In `learn or die' fight, gallant unit saves GIs (Amazing account of American Bravery)

Chicago Tribune ^ | Fri, May 28, 2004 | By Bill Glauber Tribune staff reporter

[Eurotwit]

Moore leapt from his tank and sprinted down the alley to the men.

"They had expended all their ammo," Moore said. "These guys fought like tigers. The platoon leader was wounded in the head and left leg, and he was still commanding. When I got down there they had guys who were crying. I don't know if they were tears of joy. They fought like wonderful men."

Moore and his men had to fight to get the unit out.

The dead patrol soldier was laid gently on a tank turret along with the wounded.

"While everyone else was fighting, time stopped," Dean said, still amazed by the image of American soldiers caring for a fallen comrade.

[Terabitten]

The M-4 is really a pretty damned good gun for this kind of thing but it is still too bulky for a tanker.

You familiar with the P-90? It'd be a handy little gun for the tankers, and easy to wear, too.

[tortoise]

There used to be one at Fort Ord. Trained there myself. Then Clinton got elected and Ft. Ord shut down.

Yes there was, and I trained there too. Right around the time that Clinton shut it down actually. It was still almost new, and I believe the Feds inherited it for law enforcement training. It was a great training facility, and I enjoyed the time spent in it immensely. There was an older town as well that was leased out to private individuals.

I think I learned as much about how to conduct urban warfare as a native defender as I learned about urban warfare as the attacking unit, just through experience.

[Cannoneer No. 4]

The American Soldier 1945

Note tank crewman with Thompson.

[SandRat]

To the Heroes

[HoustonCurmudgeon]

Well done gentlemen, very well done.

[sd-joe]

Just a thought. How about an Urban combat version that eliminated the heavy gun and its heavy large ammo, saving a lot of space and weight, and replaced it with multiple 50 cal machine guns which could be fought from inside the tank (instead of standing exposed in hatches and fighting).

[FastCoyote]

It looks like it has to be something big enough to blow through a road block. Maybe not M1 size, but I don't think a Stryker can push aside, or go over, a burning car for example.

[Shryke]

The M1's main gun, as I mentioned earlier, is obviously overkill, if not counter-mission. However, a large bore main cannon, short barrel, could serve several purposes - two of which would be clearing obstacles, or knocking down walls. Outside of flechette rounds, however, I don't see much utility from it as an anti-personnel weapon.

I just had a thought. What would work marvelously, I think, would be a multi function weapon platform, turret mounted. Two different caliber mini-guns (one wall/armor piercing, perhaps .50 cal, the other strictly .556) would, on a sufficiently agile turret, provide withering line-of-sight fire. An automatic grenade launcher would provide great trench-busting abilities. For close in threats, such as a bomb carrier, the only thing I can think of are shotgun type rounds, or a nice, high-powered flame-thrower. It would obviously be practical to have 2 or 3 independently swiveling weapons to engage multiple threats. I imagine that would not be too difficult to design into one turret (think three layer turret). This would allieviate the need for hatch-fighting.

As far as an engine goes, I think the current turbine in the M1 would suit perfectly. It's not a large engine.

[SMARTY]

I remember reading (O. Spengler, I think) that children have a greater spiritual bond and 'likeness' to their grandparents than to their parents. The older I get the more obvious this is to me.

Maybe this is the 'spiritual rotation' your author was talking about.

[Aaron0617]

Bumping to the top. Catching up on my reading and found this great story today. Had tears reading this one.

I'm so proud of our fighting men and women. They're doing an excellent job in Iraq.