Comments for Tanks in Afghanistan We're the Military and Airpower Guys of Jonah Goldberg of National Review Online + a stray we found wandering around looking lost. All original material JHD, BHD, JR, WT, and KA 2003-2010 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2009/03/tanks_in_afghan.html Sat, 24 Mar 2012 15:21:22 Z Movable Type 4.12 en Copyright 2012 http://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification Tanks in Afghanistan http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2009/03/tanks_in_afghan.html http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2009/03/tanks_in_afghan.html Mon, 16 Mar 2009 06:39:51 -0600 Comment from Casey on 2009-03-17
Y'know, if the Mobile Gun System doesn't work, maybe they could dig out a few Ontos systems instead.

I keed, I keed! ...
]]> http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2009/03/tanks_in_afghan.html#comment-85880 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2009/03/tanks_in_afghan.html#comment-85880 Tue, 17 Mar 2009 22:43:30 -0600 Comment from Heartless Libertarian on 2009-03-17
So having some sort of direct-fire breaching/blasting capability is very nice.  It's also easier to put the hole exactly where the ground commander wants it, since it's much easier for him to grab the gunner by the shoulder and point, vice having to figure out the 10 digit grid and then get that grid to the orbiting bomb dispenser.
]]> http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2009/03/tanks_in_afghan.html#comment-85829 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2009/03/tanks_in_afghan.html#comment-85829 Tue, 17 Mar 2009 08:41:57 -0600 Comment from Grimmy on 2009-03-17
Also, dont forget that the USMC part of the force is a MEB. An expeditionary brigade. That's a regiment or so of infantry plus whatever attachments in engineering and armor are deemed appropriate, plus  expeditionary oriented logistics support contingent, plus air wing contingent of both fixed and rotor wing.

Neither the Army or the Marine side of the mix will be missing much of any possible thing in the bang em up dept.]]> http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2009/03/tanks_in_afghan.html#comment-85816 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2009/03/tanks_in_afghan.html#comment-85816 Tue, 17 Mar 2009 02:41:08 -0600 Comment from Casey on 2009-03-16
I imagine the first constraint would be response time. The other issue is that the Air Force has now fallen in love with the Small Diameter Bomb, and at 250 lbs it might not be strong enough to punch through those walls.

Can anyone comment on how well air support might work in that context?

]]> http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2009/03/tanks_in_afghan.html#comment-85807 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2009/03/tanks_in_afghan.html#comment-85807 Mon, 16 Mar 2009 22:23:21 -0600 Comment from jim b on 2009-03-16 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2009/03/tanks_in_afghan.html#comment-85805 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2009/03/tanks_in_afghan.html#comment-85805 Mon, 16 Mar 2009 22:13:54 -0600 Comment from Cannoneer No. 4 on 2009-03-16
http://www.casr.ca/ft-leopard-2a5-denmark-2.htm
With a great deal of machinegun fire and 20 rounds fired from the guns, the Danish Leopard tank crews engaged the Taliban both out in open terrain and when the enemy forces took cover in compounds. In this situation, the tanks’ supporting fire was a big help to the Danish infantry.
 
