Strykers in Europe out gunned by Russia. Hmmm? Should we be drawing down our Armored Units?

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 24 Jul 2015 00:12:04 -0400

Tanks and "ARMOR" will be needed, you know, all those things we got rid of for Stryker Infantry BDEs. Your Thoughts?

http://www.armytimes.com/story/defense/international/europe/2015/07/23/us-army-strykers--europe-need-30mm--russia/30551987/

US Army: Strykers Need Bigger Gun to Fight Russia

One of the most important US Army units in Europe — the Stryker-equipped 2nd Cavalry Regiment — is outgunned by its Russian counterparts, Army officials say, and needs a fast-track upgrade.

Response by SCPO Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 24 at 2015 1:01 AM

SCPO Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 24 Jul 2015 01:01:42 -0400

We should be building NATO and our own forces up, not dismantling them. Anyone heard of the Ukraine, Crimea, and a very dangerous prick named Putin???

Response by CSM Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 24 at 2015 5:35 AM

CSM Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 24 Jul 2015 05:35:11 -0400

We should definitely be maintaining a heavy armor presence in Europe. I am an Infantry guy but I know from experience that there is no greater feeling than seeing your armor brothers rolling up when you are pinned down.

The problem with the Stryker is that commanders think it's a weapons platform. The MGS is definitely a weapons platform (when it isn't broke down) but the ICV is not a Bradley. It is transportation for light Infantry forces and can be used in the support by fire position to bring the RWS .50/MK 19 into the fight. It is not built to fight tanks or any other armored threat.

We didn't get rid of any M1s to make Stryker BCTs, some ABCTs were replaced by SBCTs but we have the same amount of tanks we have always had, it's the highest levels of the military saying we don't need as much armor...those are also the folks that haven't chewed any dirt in the last 14 years.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 24 at 2015 8:29 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 24 Jul 2015 08:29:27 -0400

I would focus on the fact that although a lot of armor units ave deactivated, which is unfortunate, the Army is still maintaining in excess of 2300 of the tanks in storage sites around the world. Yes, our response to any aggression that would require the tank is going to be delayed due to training and reset requirements, but the vehicles themselves have not been demil'd as of yet.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Jul 24 at 2015 11:15 PM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Fri, 24 Jul 2015 23:15:14 -0400

I don't think they want a mission to harass tanks. Who ever wrote that is smoking crack.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 1 at 2015 10:04 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 01 Aug 2015 22:04:06 -0400

I knew this would happen when we started drawing down from Europe. Should have left everything as is