'We should give the Israelies some M-1A2s.'
No, the brits should sell them some Challenger 2's - the best armoured tank in NATO. The M1A2 uses the original British Chobham armour which is very good, but the Challenger 2 uses 2nd generation chobham which is even better. If someones shooting at you, you want to be in a Challenger!
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/row/challenger2.htm
http://www.fprado.com/armorsite/abrams.htm
The Abrams uses a modified Chobham derivative that is significantly more resistant than the original Chobham armor. It would be more accurate to say the Abrams uses a "Chobham type" armor technology. US materials science is second to none, and most of the military technology we adopt from others is re-engineered using our more advanced materials science capability. It is one of the key technology advantages of the US military.
Boys, in 2006, if someone is shooting modern stuff at you, or has his finger on the remote detonator of an anti-tank mine, the last place you want to be is inside a targeted tank. No matter who makes it.
It's WWI all overagain ... square 1 ... Tanks must be supported by very effective infantry and other coordinated arms, capable of finding and taking out enemy anti-tank squads. Armor cannot operate alone on today's battlefields. Today's sophisticated anti-tank weapons, fired from above or behind tanks, have left them very vulnerable. E.G., Two-stage warheads can even defeat reactive armor. At the very least, cheap roadside IEDs can disable a tank, at the very worst, take out everyone inside it.