]]> http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2009/03/tanks_in_afghan.html#comment-85800 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2009/03/tanks_in_afghan.html#comment-85800 Mon, 16 Mar 2009 20:37:59 -0600 Comment from jim b on 2009-03-16 A little birdy told me that the Danes also have tanks in Helmund province. They just don't take them out past the wire ... they might get scratched up or something. http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2009/03/tanks_in_afghan.html#comment-85796 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2009/03/tanks_in_afghan.html#comment-85796 Mon, 16 Mar 2009 19:30:19 -0600 Comment from Cannoneer No. 4 on 2009-03-16
There used to be a big tank park/bone yard at Camp Sherzai next to KAF.  I used to think it would have been cheaper to fix the tanks already in country than to fly them in on chartered Ilyushin Il-76's.]]> http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2009/03/tanks_in_afghan.html#comment-85795 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2009/03/tanks_in_afghan.html#comment-85795 Mon, 16 Mar 2009 17:04:33 -0600 Comment from Pat on 2009-03-16 For that matter, there had been some talk of Canadian MTVLs(lengthened M113 with an added roadwheel) being sent to Afstan. I haven't kept up enough to know if they did get sent over, or not. Capt. H can confirm or deny that. http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2009/03/tanks_in_afghan.html#comment-85790 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2009/03/tanks_in_afghan.html#comment-85790 Mon, 16 Mar 2009 15:48:25 -0600 Comment from John of Argghhh! on 2009-03-16 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2009/03/tanks_in_afghan.html#comment-85776 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2009/03/tanks_in_afghan.html#comment-85776 Mon, 16 Mar 2009 11:09:21 -0600 Comment from Heartless Libertarian on 2009-03-16
They're a lot lighter and bring a much smaller logistical footprint than M1s.
]]> http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2009/03/tanks_in_afghan.html#comment-85775 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2009/03/tanks_in_afghan.html#comment-85775 Mon, 16 Mar 2009 11:08:47 -0600 Comment from Damian on 2009-03-16
The Leos have been a bit of a Swiss Army knife for the CF: part intimidator of insurgent forces, part road clearance tool, part direct fire support to infantry, part vehicle recovery tool, etc.  We don't have the resources you guys do, so we make do with what we have, and the Leos have proved quite useful.  Saved a bunch of lives.
]]> http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2009/03/tanks_in_afghan.html#comment-85774 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2009/03/tanks_in_afghan.html#comment-85774 Mon, 16 Mar 2009 10:59:10 -0600 Comment from Grimmy on 2009-03-16
I was out of line with the remark about condesendingness. I spend quite a bit of time reading foreign news/blogs/forums and with many, if not most, such folk, the "Americans are so stupid..." meme is so constant that I can get a bit jumpy.

Sorry about that. Passing on knowledge is always a good thing between brothers in arms.]]> http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2009/03/tanks_in_afghan.html#comment-85773 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2009/03/tanks_in_afghan.html#comment-85773 Mon, 16 Mar 2009 09:55:27 -0600 Comment from John of Argghhh! on 2009-03-16
My original correspondent added in a follow-up to this post  - when it comes to sending M1s, remember that they suck JP-8 like an homeless alcoholic upending a bottle of cough syrup, vice the more restrained appetites of the Canadian Leos, and the ground supply routes are already under plenty of stress.

He adds that there are M113s deployed with US forces in Afstan that could fulfill the recovery role.]]> http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2009/03/tanks_in_afghan.html#comment-85772 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2009/03/tanks_in_afghan.html#comment-85772 Mon, 16 Mar 2009 09:36:02 -0600 Comment from Damian on 2009-03-16
Undoubtedly, U.S. forces have more to choose from in terms of TOE for a particular mission.  Our guys were just letting your guys know what's worked for us.  One team, one fight.
]]> http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2009/03/tanks_in_afghan.html#comment-85771 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2009/03/tanks_in_afghan.html#comment-85771 Mon, 16 Mar 2009 09:21:58 -0600 Comment from Mark Collins on 2009-03-16 post at The Torch (with some additional links).

Mark
Ottawa
]]> http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2009/03/tanks_in_afghan.html#comment-85769 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2009/03/tanks_in_afghan.html#comment-85769 Mon, 16 Mar 2009 08:32:38 -0600 Comment from Grimmy on 2009-03-16
Not true by any stretch. 24 MEU returned from Helmund province not so long ago, for example, and US Army forces have been operating in the south as well as north for some time, iirc. The terrain issues will be known and the force adjusted for its peculiarities and needs.

Also, no offense meant to the Canadian forces, but US forces have much more available to choose from in force structure and equipment/logistics.

There's lots of ways to punch holes in walls and the US forces will have access to a wide array of wall punching gizmos that can be man packed. Tanks are fine and dandy in specific instances, but as a wide ranging, one size fits all sort of deal, not so much.

I do think it rather condescending for anyone to assume that US ground forces (Army or Marine) wont bring tanks to the fight when appropriate, but its also not saying much to suggest that they'd need to become tank dependent either.

Also, it might we a good thing to remember that Afghanistan, now more than ever, is a very constrained logistics AO and tanks are very logistics heavy.

Our guys will also have access to a decent array of recovery vehicles designed to pull other vehicles out of mud pits. Some of them are even armored.]]> http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2009/03/tanks_in_afghan.html#comment-85765 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2009/03/tanks_in_afghan.html#comment-85765 Mon, 16 Mar 2009 07:58:57 -0600