| Submit your comments on this article |
| Science & Technology |
| Why have so many US-made Abrams tanks been destroyed in Ukraine? |
| 2024-06-13 |
| Posted by:Skidmark |
| #6 Sure feels like they were given a really nice cordless screwdriver, and they are just rotating the entire tool around manually. Could have triggered WWIII over it, and they just start using it like a hammer. Worse, once again, another opponent gets to learn how to fight one of the premier tools in the military being operated at 1/4 its capacity; all sorts of relatively free practice. |
| Posted by: swksvolFF 2024-06-13 12:35 |
| #5 ...its up there with the M2 (Ma Deuce), B52, and other designs that are all about as good as one can make. The Abrams is designed to work in a combined arms environment something the Ukies and Russkies have a hard time to execute. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2024-06-13 10:39 |
| #4 What model Abrams and when were they designed? |
| Posted by: Mercutio 2024-06-13 08:59 |
| #3 Armor can't survive on the battlefield without air superiority. From the WWII and on. What's been different in Ukraine has been the ad-hoc nature of the anti armor airstrikes. Everybody and his cousin can go tank plinking. Haven't noticed huge numbers of Merkava's being nailed in Gaza. Abrams did well in Iraq. |
| Posted by: ed in texas 2024-06-13 08:46 |
| #2 'What is the sword compared to the hand that holds it?'. There aren't any magic weapons, the very concept being a primarily leftist trope. It is training, discipline, unit cohesion, and solid, well understood and long practiced tactics that create battlefield success. |
| Posted by: Cesare 2024-06-13 08:30 |
| #1 If I use a battlefield rifle as as heavy artillery and my enemy responds with actual artillery, then I am using the rifle in the way it was never intended. So it is with the Abrams. |
| Posted by: badanov 2024-06-13 08:05 |