ELECTION 2008 | The Pub | The Field Mess | The Staff College | Bookmark WAB



Go Back   World Affairs Board > Military Forums > Land Forces
Register FAQ WAB RSS Feed Forum GuidelinesMembers List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Greetings, and welcome to the World Affairs Board!

The World Affairs Board is one of the premier forums for the discussion of the pressing geopolitical issues of our time. Topics include foreign & defense policy, international security, military developments, weapons proliferation, terrorism, international strategic affairs, and politics. Our membership includes many from military, defense industry, and government backgrounds with expert knowledge on a wide range of topics. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so why not register a World Affairs Board account and join our community today?
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-24-2003, 15:36 PM   #16 (permalink)
TopHatter
Administrator
 
TopHatter's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-03-03
Location: Fort Myers FL
Posts: 9,694
Country:
Send a message via AIM to TopHatter
Quote:
Originally posted by Praxus
The Merkava Mk.4 carrys 48 rounds which is only 2 less then the Challanger 2. The Merkava Mk3 carrys 50 rounds of ammunition.
But that ammo load is possible only if the small compartment in the back is used, correct? I can't seem to find really detailed information on the Merkava, although GlobalSecurity.org has some good info.
__________________
If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader.
~John Quincy Adams
TopHatter is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-24-2003, 17:30 PM   #17 (permalink)
bigross86
401 Ikvot Habarzel
Military Professional
 
Join Date: 08-07-03
Location: Ra'anana, Israel
Posts: 3,148
Send a message via ICQ to bigross86 Send a message via AIM to bigross86 Send a message via Yahoo to bigross86
And it'll probably get harder know that Merkava Mk IV might get cancelled.
__________________
You're a naughty girl, go to my room!
bigross86 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-24-2003, 18:56 PM   #18 (permalink)
Officer of Engineers
Military Professional
Moderator
Scotch taster
 
Join Date: 08-06-03
Posts: 15,917
Country:
Quote:
Originally posted by TopHatter
Perhaps I should clarify my opinion.
In a comparison between city-fighting and open area warfare, the Arab will have a great advantage. It may not be enough of one to win, but he certainly has a great advantage in the city then conventional warfare. As you pointed out, he won't enjoy the same advantages as the Russian in Stalingrad for example, but he still stands a better chance in the city.
IMHO, they lacked the will to fight. When they did fight, it was with tenacity and courage (Medina Ridge, 73 Easting) even though they got steamrolled. However, they did accomplish their OPOBJ - to buy time for the Iraqi Army to escape Kuwait.

They did alot of things right in this war (and conversley, the Americans did alot of things wrong) but they lacked either the competence or the will or both to carry their initial successes through.
__________________
Chimo
Officer of Engineers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-24-2003, 19:00 PM   #19 (permalink)
TopHatter
Administrator
 
TopHatter's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-03-03
Location: Fort Myers FL
Posts: 9,694
Country:
Send a message via AIM to TopHatter
Yes, I agree with you there. The only chance they'ed have would be as partisans in city fighting
TopHatter is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-24-2003, 19:08 PM   #20 (permalink)
Officer of Engineers
Military Professional
Moderator
Scotch taster
 
Join Date: 08-06-03
Posts: 15,917
Country:
Look, when the Americans capture 6 out of 7 bridges when you had days to blow them up (the 7th collapsed because it couldn't support the weight of an Abrams), someone is incompetent.
Officer of Engineers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-24-2003, 19:18 PM   #21 (permalink)
TopHatter
Administrator
 
TopHatter's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-03-03
Location: Fort Myers FL
Posts: 9,694
Country:
Send a message via AIM to TopHatter
Once again, I have to agree with you 100%.
TopHatter is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-24-2003, 19:46 PM   #22 (permalink)
Anon
New Member
 
Join Date: 08-03-03
Posts: 0
OIF would've been a disaster if not for the Iraqi incompetence.

Thank god they are military idiots. They missed so many opportunities to bleed US forces it's almost bewildering.
Anon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2003, 02:02 AM   #23 (permalink)
axl
Patron
 
Join Date: 09-18-03
Posts: 242
Quote:
Originally posted by Praxus
Please tell me, where in the history of the Merkava tanks were their long lasting tank battles and when they were far enough from Israel were they couldn't get rearmed.
history is not an issue. but if you don't pack your tank with ammo, with will run into trouble. the compartment is an emergency thing only, normally not used. but in addition it allows the crew to enter the tank easier.


Quote:
Originally posted by TopHatter
I can't seem to find really detailed information on the Merkava, although GlobalSecurity.org has some good info.
just try the link under my post.

regards
axl
axl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2003, 14:20 PM   #24 (permalink)
TopHatter
Administrator
 
TopHatter's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-03-03
Location: Fort Myers FL
Posts: 9,694
Country:
Send a message via AIM to TopHatter
Quote:
Originally posted by M21Sniper
OIF would've been a disaster if not for the Iraqi incompetence. Thank god they are military idiots. They missed so many opportunities to bleed US forces it's almost bewildering.
Yeah, you said it. I wonder how many people in America and elsewhere even realize how disastrous OIF could have been if it would have been a different country/army opposing them
TopHatter is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2003, 14:55 PM   #25 (permalink)
Officer of Engineers
Military Professional
Moderator
Scotch taster
 
Join Date: 08-06-03
Posts: 15,917
Country:
As I stated, this was a very situational planning and a very situational war. However, given Rumsfeld's interference, I don't think Gen Franks had a choice but to count on Iraqi incompetence.

