> Sounds a lot like what a lot of people said before > the first Gulf > War (including myself, I'll admit). But in an open > battle, our > technology and training was greater than the > overwhelming numbers of > tanks, infantry, aircraft, etc. > > Heck, folks were saying the same before the GW2!
Largely agree. Should the Iranians cross the border and engage in a set piece battle with US forces, they would be playing to our strengths and would suffer grevioulsy for it. The T-72s they have still suffer from the same disadvantages as all other Iraqi T-72s, no mater how modern you think they are: any penetration in the forward 2/3ds of the vehicle are typically catastrophic (high order ammo explosions), and the cannon has been proven to be unable to defeat the armor on the M1A1HA or later variants at useful combat ranges. The BMP series mechanized infantry fighting vehicles have similar vulnerabilities (the Mujahideen in Afghanistan were able to defeat these vehicles in the side armor with M2HB .50CAL machine gunes). I could only concede the likelihood of high casualties if the Iranians could draw us into urban combat, where the differences between the two sides would be reduced. Damon. ===== ------------------------------------------------------------ Damon Agretto [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum." http://www.geocities.com/garrand.geo/index.html Now Building: ------------------------------------------------------------ __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
_______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
