[JDoutrider]

This definetely is something to think about.

[Lancey Howard]

BUMP

[SENTINEL]

"That could be the undoing of the 3rd Infantry Division. If the 3rd can’t stop them, the Marines and Brits don’t have a chance. The Marines only have 188 M1A1 Abrams (not upgraded) and the Brits use the Challenger II tank that has sort of brittle armor.”

BS...Tow missiles fired from Hummers took out more tanks than any other ground vehicle during GWI. This system allows 2.75 mile day or night sniper shots that can take out anything on the battle field. Tows are at their best in open flat terrain, like Kuwait or around Baghdad.

Cakewalk, no way, but Brits and Marines not having a chance, I don't think so.

[Milwaukee_Guy]

The Main Battle Tank has always been the Queen of Battle. The appearence of a capable MBT has, is, and always will dominate the battlefield. Countless revisionists have tried to announce the end of the MBT and have been proven wrong.

IMHO we have too few MBT's in Iraq. The latest Abrahms M1A2 is the most capable MBT in the field. We have only a few hundred in theater right now. We need more. The fact the Marines still have the older M1A1 is not encouraging.

The most recent example of being too armor light is Somalia. A debacle (IMHO) due to the lack of serious armor. Twenty Abrahms MBT and forty Bradley IFV would have been decisive. Instead the Clintonistas forced us to rely on old Pakistani MBT's and German Fox (Fuchs) wheeled armored cars to extricate our forces.

We need to hold up outside of Bagdahd and wait for more Abrahms to be delivered to the battlefield. Otherwise we will again suffer casualties that need not occur.

[timydnuc]

As much as I like NewsMax, I gotta just tune them out sometimes. Sure, Clinton FUBARed his whole 8 years, sure, Clinton was the everloving worst man to ever occupy the office of President of the United States, but that has all been taken into the equasion by GW and the boys & girl. If you think for one minute that our President and his staff didn't go into this thing knowing full well what cards they had to play and the outcome of this thing, then you'd believe Bill Clinton was an honest man.

I get a little pissed off when, in a time of war, when we start blaming Clinton. He is the most peutrid scum of the earth, but to blame him is to overlook our ability to adapt, and overcome. And we have, and will, adapt, and overcome.

Put Clinton in his place right now, in some outhouse pit in upper New York. Clinton is irrelivant, especially now, it's a war, and you know how he runs from that.

Focus on the task at hand and support a President that knows how to protect us. Cluck Flinton, he's an idiot!

[denydenydeny]

There is another Republican Guard unit 30 miles from the Medina Division. Once the battle begins, the next unit will close on the first and mass their fire.

Not an expert here, but this whole disaster scenario seems to presuppose that the Americans' close air support will be off in another time zone.

Massed Republican Guard units would, I imagine, be a Christmas present for Coalition air.

[uncbob]

The two factors not included in this analysis are our superior air power,

Tanks are dead meat in the desert when the other side owns the air The Apaches Warthogs and F16 will slaughter those RG tanks out in the open

[BushMeister]

I've heard rumors of the improved tank rounds the Russians have supposedly sold to the Iraqis. If true, this would be another blatant violation of the arms embargo slapped on Iraq after the Gulf War. But the question reamins: even if the rounds are better, and have a chance to penetate the Abrams (of which I'm skeptical, since the Russians probably didn't test their ammo on an actual Abrams), can the Iraqis actually hit our Abrams before the M1A2s/M1A1s hit the Iraqi tanks. We are absolutely sure of the result in the latter case, and our tanks have better range, better sights, CITVs that sllow the commander to line up the next shot, and better crews.

We are not outnumbered 5 or 6 to 1 in tank numbers. Estimates are that we will have 400 tanks to the Iraqi's 500 tanks when the battle is joined.

Do I wish that we had 3 heavy Army divisions closing in on Baghdad, along with the Brits and Marines? Sure. But I still believe things are going to get major ugly for the Iraqis when our actually positioned forces crash into the RG about 3-5 days from now.

[Paleo Conservative]

Perhaps the reason for fighting light in Iraq is so we don't have too many tanks in the Middle East. We have other fish to fry in North Korea. Another thing, we are not going up against Russian tank crews. I doubt the Iraqis are as proficient as Russians.

[enemy9oclock]

Not to detract from the author's Clinton Bashing (which I wholeheartedly support), but there are a couple of comments that I have to question. First, from everything I've heard, nothing short of depleted uranium rounds and advanced anti-tank missiles will penetrate an M1A2 armor - even from the the side. I highly doubt that the Iraqi's have any DU munitions, although there are reports of Russian anti-tank missiles being smuggled in which might cause some problems. Also, I don't buy the comment about the 'brittle' Challenger 2 armor - the Challenger uses the same Chobham armor as the Abrams (British invention). Iraq's old T-72s have ZERO chance of standing up to our armor. Sounds like more doom and gloom from the hand-wringers to me.