“I guarantee you that not even the Chinese value lives so little, that they would willfully deploy these against any nation’s main battle tanks.”
I’m guessing you’ve forgotten that Stuarts were deployed against much superior German tanks in WWII? The disparity there was much greater than between these and Abrams...
You also may have missed that these can fire missiles as well as shells. That is reminiscent of the M60-A2 tanks from the 70’s. Such missiles might well defeat the top armor of the tank, if not the front. Interestingly, the South Korean tanks in use now fire an indirect artillery round that attacks top armor as well...
Can't forget what never happened. Per Wikipedia:
"the M3 was superior or comparable in most regards to most of the tanks used by the Axis forces. The most numerous German tank, the Panzer III Ausf G, had nearly identical armor and speed to the M3 (the M3 actually had thicker front and turret armor, while the Panzer III had slightly thicker side armor), and both tanks' guns could penetrate the other tank's front armor from beyond 1,000 meters.[10] The most numerous Italian tank (and second most numerous Axis tank overall), the Fiat M13/40, was much slower than the Stuart, had slightly weaker armor all around, and could not penetrate the Stuart's front hull or turret armor at 1,000 meters, where the Stuart's gun could penetrate any spot on the M13/40."
"You also may have missed that these can fire missiles as well as shells."
Its times like this when I wish I could use emojis on here, in particular the one laying on his side in laughter. A light tank whose main gun can fire a missile. Where have I heard of that before?
Hmmm....oh yeah - the Sheridan!
BTW, the M60A2 was considered a failure too.