun round in urban combat. The plentiful cover available is usually proof against the shrapnel from mortar rounds, but not so from the blast effects of direct fire from a tank's main gun.

An infantry company supported by a tank platoon is a formidable force in urban terrain. The tanks are more vulnerable to close range attacks, but the infantry and its fighting vehicles should be able to limit any attacks to frontal attacks which are least prone to success.

[SLB]

BTTT.

[Finalapproach29er]

A Tom Hanks, W.W.II "sticky-bomb"?

[Batrachian]

Abrams tanks are, and always have been, vulnerable at the rear. That's no secret. There's no real armor there, only relatively thin plate steel. Toss a bomb on the back deck, or hit the exhaust grill with an RPG, and you'll take out the engine, and probably set the fuel on fire as well. The crew will escape, because they're well protected, but the tank will be out of action. Eventually the Army will come back and tow it away and fix it if it can be fixed. I doubt the Iraqis have anything to tow away a 70 ton tank.

A few M1s where lost during the initial combat phases of Operation Iraqi Freedom in the way I described. It's painful for an old Armor guy like me to see, but that's what happens when you let the enemy get behind you.

[boris]

They can kill Israeli Merkva tank--considered the best tank in the world--or close to it.

The terrorists take an old water heater and fill it with 200 kg of C-4, bury it in the road and set it off underneath the tank by remote control when the tank rolls over it.

--Boris

[Ragtime Cowgirl]

 From CPA briefing, 4/09, latest posted transcript -- 

 

GEN. KIMMITT: ... I would say it's a gross mischaracterization to suggest that the entire country is at war, that the entire country is now under the grips of combat.  I think we can take a look at the map and see that currently there are some small, localized contact, such as here in al Kut, down here in An Nasiriyah, a little bit in Baghdad.   But to suggest that somehow, that the 27 million people of the country of Iraq are currently in the midst of a war, that just isn't the case.

            Is it spreading?  I would ask those who want to attack the coalition or attack Iraqi government facilities or attack Iraqi police stations in any number to take a very close look at how quickly we were able to reposition a coalition force of over 1,000 soldiers, approximately two to three dozen combat vehicles and extensive air power in a very, very short period of time.  That ought to be a very clear lesson that if, in fact, somebody has the idea -- perhaps in Arupa (ph) or over here at Samawa or up here at Tikrit -- that they want to start another set of violence, another set of engagements, that the coalition, with its 130,000-plus members, and the Iraqi security forces, with their 200,000-plus police, ICDC and Iraqi armed forces, has the flexibility, the capability to move anywhere in this country and put down that violence.  So watch very carefully

Q     (Through interpreter.)  This is to General Kimmitt.  You spoke about the 120,000 American or coalition forces here.  Can you   tell us exactly how many of the coalition forces are engaged in the areas of Fallujah and al-Mahdi militias?  And there are reports, journalistic reports they say about the destruction of convoys and movements.  You have not told us about the losses on the coalition side.

GEN. KIMMITT:  With regards to how many of our forces are involved in Fallujah and some of these other operations, a very, very small percentage; probably -- oh, I'd estimate somewhere on the order of a brigade-and-a-half worth of forces are directly involved in combat operations at this time in terms of ground maneuver forces. And that's a very small percentage of what's available to be drawn upon here in Iraq should we need to move forces from one sector to another.  Now I may be a little bit off on that estimation.  It may be a little more, perhaps two-and-a-half brigades, but nonetheless whether it's one and a half or two and a half, that is a very, very small percentage of the available combat force here in the country.

.........GEN. KIMMITT:  You're right, but the numbers are very, very small.  We continue to lose small numbers of Humvees on a daily basis, partially damaged by IEDs and such, and I think we had today some fuel trailers that were blown up.  But as a percentage of the total force -- I'm not certain that we have lost any tanks.  I'm not certain that we have lost any Bradley Fighting Vehicles.  I have no report that we've lost any light armored reconnaissance vehicles as part of any of these operations.  I suspect that you may have been reading accounts from some of the more extremist websites, more extremist publications that would suggest somehow that there have been large losses, but   those just don't square with the facts.  I'll see what I can find out in terms of the actual numbers and get them to you tomorrow.

(Briefing slides not yet posted.)

[F14 Pilot]

The question is who or what country is giving them Anti-Air, Anti-Tank weapons?

[LS]

Well, one of my ROTC students showed me a sequence from the U.S. army deliberately trying to destroy an Abrams: it took TWO direct hit sabot rounds; two thermite grenades, and the thing still didn't blow up. After another 3-4 direct hits, it finally blew up. I'm suspicious of this.

[nuconvert]

Iran ? That would be my guess

[verity]

Nothing that is man-made is invulnerable!

[blackie]

Be Ever Vigilant!

We are winning ~ the bad guys are losing ~ trolls, terrorists, democrats and the mainstream media are sad ~ very sad!

~~ Bush/Cheney 2004 ~~

[Godfollow]

Um... that makes five...

[Diverdogz]

Dam?

[F14 Pilot]

Iran's Mullahs!