the best ways to use US Army against Russia

[c_of_red]

'm not going to wade through all this dreck to figure out where this came from so just tell me who is suggesting that experience and morale "affects the ratings of the front hull armor"


Don

Anyone that thinks the Soviets made a 'Monkey model" and the Arabs were dumb enough to buy it or wouldn't know it was a monkey model even after the salesmen for the British, French or German MBT's explained it to them.
I argue that the monkey model thangie is propaganda.
The original tangent that we all wandered off on was that Soviet armor is vastly overrated. As evidence of that I pointed to kill ratios. Mark and others claim it was because of the Monkey Models being used by 3rd worlders, with the assumption being that the New Soviet Man would get more out of a Soviet MBT. I don't disagree entirely. I commented that one of the design flaws of Soviet MBT was crew protection and crew comfort.
Biometrics, if you will.
Anyway, Several people here think that Soviet MBT's are the greates thing since sliced bread. I ask them if they are so good, why are the kill ratios against Soviet tanks so lopsided?
The answers I got were the monkey model, which is pure propaganda, and crew training. On Marks' question about the US having T-72's in Desert Storm and the Iraqi's having M1's. I would guess that the M1's would have won. Despite the better training of the US crews. Hence the crack about national origins having no effect on frontal armor. Nothing to do with the game here.
I think there is quite a bit of communications breakdown taking place. Most of it seems to be my fault.
So I am no longer contributing to this thread. I have strong opinions and it doesn't upset me to argue with others that have equally strong opinions. I do have 248 slots available if anyone is interested. We can put it to the WinMBT test.

[DRG]

Originally Posted by c_of_red

So I am no longer contributing to this thread. I have strong opinions and it doesn't upset me to argue with others that have equally strong opinions. I do have 248 slots available if anyone is interested. We can put it to the WinMBT test.

There is no doubt there were versions of the T-72 that were built to an older and / or lower standard and sold as export and those for the most part are the ones that have made the news ( those and the obligatory shots of burning T-55's from those two wars but what does that prove ?.. that a tank designed just after WW2 has next to zero chance against the best tanks the west fields? Duh.) However, if you steadfastly refuse to believe that then there is little point in anyone offering any counterpoint information because all you'll do is dismiss it as propaganda or the claim the info comes from a "socialist organization " and the "argument" goes round and round and round then it's just as well you are no longer contributing to this thread because you simply are NOT contributing anything worthwhile besides personal opinion and alternate propaganda. As for putting it " to the WinMBT test " I have no doubt that if you take Iraqi and Russian T-72's with the same armour and armament and put them up against the best the US has to offer you'll get similar results to the Gulf War but what you seem to expect is that every battle between Western forces and Russian tanks should be a turkey shoot based on what has happened when "western" forces fought Arabs which is totally absurd IMHO.

A top of the line T-90A is NOT the same thing as an Iraqi T-72 any more than a M1 Abrams with the 105 gun is the same thing as a M1A2 SEP


Don