Tanks to Afghanistan
The Washington Post reports that the US is planning on deploying M1 Abrams tanks to Afghanistan;
The deployment of a company of M1 Abrams tanks, which will be fielded by the Marines in the country’s southwest, will allow ground forces to target insurgents from a greater distance – and with more of a lethal punch – than is possible from any other U.S. military vehicle.
Now, I think that this move is a little too late in the war. Not only that, but one company? An Army company of tanks is 13 tanks (well, it was two decades ago, anyway) and I guess the Marines have the same number.
The Post writes that this is significant because it shows the the US is getting serious about the Taliban. It’s be significant if it’s been done years ago and the force is bigger than a company. To me it looks like the Obama Administration is trying to look tough rather than actually be tough.
I don’t know how they’ll break this new force down to be effective, and I realize that the company will probably never be deployed as a company, but rather as a two vehicle force accompanying Marine patrols. But, I find it hard to believe that this new force will have much effect on the battle. The enemy will hear the tanks miles before they see them and probably beat feet to look for a patrol without tanks.
The article says that the M1 will have the advantage of engaging long range targets immediately rather than the troops having to wait for indirect fire or air support, but if the enemy leaves upon hearing the tanks, what good is a long range capability?
I think this deployment is more symbolic than good strategy.
Category: Barack Obama/Joe Biden, Terror War
Slight correction, 14 tanks to a company, CO and XO each have a tank. But a Company? What are they going to do, send a tank and it’s wing with one company of infantry? Seems kinda thin. I’d think they’d want at least a battalion….one tank platoon (4 tanks) should be decent support for an infantry company.
How well can those tanks survive IEDs? Are they more survivable than Strykers, for example, or will they be sitting ducks?
I was startled to realize we haven’t had any heavy armor on the ground there already!
Bravo to the war planners for attempting to pull their collective heads out of their rear ends, but no cudos for promptly getting it stuck again, half way out.
Old Tanker nails it in one, anything less than a battalion is being dangerously tight assed with resources. When waging war one should always allocate and use more resources than believed necessary, even then experienced commanders may find they could have used more.
After spending some time on the ground there, this might not be the best move. There are very limited areas that these tanks can get to, even in the Helmand province. The Canadians deployed Leopold tanks to Afghanistan (back in ’08 I think)very very quietly (flew one in per night every night for two weeks)and got great shock value for it but no real tactical advantage.
You need smaller, not larger vehicles for this environment. Yes, the larger vehicles have better crew protection, but with the tight mountainous terrain, it’s better to have smaller vehicles that can fit back in there. Our uparmored HMMWV’s had a difficult time getting to certain areas. I can only imagine the difficulty that the MRAP’s, JTV’s and Strykers have. If you limit the areas you can get to, you open the areas that the Taliban can control.
Joe,
The track, roadwheels, and armored skirting will take most of the bite out of an IED but it would still incapacitate the tank. The idea is that the tanks won’t need to use roadways and therefore not be exposed to IED’s which are planted where there is a probability of a vehicle passing (roadways) They would be of little use in a town or village but need to be used in open ground. I’ve never been to Afghanistan so I don’t know the terrian but I don’t recall them being very useful to the Soviets. Probably why they are talking small numbers, their use would be limited.
Joe, I doubt seriously that the M1s would be utilized much outside of urbanized areas, and one of the principles of armored warfare in an urban environment is the proper accompaniment of dismounted troops with the armored vehicles. The M1 is far less vulnerable than a Stryker if properly deployed. The M1 also represents an increase in both firepower and force projection that the Stryker can never hope to match, and frankly I’m amazed we haven’t been utilizing.
I still remember laying on the 5th floor of the Ministry of labor building in downtown Baghdad and watching an M1 tank engage a sniper on something like the 14th floor of one of the surrounding high rise buildings. Now THAT’S counter sniper fire. 😉
watching an M1 tank engage a sniper on something like the 14th floor of one of the surrounding high rise buildings. Now THAT’S counter sniper fire
You can’t get far enough back from the window, can you! 😛
Lol, nope. I remember being thankful the only tanks operating by that time were ours.
I wonder what the 72 virgins thought when they got handed a pile of soapflakes?
I envision the Marines using the tanks for two possible purposes:
1. To beef up patrols in Sangin, where Marines with 3/5 are going through the gauntlet (12 KIA in about a month). You might see a platoon going to Marja as well.
2. When I was in Iraq, 2nd tanks was in our AO with 1st LAR doing border security with us in the Sinjar area. They weren’t going into urban areas so much, but they were using their badass optics to sweep the Syrian border and catch smugglers. You might see them up with an LAR unit again (which is operating in the South of Helmand) and attempt to help secure the Pak border in Helmand.