You've could tell that he took some very big risks. Risks that I don't think he would have made if he were facing another army. 3-7Cav wouldn't have made that far of advance that fast. Basra would have been destroyed, not bypassed. The 187 Bde wouldn't have dropped and sat around waiting. The LOCs would have been swept clean. And there would not have been a pause. And after walking into 5 ambushes, you think you would slow down and find out what you're doing wrong.

I was amazed that the Americans didn't repeat a tactic that was used in the Kuwait War and one which we initially thought of in VII Corps at the Fulda Gap. Drop a supply depot in FRONT of the advancing column. That way, you don't wait for your supplies to catch up to you but rather waiting for you.
Officer of Engineers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2003, 15:10 PM   #26 (permalink)
TopHatter
Administrator
 
TopHatter's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-03-03
Location: Fort Myers FL
Posts: 9,694
Country:
Send a message via AIM to TopHatter
I think Rumsfeld was banking on Fortune Favors The Bold (I'm sure I butchered a good saying) or better yet, Who Dares Wins. I think he gambled on the Iraqis being incompetent to make up for the rushed war. He gambled big and won big. The plans of Franks and others, and the training of the allied armies made up the difference. All in all, a "splendid little war". It's too bad the public will be expecting that from now on. Just wait until the DPRK decides to try it's hand at full-blown conventional warfare again. :unsure
TopHatter is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2003, 15:18 PM   #27 (permalink)
Praxus
Senior Contributor
 
Join Date: 08-26-03
Posts: 3,237
Quote:
OIF would've been a disaster if not for the Iraqi incompetence. Thank god they are military idiots. They missed so many opportunities to bleed US forces it's almost bewildering.
Excuse me?

Please explain to me how they could make "US Forces Bleed". You make it sound like we just got lucky because they are incompitent.

Quote:
Just wait until the DPRK decides to try it's hand at full-blown conventional warfare again.
EXCUSE ME AGAIN?????

The DPRK has a starving Army, equipment from the 1950's, and illtrained soldiers. The South Koreans with US aircover WILL butcher them and yes BUTCHER them. The battle won't even be close, they will have to walk over dead bodies stacked 5 feet high to attack us.

Last edited by Praxus : 09-25-2003 at 15:24 PM.
Praxus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2003, 15:39 PM   #28 (permalink)
Officer of Engineers
Military Professional
Moderator
Scotch taster
 
Join Date: 08-06-03
Posts: 15,917
Country:
Praxus,

The Americans were lucky. Had it been a Russian motor rifle regt instead of the Medina, 3-7Cav would have been meat. At the very least, that bridge the 3-7Cav was tasked to take and hold would have been gone.

The Iraqis didn't manned their ambushes with heavy ATGMs. Hell, they didn't use heavy ATGMs at all. You think those raids into Baghdad would be so impressive then?

Baghdad airport was taken and held by a single battalion. The Iraqis threw coy and pltn attacks at it. Had it been a co-ordinated bde lvl attack, Baghdad Airport would have been re-taken. Hell, there were enough Iraqi guns within range of Baghdad airport, no one started raining steel.

Had it been any other army in Basra, they would have mounted counter-attacks to tie down the Brits and to strangle the supply lines by forcing the Brits to commit to battle and thus expend resources, resources that could not be used in the drive to Baghdad.

The Americans and the British could not have handled 100s of 1000s of EPWs. Any other army would have ordered surrenders when the strategic picture became hopeless and drain the attacking force of men and material by guarding the EPWs instead of going north.

Alot could have gone wrong. And alot did. The Iraqis were just too stupid to exploit it.

And you've gone the opposite extreme thinking we'll slaughter the NKPA. The fact is that both sides will bleed and bleed big fighting through the DMZ. That many guns and that many people up front is going to hurt you no matter how good your air cover is. I think we'll stop them at the DMZ or at Seoul and we'll stop them but the fight would be up close and personal. Yes, they're that close.

Last edited by Officer of Engineers : 09-25-2003 at 15:42 PM.
Officer of Engineers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2003, 15:55 PM   #29 (permalink)
Anon
New Member
 
Join Date: 08-03-03
Posts: 0
Not much to add there Colonel, except to say that the Iraqi's missed a golden opportunity in forcing the US to clear baghdad block by block, and house by house.

All those fedayeen wasted on stupid suicide attacks against US armored columns would have been MUCH better used as urban fighters.

If Franks, Schwarzkopf, Wallace, Powell or Shelton had been commanding the Iraqi forces, the US death toll would've probably been in the several thousands, or more.
Anon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-2003, 16:29 PM   #30 (permalink)
Stinger
Contributor
 
Join Date: 08-08-03
Posts: 714
Send a message via Yahoo to Stinger
Quote:
Originally posted by M21Sniper
Not much to add there Colonel, except to say that the Iraqi's missed a golden opportunity in forcing the US to clear baghdad block by block, and house by house.

All those fedayeen wasted on stupid suicide attacks against US armored columns would have been MUCH better used as urban fighters.

If Franks, Schwarzkopf, Wallace, Powell or Shelton had been commanding the Iraqi forces, the US death toll would've probably been in the several thousands, or more.
Thats what had me worried, I didn't think the Iraqi's had much of a prayer out in the open (though I thought they'd do better than they did), but I was damned worried whenever we entered urban environments. I HATE urban warefare, give me some nice trees or tall grass, or maybe even a sand dune to hide behind.
__________________
Your look more lost than a bastard child on fathers day.
Stinger is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
T-95 vs M1A2 Lunatock Land Forces 181 02-11-2008 09:11 AM
Merkava to undergo updates.. then stop production? Catalan Land Forces 20 11-15-2006 21:45 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 14:36 PM.


Rochen is the business hosting sponsor of World Affairs Board and a provider of reseller web hosting services.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.0.0 RC8