Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Longbow1969

This reminds me a lot of the first gulf war. The media was going nuts over how the Iraqis had “desert” tanks and were superior fighters in that terrain. I remember people talking about how we shouldn’t go because the Iraqis will easily destroy our forces and we aren’t cut out for desert fighting.

Unfortunately, the media wasn’t aware of how awesome Abrams tanks with GPS tracking are. We plowed through sand storms and picked off Iraqi tanks from thousands of yards with precision while going something like 20/30mph in the desert. It was embarrassing for Iraq. I can’t remember the kill ratios but I think we only lost a couple Bradleys from enemy fire.

Not trying to get too overconfident here, just throwing in my agreement that the media does indeed have a habit of overestimating the opposition. Let the military do the overestimating, that way we can be sure they’ll turn the area into a parking lot.


17 posted on 04/05/2013 11:19:13 AM PDT by Marko413
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]


To: Marko413
Good points.

It was embarrassing for Iraq. I can’t remember the kill ratios but I think we only lost a couple Bradleys from enemy fire.

It was even more embarrassing for Russia. That conflict proved yet again that Soviet/Russian weapons platforms and military doctrines simply wilt in the fact of US/Western firepower. I'm not saying their stuff is bad, only that our stuff really is that much better in most cases - and we and our allies tend to be able to afford 10 times more training on the equipment.

Not trying to get too overconfident here, just throwing in my agreement that the media does indeed have a habit of overestimating the opposition.

Yup, I too remember the media casualty estimates going into Desert Storm. We were supposedly going to face 10,000 KIA's. In reality we lost about 250 dead - and a big chunk of those was one SCUD hitting a barracks.

The reality is that in an actual war, South Korea could easily defeat the North - without us if they needed to. If North Korea attacks the South in a significant way, it would be the end of North Korea - and everyone knows it. North Korea has an antiquated military, largely made up of 1950's/1960's technology. South Korea has a first world military with the latest gear, training and tactics. The North could do some damage, would probably use poison gas in an attempt to deny the South their airfields, would likely shell Seoul to cause chaos, etc. It wouldn't take long though for the North's offensive to collapse and fall to pieces - they probably don't even have the food or supply logistics for more than a few days of real fighting.

21 posted on 04/05/2013 11:46:55 AM PDT by Longbow1969
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson