Skip to comments.
Iraq Commanders Getting All Armor Needed to Do the Job
DoD-AFPS ^
| April 30, 2004
| Donna Miles
Posted on 04/30/2004 3:00:08 PM PDT by Ragtime Cowgirl
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-23 next last
Comment #2 Removed by Moderator
To: Cannoneer No. 4; MJY1288; xzins; Calpernia; TEXOKIE; Alamo-Girl; windchime; Grampa Dave; ...
Military question, hypothetical - would our troops be better off with no armor and a strong leader who loved America, or a million armored HUMVEE'S under the leadership of UN-Clinton-Kerry?
3
posted on
04/30/2004 3:11:56 PM PDT
by
Ragtime Cowgirl
(The)"enemy in Fallujah.will not be controlled.we will have to eliminate that enemy."Gen.Abizaid,4/30)
To: William Creel
Does anyone else remember back in the late 70's when this tank was under development (back when it was called the XM-1)? I remember the lib media was just unmerciful -- it seems like they had a news story every day (it might have actually been one a week) about what a stupid design it was and what a bunch of morons the U. S. military must be for designing it.
This went on and on for years. The New York Times was the most critical. Of course, in the first Gulf War we've come to find out who the real morons are -- it was the reporters who said the XM-1 wouldn't work. It's the best tank in the world.
4
posted on
04/30/2004 3:13:02 PM PDT
by
68skylark
(.)
To: Ragtime Cowgirl
BUMP and I am glad to see this!
5
posted on
04/30/2004 3:15:06 PM PDT
by
TrueBeliever9
(aut viam inveniam aut faciam (where there is a will - there is a way)
To: Ragtime Cowgirl
An army of lions led by sheep will always lose to an army of sheep led by a lion.
6
posted on
04/30/2004 3:21:54 PM PDT
by
Cannoneer No. 4
(I've lost turret power; I have my nods and my .50. Hooah. I will stay until relieved. White 2 out.)
To: 68skylark
Yeah, I remember. I happened to be in armor at the time. 60 Minutes did a piece on the contract competition. In this case they may have had a point. IIRC, the head to head tests at the Ft. Knox proving ground showed that the GM version was clearly a superior platform, while the Chrysler model had serious filtration problems, among many others. But the army selected the Chrysler model. Why? Well, it's was during the exact time that Chrysler was about to fold.
Now, that's a little different than just saying across the board that the M1 was a piece of junk. And maybe both things were being said by the media -- I don't recall that kind of detail.
But I do find it curious that we are sending the A1 version over there bec the tank has changed greatly since that version was produced.
7
posted on
04/30/2004 3:22:29 PM PDT
by
Lee'sGhost
(Crom!)
To: Ragtime Cowgirl
I'd rather fight barehanded than be under Kerry.
8
posted on
04/30/2004 3:38:52 PM PDT
by
SAMWolf
(War is God's way of teaching us geography)
To: Lee'sGhost; All
I do find it curious that we are sending the A1 version over there bec the tank has changed greatly since that version was produced. I thought that most of the Abrams tanks that saw "major combat operations" in Iraq were the A1 variant. IIRC, the 4th I.D. has the newer A2 model, but they were late in getting to the fray. If I'm incorrect, please let me know.
9
posted on
04/30/2004 3:46:04 PM PDT
by
Charles Martel
("Who put the Tribbles in the Quadrotriticale?")
To: Cannoneer No. 4
An army of lions led by sheep will always lose to an army of sheep led by a lion.Good quote, thanks. Adding to the tagline file. Whose?
10
posted on
04/30/2004 3:49:20 PM PDT
by
Ragtime Cowgirl
(The)"enemy in Fallujah.will not be controlled.we will have to eliminate that enemy."Gen.Abizaid,4/30)
To: Ragtime Cowgirl
Churchill's, I think.
11
posted on
04/30/2004 3:52:54 PM PDT
by
Cannoneer No. 4
(I've lost turret power; I have my nods and my .50. Hooah. I will stay until relieved. White 2 out.)
To: Ragtime Cowgirl
"I do not fear an army of lions, if they are led by a lamb. "I do fear an army of sheep, if they are led by a lion."
- Alexander the Great
12
posted on
04/30/2004 3:57:05 PM PDT
by
Cannoneer No. 4
(I've lost turret power; I have my nods and my .50. Hooah. I will stay until relieved. White 2 out.)
To: Charles Martel
I think you are correct on all counts -- but do remember that GWI was more than 10 years ago. But more to the point, there was/is actually an M1 (no "A1" designation added on). That's the first production model and is actually what I was thinking of when I made my comment.
Thanks for helping to clear that up.
13
posted on
04/30/2004 3:57:14 PM PDT
by
Lee'sGhost
(Crom!)
To: Ragtime Cowgirl
We are winning ~ the bad guys are losing ~ trolls, terrorists, democ
rats and the mainstream media are sad ~ very sad!
~~ Bush/Cheney 2004 ~~
14
posted on
04/30/2004 4:03:38 PM PDT
by
blackie
(Be Well~Be Armed~Be Safe~Molon Labe!)
To: blackie
I would rather have one hand behind my back, with the other guy, with a 12 inch knife running at me. In I would still not went that creep John Effin kerry, any where with in 10 miles of the white house.
To: Ragtime Cowgirl
Would someone tell these guys that the HUMVEE is NOT an AFV? It is a utility truck, a replacement for the Jeep.
I was a tank commander in "Nam with the 1st Bde of the 5th Mech Inf. After initial skepticism the brass found out that heavy armor, such as 53 ton M48A3 medium tanks and light armor like M113 ACAV's could operate quite effectively in Vietnam, due in large measure to the ingenuity and innovation of the ordinary G.I. and his leaders.
The kind of fighting going on in Fallujah cries out for coordinated tank-infantry teams that can reduce the sniper nests with relatively little risk for the ground pounding grunts. High explosive rounds from 120MM tank main guns provide on station pin point immediate direct fire artillery support under the direction of the accompanying and protecting infantry. At present there is not even much rubble to impede AFV movement.
WE did a pretty good job with tank infantry teams in Hue in '68.
16
posted on
04/30/2004 5:34:55 PM PDT
by
DMZFrank
Comment #17 Removed by Moderator
To: DMZFrank
But, but, if they admitted that tanks work every time they are tried, then how could they justify gutting the heavy army and giving all its funding and missions to everybody else?
18
posted on
04/30/2004 7:57:31 PM PDT
by
JasonC
To: Ragtime Cowgirl
Nobody's demanding Strykers?
Or whatever that "thing" is called?
19
posted on
04/30/2004 10:15:48 PM PDT
by
MonroeDNA
(Hillary was in charge of the FBI files, which went into a data base: WHoDB. Genious ackers, expose)
To: Ragtime Cowgirl
Nobody's demanding Strykers?
Or whatever that "thing" is called?
20
posted on
04/30/2004 10:15:55 PM PDT
by
MonroeDNA
(Hillary was in charge of the FBI files, which went into a data base: WHoDB. Genious ackers, expose)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-23 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson