We will be sorry if we let the M1 go when the next large scale international conflict breaks out.
The Pentagon is being foolish if they think we have evolved so much as a global community to exclude a world war.
The question is if the Pentagon stops the upgrades to the Abrams, do they have something else in the pipeline? After every conflict there are people that looks at works and at what does not work. In an urban battle, tanks do not work well in the wars where we want to limit non combatants deaths. If you want to destroy a town, that is a different story and tanks work well. But with more political scrutiny about injuries to non combatants it will be difficult to keep battle tanks in the arsenal.
Read Rangers post on why tanks are outdated. Also if you are going to destroy a town, just level it with missiles and bombs. No need to risk troops on the ground.
We need to quit invading, occupying, and then rebuilding these places (tanks are great for this). We are broke.
July 20, 2012 at 1:18pm
Bulletproof vest or not, rounds on target would have saved lives. You can argue the point after you have taken a few rounds in the vest.
If you carry a weapon hitting a person in a theater in the face is a shot you should be able to make.
Other wise leave the weapon at home.
End of the day this is a terrible example of sheep left to a wolf with no guard dogs to be found.
God be with the victims and their families.