What's new

Iraq refuses Abrams tanks in favor of the T-72!

Major Shaitan Singh

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Dec 7, 2010
Messages
3,550
Reaction score
43
Country
India
Location
India
T-72M1_Combat_Improved_Ajeya_Mk2.jpg


Yeah yeah! That's right! Vaunted "war elephants" Uncle Sam during the civil war have been more vulnerable and less effective than the T-72M Soviet generation. Write about this fellow blog BMPD :

"As reported February 6, 2015 Czech web resource aktualne.cz , Czech company Excalibur Army (part of the Excalibur Group) will soon begin delivery of the Iraqi army refurbished T-72 tanks and infantry fighting vehicles BMP-1 in the presence of the Czech army. The first batch of T-72 tanks and BMP-1 is past repair, adopted by the Iraqi representatives and is ready to be shipped at the company in Sternberk (former armored repair plant of the Ministry of Defence of the Czech Republic VOP 026 Šternberk, acquired Excalibur Group in 2010). The exact number of ordered Iraqi tanks and APCs are not reported, but the owner of the Excalibur Group Jaroslav Strnad said that prepared for dispatch technique is "the first part of the contract for more than 100 refurbished BMPs and tanks. This is a job for us for several years worth hundreds of millions of crowns. "This is the biggest export contract in the history of Excalibur Group since 1995. As previously reported , the company recently Excalibur Army also began the implementation of a contract for the delivery of a refurbished equipment (including acquired in Hungary written-off T-72A and former Czech BMP-1 and 122-mm MLRS RM-70) Nigeria.

Comment bmpd. Since its re-establishment in 2004, the new Iraqi armed forces tried to pursue a policy of refusal to purchase Soviet-designed tanks, and tanks to refocus on the western production. In 2005, the new Iraqi army against the American military financing were delivered 77 T-72M1 from the presence of the armed forces of Hungary, the intermediary company repurchased US Defense Solutions and past repair Hungarian armored repair plant CURRUS in Godollo. These tanks so far were the only machines such as the T-72, imported by Iraq in the "post-Hussein period." In the future, the Iraqi government has rejected offers them the same buying Defense Solutions project in Eastern Europe and the Ukraine to 2,000 T-72 tanks and then repair them on Czech and Ukrainian armored repair plant and supply the new Iraqi army. Instead, Iraq from 2010 to 2013 was 146 modernized M1A1M Abrams tanks from the presence of the US Army, and in December 2014 was issued a notice of the impending delivery Pentagon Iraq another 175 upgraded M1A1 tanks of availability.

In February 2013, former Iraqi Defense Minister Gen. -leytenant Abdul Qadir Mohammed Jassim al-Obeidi Mifardzhi (Abdul Qadir Mohammed Jassim Obeidi al-Mifarji), who held the position in the government of Nouri al-Maliki, from June 2006 to December 2010, and who has spearheaded the currently implemented contracts to supply Iraq a large block of Russian weapons, said that Iraq, despite the acquisition of weapons in Russia, nevertheless will not purchase any tanks "of Eastern origin" because they "represent a bomb on the tracks," and that in the future will be purchased only Western-made tanks .However, rapid advances LIH groups in the fight against the Iraqi army in the last year, is likely to have led to the failure of the Iraqi military and political leadership of this principle and "intelligibility" in procurement, and Iraq again began hastily to buy weapons "of Eastern origin "including T-72 tanks. Can be predicted that the contract for the purchase of T-72 tanks in the Czech Excalibur Army will be only the beginning of the process - that opens up prospects for the sale of tanks to Iraq (as a "second-hand" of the presence and the new T-90 production) and for the Russian side. "

As we can see, the euphoria of owning a "perfect" weapon manufactured in the USA under the blows of the LIH immediately passed. American combat systems can not compete with cheaper, but also more effective Soviet / Russian weapons. Iraq has already been tested in battle and Russian systems TOC on the chassis of the T-90S. According to insider information, he is now interested in buying themselves and T-90S tanks, upgraded with the installation of air conditioning and panoramic sight, as well as equipped with a set dopzaschity for combat operations in the city. In addition to the interest of the Iraqi army tanks cause fire support vehicle BMPT-72.However, in the latter case, the customer would like to have a large angle of elevation of the gun unit, a simple and cheap MSA in case of failure of the rockets in favor of Nursi blocks or installing packages with RPO.

Negotiations are going. Crucial price, which in the opinion of the Iraqi side is a tall and delivery time (I would like to quickly). I should add that a couple of years ago, an Iraqi delegation visited the head of the corporation "Uralvagonzavod" in Nizhny Tagil to get acquainted with the possibilities of production. The company currently handled by military orders, including export. This is due to including the deployment of one of the countries licensed assembly, comparable in terms of Indian orders. In these circumstances, the desire to Russian defense industry, compensate for the loss of advancing the delivery time for Iraq are justified - bend at the price they are not collected. Move all of the customers could be early commissioning of the new unit Smith shops. However, there UVZ was ambushed - due to sanctions ordered equipment in Europe and there stuck. Under the new conditions the corporation's management is considering breaking contracts with European suppliers (in spite of a number of financial losses) and reorientation on equipment suppliers from China, South Korea, and possibly Japan.
 