I think the Taliban will try and tango with the Abrams a few times in firefights and after they realize they can’t kill’em with RPGs, they will resort to using big-ass IEDs to try and take em out.
“Oh fuck, tanks, we’ll come back later and ambush the light infantry when the tanks leave.”
Crap, the comment I just typed disappeared.
Last week, I stumbled across THE coolest documentary, but I had absolutely no one to share it with, until you posted this today. I suppose it all depends on one’s point of view. Season 1 Episode 1 Greatest Tank Battles:
http://www.history.ca/video/default.aspx?releasePID=Q3NWBoO20XsHVqQxMYPeFAYfPGsMOtC0
Also #4 thank you. You clarified something I was curious about after having seen a video showing Canadian troops with tanks in Afghanistan.
Oh, and one of the reasons I called the documentary cool is because such epic tank battles are likely never to be seen again.
Link didn’t work for me…
Here is what properly utilized tanks do… http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IkzstDI5Ce4
“Last week, I stumbled across THE coolest documentary”. Can’t get it, damn internet filter. Oh yeah, I’m supposed to be working….
Lawd, if all of us who worked stopped commenting here, VoteVets WOULD be the top milblog! 🙂
…oh, and by the way, I am very sad. NOBODY laughed at my joke earlier… 🙁
PintoNag,
I laughed, you just couldn’t hear me….
Thanks, Joe. At least you read my posts; sometimes I feel like I’m shouting down a well around here…
#14 Old Tanker and #15 Joe
Damn… The link didn’t work at all? Did it at least get you to the History.CA site? Or is it blocked completely?
OT, the video you linked to is over 3 minutes. The documentary I’m talking about is AKIN to that but is 47 minutes of interviews, footage AND CG stuff. The first episode, the one I linked to, is 73 Easting. (There are NINE other episodes, which I haven’t watched.)
Spockgirl,
Yeah, I could get to the website, but the movies themselves didn’t work. My network admin has our filter set to block most videos I guess…..
I’m in the same boat as Joe, made it to the site, but the vids wouldn’t work.
That’s OK. I’ll watch them later at home…..
#21 and 22
Tanks for letting me know.
lol
A battalion of M1s would be a nightmare to fuel in Afghanistan. They’re probably looking at getting the most bang for their buck in just sending a company.
I think Dan hit it right on the head with optics and big IEDs. Other advantage of tanks is a far better off-road capability compared to those f’ing MRAPs.
M1’s can defeat the IED threat by using the mine roller/ mine plow attachments as appropriate. either way a big a$$ bomb will ring the crew’s bell
The rumour mill back in CFB Kingston said the Canadian Forces used predicted complaints about the Leopard I models in Afghanistan – too hot without conditioning, problems with dust, etc. – as politics. Helped them move on up to the sexy new Leopard II.
Don’t really see the point of deploying much armour to the region as it isn’t really tanking country (not that there’s anything wrong with that). Seems like another way of saying “we’re here to stay,” and probably a subtle nod to the local hotheads – assuming they didn’t get the gentle FU from the Canadian Leopards – that US-Nato armour doesn’t tap out quite like the old Russian stuff.
Christ. That video is like Villers-Bocage redux.
“M1’s can defeat the IED threat by using the mine roller/ mine plow attachments as appropriate. either way a big a$$ bomb will ring the crew’s bell”
No. Big ass bombs are buried several feet below the ground, oftentimes in culverts. You can’t get that with a plow, especially not if you want follow-on forces to actually be able to use the road.
Not to mention that Kandahar was the site of a 1500lb HME IED that completely pulverized a Striker. An M1 *does not* clear that or “get its bell rung” by that. It gets destroyed. It happened in Iraq, and some of the exact same dudes are making IEDS in Afghanistan.
I was just thinking how odd (interesting) it is that the deployment of tanks is being publicized so soon after Karzai’s recent comments calling for the REDUCTION of US military operations.
YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
TANKS!
I would like to point out that many, many moons ago, lots of people said that tanks would be useless in the jungles and rice paddies of Vietnam. I would refer everyone to a book by one Sgt. Zumbro entitled “Tank Sergeant” in which he described his year there riding around in M48s and blowing massive holes in Viet Cong/NVA attacks.
Also, the Canadians had decided a while back to scrap the Stryker MGS in favor of new tanks after having decided to scrap their Leopard 1A4s for the MGS. Thus, they ended up contracting with Germany to purchase surplus Leopard 2A5s and have them upgraded to Canadian specs. The Leo 2A6s in Afghanistan are just on loan to the Canadians from the Germans for now. But they’ve still proven somewhat more effective than simple APCs running around with only HMGs on board.