Armor to Iraq

Armed Forces Press Service ^ | Donna Miles

[gandalftb]

WASHINGTON, April 30, 2004 -- Commanders on the ground in Iraq are getting all the armored protection they determine necessary to do the job, the operations chief for U.S. Central Command told Pentagon reporters today.

Marine Maj. Gen. John F. Sattler, speaking via teleconference from U.S. Central Command's forward headquarters in Qatar, said ground commanders' requests for additional M1A1 tanks, "up-armored" humvees and kits to up-armor vehicles already in the theater are being filled quickly and completely.

The requests came from the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force operating in western Iraq and the 1st Infantry Division in north-central Iraq.

The last of 28 additional M1A1 tanks requested in Iraq are expected to arrive within the next three days, Sattler said. "There is a time and place for those, and they send a very valuable message just by pulling one up to the front lines," he said.

But Sattler acknowledged during an April 29 teleconference that tracked vehicles aren't always the most appropriate vehicles to do the job. "Counterinsurgency requires you to get up to actually engage and work with the population, and that is tough to do from inside a tank or Bradley (fighting vehicle) or armored personnel carrier," he said.

In these situations, Sattler said wheeled vehicles and warriors on the ground provide the necessary "speed and agility."

Based on the current security situation, Sattler said commanders on the ground increased their initial request for 1,000 up-armored humvees to 2,500. Acting Assistant Secretary of Defense Larry DiRita said the Pentagon has "significantly surged production" to provide commanders in Iraq the additional 2,000 up-armored humvees they have requested. By December, Sattler said, the U.S. military will have 4,500 up-armored humvees in Iraq.

Commanders in Iraq also requested 8,000 up-armor kits to reinforce "soft-skin" humvees, he said. Up-armored humvees are used in higher-threat areas, primarily to conduct patrols and provide convoy security. Vehicles that travel exclusively on military compounds and other low-threat areas don't require the additional armored protection, Sattler said.

Sattler said the military is supporting all commanders' requests as quickly as possible. "They made the call, and we supported them based on the situation at the time," he said.

[gandalftb]

The lack of adequate Marine armor and air has been a significant impediment to pacifying Falluja and Al Anbar province. My gripe is that the Marines were led to believe by CentCom that they were only needed for mopping up, and "hearts and minds". That turned out to be so much crap. Now with both of them in place we can be much more robust.

[antaresequity]

The lack of adequate Marine armor and air has been a significant impediment to pacifying Falluja and Al Anbar province.

On what facts do you base the conclusion that their is a lack of armor, and the subsequent claim that as a result, problems in pacifying Fallujah have been exacerbated?

Their is a carrier task force in the gulf, and at the very least, hundreds and hundreds of M1A1 tanks in theatre.

Air power and tanks are for destroying things. If we wanted to, we could have turned the slums of a Fallujah into a smoking series of rubble piles and craters overnight.

Three AC130 gunships could accomplish the same thing, lobbing 105's around the clock.

[cwb]

I've noticed a deliberate shift in the Democrat's game-plan as they have now made the lack of proper equipment a headline issue. With Kerry's Missouri speech yesterday...and the Democrat response to Bush's radio address this morning, they are going after the unpreparedness/plans for this war.

I got a frantic call from my mother this morning after she heard the National Guardsman's speech about how they were ill-equipped to deal with this war...including a significant shortness of armor. While I pointed out that it was Clinton who practically cut our Army divisions in half...and congress (Kerry) who has continually voted down appropriations for the military, she was still moved by the NG'man's speech, who also talked about family's that were being broken apart over this war.

I wonder if some of you more familiar with these issues wouldn't mind adding some perspective to this man's opinion. My mother, after hearing this, didn't think Bush's relection chances were too good.

[Ranger]

Earlier this month there were 125 M1A1 tanks in Iraq. That number has increased by I think 28 or so in the last week or so. At least that is what I recall.

[Vetvoice]

Sorry, my friend but before someone whispered in Rumsfeld's ear last week we were estimated to be below 70 operational tanks in Iraq. The key word here is "operational." The tanks used by the 3rd ID and the 4th ID for a year are still in country and deadlined from a lack of depot facilities.

