Posted on May 25, 2015
Anti-Tank Guided Missiles in Syria, the new weapon of choice.
5.89K
18
15
4
4
0
I have been reading about the war in Syria. This gave me a perspective that I haven't thought about. The anti-Assad forces are armed to the teeth with these things. I have no clue how many have fallen into ISIS hands so far. I am sure they have plenty. With this being said I, for one, hope we don't go back into Iraq in force. I dread what it will look like. With weapons like this on the battlefield they can take a heavy toll on us. In Syria there are ripping apart Assad's Army as they just recently lost their first major city in a battle. His assets are sitting ducks and are being taken out. What would this do to MRAPs and other armed vehicles?
On a side note we call it the BGM-71 TOW. It is a US made weapon. I am sure it is not the only one they are using but it is common.
On a side note we call it the BGM-71 TOW. It is a US made weapon. I am sure it is not the only one they are using but it is common.
Armor
GWOT
ISIS
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 6
3
3
0
CPT (Join to see) I have been keeping up with the TTPs in both Syria and Iraq as they develop...well because its my job, and it is scary. ISIS mixes conventional military tactics/weapons with terrorist tactics in a very efficient and effective manner. I know a lot of people give the Iraqi Army a hard time, but the Syrian Army --with robust international backing-- isn't doing much better. If/when we end up finally confronting this cancer I offer two pieces of advice: 1) Bring a lunch we'll be there a while and 2) go ahead and tighten up that chin strap.
(3)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
I would greatly enjoy breaking bread and picking your mind on this. I also watch a lot of what is going on. It blows my mind how others see ISIS. They are a good fighting force. They are not winning by accident. They are a refined solid force that is using tactics to maximize their gains. Still I see people put them on par with the likes of the militias we fought in Iraq. ISIS is so much more than the Muhdi Army. If anyone thinks we are just going to blow through them they will find another thing coming.
(1)
(0)
2
2
0
Hamas used these effectively along with unconventional IEDs against Israeli forces a couple years ago and sent them limping back to Israel licking their wounds. It is the "hybrid threat" (conventional and unconventional warfare) that has been written and discussed about a lot in the past few years. Military analysts predict that the next major conflict will be a hybrid fight. Very scary.
Interesting assessment of the 2014 Gaza conflict below if you have some time.
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CCQQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Femetnews.org%2Fdocuments%2F2014-Gaza-Assessment-Report.pdf&ei=q2dkVbyuJcrLsASX14HIDA&usg=AFQjCNGtNi-C171KvMwPWIzU-l-iDnR-Iw&sig2=4YrhMT0YRgrQVnlBPw87oQ
Interesting assessment of the 2014 Gaza conflict below if you have some time.
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CCQQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Femetnews.org%2Fdocuments%2F2014-Gaza-Assessment-Report.pdf&ei=q2dkVbyuJcrLsASX14HIDA&usg=AFQjCNGtNi-C171KvMwPWIzU-l-iDnR-Iw&sig2=4YrhMT0YRgrQVnlBPw87oQ
(2)
(0)
1LT William Clardy
An interesting read, CSM (Join to see), but I would offer 2 significant caveats for drawing any widely applied conclusions from that conflict:
1) The IDF is probably the only military force significantly more casualty-averse than the U.S. Army, and that aversion has deep ramifications throughout its doctrine and tactics.
2) The Gaza operation was a remarkably static situation with extremely limited scope. The IDF chose to stand off and attrit Hamas -- there was no maneuver element, no attempt at encirclement, and direct assault was considered only as a last resort.
1) The IDF is probably the only military force significantly more casualty-averse than the U.S. Army, and that aversion has deep ramifications throughout its doctrine and tactics.
2) The Gaza operation was a remarkably static situation with extremely limited scope. The IDF chose to stand off and attrit Hamas -- there was no maneuver element, no attempt at encirclement, and direct assault was considered only as a last resort.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google