You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Iraq
Iraq Getting M-1A1 Tanks
2008-08-03
August 3, 2008: Iraq wants to buy 140 M1A1M Abrams tanks, along with over a hundred support vehicles (for maintenance and transportation, like 35 tank transporters). The request includes training and technical support. The total contract cost would be $2.16 billion. Iraq would not be the first Arab country to operate the M1 tank. Egypt, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia already operate over 1,600 of them, and Egypt has built hundreds of them (mainly using components imported from the U.S., but with some locally made parts). Neither Iraq nor the U.S. Army has revealed the details of the "M" version of the M1A1. All the other Arab users have at least some of the latest model (M1A2 SEP).

The Arab users of the M1 have been very happy with their American tanks. This satisfaction increased when they saw how the M-1 performed in Iraq. While most Arabs deplored U.S. operations in Iraq, Arab tank officers and M-1 crewmen were quietly pleased that their tanks appeared invulnerable, and able to assist the infantry in any kind of fight. Iraqi army officers have spoken to fellow Arab officers who have used the M-1, and were told this was the way to go.

Selling the M-1 to Iraq creates the possibility (although remote) of M-1s fighting M-1s. Saudi Arabia is seen as the champion of mainstream Sunni Arabs, and has long supported the Sunni Arab minority in Iraq. For a while, after 2003, with the increasingly savage fighting between Sunni and Shia Arabs in Iraq, there was talk of Saudi Arabia intervening, or threatening to, in order to halt attacks against Iraqi Sunni Arabs. This idea quickly went away in the face of an American army in Iraq, and growing al Qaeda terrorism in Saudi Arabia. But once U.S. troops leave, and if the ancient animosity between Sunni and Shia Arabs in Iraq gets ugly again, there could at least be incidents on the border, and the possibility of a few clashes between Saudi and Iraqi M-1 tanks.
Posted by:GolfBravoUSMC

#12  Several important qualifiers:

1) MBTs are a LOT less effective with the assortment of sophisticated tank killing weapons around today. It is far better and cheaper to have a large number of troops in anti-tank companies. The Germans very successfully held off huge Russian armored units with just Panzerfausts.

2) That being said, the best use for MBTs is domestic, against militias and insurrectionists.

3) The Stryker is the god-awfullest tank killer around, because of its superior C&C. But Reapers are its evil twin in the air. With either about, the LAST place I would want to be is in a tank.
Posted by: Anonymoose   2008-08-03 23:35  

#11  "it is embarrassing for a modern army to have to buy spare parts on eBay"

Snark o' the Day! :-D
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut   2008-08-03 23:01  

#10  Selling the M-1 to Iraq creates the possibility (although remote) of M-1s fighting M-1s.

An interesting thought from a war nerd point of view. We would get to see who has done their homework and who fights like a traditional Arab army.

I say sell 'em. The Soviet T-55 was a decent machine in its day, but it is embarrassing for a modern army to have to buy spare parts on eBay.

And yes, all this talk of puckered sphinters, Persian or otherwise, is creeping me out.
Posted by: SteveS   2008-08-03 22:34  

#9  I would say more than probable. If they keep up this pace, in 2-4 years they could put on a good blitzkrieg attack into Iran.
Posted by: DarthVader   2008-08-03 21:44  

#8  I don't think Iraq would invade Iran, but having a few hundred M1 tanks would certainly give the Medes and Persians pause about attacking Iraq. Particularly if the Iraqis learn to use them properly. Given the progress of their military over the last couple years, I'd say that's more than possible.
Posted by: Steve White   2008-08-03 21:29  

#7  I dunno about them persian sphincters. having good tanks, and being able to engage effectively in armored warfare are different things - in the last Iraq-Iran war tanks were mainly used as semi-fixed artillery by both sides, right. Leaving aside difficulties in terrain in launching an armored attack on persia.

Not to mention that politically Maliki and pals dont want to make an enemy of Iran. OR of the Sunni states. They want to balance between them.
Posted by: liberalhawk   2008-08-03 21:24  

#6  I love it. Proof we are truly interested in seeing Iraq function as a country. Iran's mullahs must be having kittens.
Posted by: DarthVader   2008-08-03 21:17  

#5  I'll bet Persian sphincters are tighter than Arab.
Posted by: Nimble Spemble   2008-08-03 20:47  

#4  M1's won't have to fire a shot. They can just run over the "new" Iranian tanks.
Posted by: ed   2008-08-03 20:19  

#3  Iran could upgrade from one Russian tank to another, but that won't do them much good against M1s.
Posted by: Mike   2008-08-03 18:16  

#2  regional power, democraticaly elected. Arab dictatorship sphincters must be puckering
Posted by: Frank G   2008-08-03 17:58  

#1  > (and is unable to upgrade much because of all the arms embargoes)
I thought Russia ignored that.
Posted by: Bright Pebbles   2008-08-03 17:48  

00:00