nd modern armor could destroy both of them with pinpoint accuracy while moving full speed over rough terrain outside of radar range (e.g. what happened in the invasion of Iraq).
lol, that is NOT what happened in Iraq. The tanks were sitting on low boy trucks for the vast majority of the invasion. How do I know this? Because they were in my convoys.
Even for major offensives after the initial invasion, that’s not at all what happened. They were basically employed as large mortars, sitting about a half mile outside of a town, and leveling it.
Ah, got ya. Even then, most of that was done by aircraft sorties, though, and not much tank action. The US didn’t enter Iraq very far in the first Gulf War.
I mean, I suppose so… But it certainly showed that in order to face off with a superior force, you need to not be a shite leader too. Capitulation won that conflict, by and large.
lol, that is NOT what happened in Iraq. The tanks were sitting on low boy trucks for the vast majority of the invasion. How do I know this? Because they were in my convoys.
Even for major offensives after the initial invasion, that’s not at all what happened. They were basically employed as large mortars, sitting about a half mile outside of a town, and leveling it.
I was talking about the Gulf War in the 90s: https://youtu.be/b5EeKsEFpHI
I think the Iraqi tanks were mostly blown up by the time Bush Jr did his invasion.
Ah, got ya. Even then, most of that was done by aircraft sorties, though, and not much tank action. The US didn’t enter Iraq very far in the first Gulf War.
True. Though in what tank vs tank combat there was, the advantages of modern armor were stark.
I mean, I suppose so… But it certainly showed that in order to face off with a superior force, you need to not be a shite leader too. Capitulation won that conflict, by and large.