T-72 is lot more better then Abrams but those Abrams which are being delivered to Iraq because they are scaled down to such an extent that they would merely able to even fight ww2 tanks...lol
 
I hope the Iraqis remember to close the hatch ,when they take them into a war zone.Might make a difference.:D

Iraqi Army=buffalos;ISIS=wolves

23i8hg0.gif
 
Last edited:
I hope the Iraqis remember to close the hatch ,when they take them into a war zone.Might make a difference.:D

Iraqi Army=buffalos;ISIS=wolves

Hatch never was the main problem, no infantry around was the problem

iraqi crews can repair and keep T-72s up running on their own, too much trouble with the Abrams but they accepted 6 abrams as well
 
T-72 is lot more better then Abrams but those Abrams which are being delivered to Iraq because they are scaled down to such an extent that they would merely able to even fight ww2 tanks...lol

Could you please elaborate ; what exactly are the SCALED down
Abrams ; which capabilites have been removed
 
Could you please elaborate ; what exactly are the SCALED down
Abrams ; which capabilites have been removed
upload_2015-2-10_17-6-35.jpeg
M1 Abrams in Hezbollah's hands
Br2szHYCEAA7nkW.jpg
Downed by ISIS
Do you think US is a fool that would gave fully capable vehicle to Iraq..it was downgraded that's only reason Iraq wants T-72...
 
Smart choice, its not about which is a better tank, its about what fills your needs. Abrams is a gas-addicted machine that is too expensive.
 
Our media writes that Iraq is interested in buying T-90 and Terminator 2 - this is a photo.
1(165)[1].jpg
 
Could you please elaborate ; what exactly are the SCALED down
Abrams ; which capabilites have been removed

The tank commander does not have it's own independent optical sight, though this was a choice made by Iraq's MoD, it limits the view of the crew.

But the problem here is not whether it's an Abrams or the T-72. When looking at the destructed Abrams or those left in an inoperable state you'd see the mistakes were made by the crew. Using Abrams for COIN in cities whilst there is no infantry around to protect the tank, the tank being slow and having limited view enables terrorists to storm it from all sides, fire RPG's, run their car bombs etc.

See the US operating Abrams in cities COIN warfare, they have infantry around.


Another example of mistakes, driving the tank through a swamp, with all the foliage the tank crew won't be able to see whose hiding in it. Perfect environment to ambush the tanks unaccompanied by infantry.. even though a 65 ton tank shouldn't enter such a swamp in the first place, they should remain on the highway/open desert as much as possible.

Environment such as seen in the picture favors low profile military units (infantry), they won't be heard coming unlike the heavy noisy Abrams. ( Abrams in pic didn't get destroyed, but stuck.. ).

IS-Anbar-Armor-ambush6-thumb-560x356-3394.jpg


Crew might know how to operate the tank but they and their commanders need to know how to use a tank in the battle environment. Once again the issue lies with commanders lacking military knowledge, they make the decisions to send tank units through such an area.
 
Last edited:
The tank commander does not have it's own independent optical sight, though this was a choice made by Iraq's MoD, it limits the view of the crew.

But the problem here is not whether it's an Abrams or the T-72. When looking at the destructed Abrams or those left in an inoperable state you'd see the mistakes were made by the crew. Using Abrams for COIN in cities whilst there is no infantry around to protect the tank, the tank being slow and having limited view enables terrorists to storm it from all sides, fire RPG's, run their car bombs etc.

See the US operating Abrams in cities COIN warfare, they have infantry around.


Another example of mistakes, driving the tank through a swamp, with all the foliage the tank crew won't be able to see whose hiding in it. Perfect environment to ambush the tanks unaccompanied by infantry.. even though a 65 ton tank shouldn't enter such a swamp in the first place, they should remain on the highway/open desert as much as possible.

Environment such as seen in the picture favors low profile military units (infantry), they won't be heard coming unlike the heavy noisy Abrams. ( Abrams in pic didn't get destroyed, but stuck.. ).

IS-Anbar-Armor-ambush6-thumb-560x356-3394.jpg


Crew might know how to operate the tank but they and their commanders need to know how to use a tank in the battle environment. Once again the issue lies with commanders lacking military knowledge, they make the decisions to send tank units through such an area.
The funny things are that baathist leading the army that fight baathist in the form of isis! see that's the biggest reason our brams failed.

you can't let your enemy lead your army fighting his like that's impossible and you can't see that any where except in Iraq.
 
iraq has better exp with T72 i mean russian tanks and it is easy to maintain and u can use it without any maintenance

Iraq military made some immature decision before but they are improving now from mistakes

Iraq should go for more Russian made weapons
 
Everything. It's name is only Abrams. USA does that - providing Lite demo versions of tanks that are great for parades.
BLablabla there is no Abrams Lite.

View attachment 191904M1 Abrams in Hezbollah's hands
Br2szHYCEAA7nkW.jpg
Downed by ISIS
Do you think US is a fool that would gave fully capable vehicle to Iraq..it was downgraded that's only reason Iraq wants T-72...
Even early version M1 abrams tanks are superior in armor, mobility and firepower.

Iraqis have trained on T-72, it is simpler, it requires less maintenance in the field i.e. that's what those troops can handle (i.e. not a fault of the M1)
 

Back
Top Bottom