Rumsfeld immediately order 28 tanks flown to Iraq (where they were given to the Marines) and there are 24 more being flown in. The big qustion is how to refurbish the hundreds of thanks that have been "rode hard and put up wet."

They need a lot of work to be usuable again...

[gandalftb]

Marine armor means Marines operating armor that is tricked out by Marines, that is key. Marine armor is trained to support Marine infantry very closely as is Marine air. Waiting for an Army tank to show up, do a mission and then go back to its unit doesn't work.

Fact: 3 Marine battalions are directly engaged 24/7 with less than 5 tanks, and no Marine air or artillery. Air and infantry can deploy quickly but armor requires weeks by ship and should have been pre-staged with parts.

[UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide]

The Germans at Kursk in 1943 had 2700 tanks and lost 350 in one day (July 12). The Soviets had 4800 armored vehicles. Appropo of nothing except to compare the tiny numbers of today.

[Ranger]

Agreed.

[Ranger]

Any estimate of the scope of the repair problem? If 70 of 125 are operational (56%) and that is in the battle zone, then the problem is going to be very large. I'm hearing it from multiple sources right now. Same with transport aircraft. I think it will become a screaming issue in about 3 or 4 months as money gets shorter and the next round of deployments line up. The vehicular equipment of all kinds is just falling apart from hard use and lack of parts, maintenance and money.

[gandalftb]

By the way, the AC-130s are crucial also in Jolan as the alleys and streets there are too narrow for tanks. The point of the tank is a highly mobile, quick response, high firepower, very survivable platform that can go 60 mph. We don't want to crater-out any place in Iraq. There are fewer than 100 operational tanks in Iraq, not including Brit armor in the south.

[DMZFrank]

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.

[VOA]

While I pointed out that it was Clinton who practically cut our Army divisions in half...
and congress (Kerry) who has continually voted down appropriations for the military,
she was still moved by the NG'man's speech, who also talked about family's that
were being broken apart over this war.

I feel for you...I've got a number of well-intended relatives who also
seem to not have their B.S. detector set high enough.
I'm know I'm just gonna' have to "let 'em have it" with regard to this particular
Kerry spokesman...and ask why he gave a glowing report of events in Iraq last fall...
when he could have either said "no comment" or "things could be better and here
are constructive suggestions for what we need in terms of supplies."

Just because someone wears a uniform, it doesn't mean they can't have the same
problem with truth as Clinton or Kerry.

[Cannoneer No. 4]

We even have Freepers providing talking points to Marty Meehan and Teddy Kennedy. This issue is a club with which to beat the Administration. Ever wonder what the Army would bought with the money they are being forced to spend on M1114's? And once every three soldiers in Iraq finally have one, do you think soldiers will stop being killed?

[Cannoneer No. 4]

I think it will become a screaming issue in about 3 or 4 months as money gets shorter and the next round of deployments line up.

That has been the plan all along, hasn't it?

When do we see you on ABC News?

[Cannoneer No. 4]

ping

[Terp]

My gripe is that the Marines were led to believe by CentCom that they were only needed for mopping up, and "hearts and minds". That turned out to be so much crap.

You don't go about winning the "hearts and minds" of a people until they know they've been defeated. Which doesn't appear to be the case in Fullajah [sarcasm].

We need to convince the people of that city that we're the big dog on the block and then we can worry about winning there darn "hearts and minds" in my opinion.

[Ranger]

The administration and congress need to propose and pass a supplemental appropriation for DoD now. It needs to be much larger than this narrow issue of armor requires. The problem is across the board. Perhaps you should step away from your paranoid partisanship and ask what we should be doing as an American.

[Darksheare]

No-one has pointed out that part of the problem was Eric Shinseki's plan to slash the military's size and equipment.
That was a policy that was ill concieved.
Especially the dropping of artillery units that are -oops- now needed in Afghanistan due to the mere fact that they are LIGHT towed artillery rather than slightly harder to transport heavy artillery.

Has nothing to do with partisanship here, it's about a previous policy that was continued.
And the Shinseki for Senate limo was supposed to be a cornerstone of that operational plan.
One good thing: The Shinseki for Senate limo can be improved upon with a few minor tweaks.
But first, we should rethink the previous operational plan.