Iraqi Heavy Armor Status Changing

[Almaleki]

----
My Comment :
This Article from a blog .... It is about a comment for the IMOD ( that will be Iraqi Ministry of Defense ) Minister for Arabic TV Show ... an American Commenter Who knows Arabic , Saw that interview and he is Named " Jack Winters " ,,,, Details in the Article about that Interview and it was addressed as Jack Winters Comment not The Iraqi Minister ( well i saw that interview and he said the same ) anyway to the Article ** :
----

Since 2005, it has been the Iraqi Army’s stated policy to keep the Soviet-designed tanks in one division, the 9th Division based at Taji. New, non-Soviet design tanks would go to upgrade other divisions. That policy has colored all analysis and projections of where the new M1A1 tanks and M1126 Stryker Armored Personnel Carriers (APC) were likely to go first. That policy has changed according to an 18 August 2009 comment by Jack Winters:



"On another topic about the M1 and where they're going to go, that question was asked by reporters to the defense minister; and he said they're going to the Ninth Div, and the T72's are going to go to other units in the army. So the idea they are going to go to Baghdad div is not in the mind set of the MOD."



This new detail significantly changes the probable distribution of Iraqi armor over the next 18 months and makes previous predictions obsolete. [The devil is in the details. Even small details can change everything]



This could also explain some of the confusing reporting recently concerning the 52nd Brigade’s (14th IA Division) Combined Arms Live Fire Exercise (CALFEX) in Basrah.



The question becomes, where is the armor currently in 9th Division and the not yet delivered two battalions of T72s going? To make such a prediction, there are several additional details that need to be considered:



1. The comment said "units". Plural. This means the Iraqi Minister of Defense is talking spreading the armor out as the 9th Division upgrades to M1A1s and Strykers. Probably in brigade strength since the support battalions are at that level but, to several different divisions.



2. The last 9010 Quarterly Report to Congress said that the Iraqi Army is looking at converting “4th Battalions” to support units. E.G. Use the two battalions of M113 APCs in 9th Division for mortar carriers and mechanized combat service support (CSS). That removes those two battalions from the equation as mechanized reconnaissance battalions. The new brigades would need brigade support battalions, so new BSBs would be formed utilizing the redistributed armor. Plus the current and future brigades are adding 120mm mortars to their strength. Some of those M113 APCs will probably be converted to mortar carriers.



3. 52nd Brigade (14th Division) was called a "Navy Brigade" in the press report on the CALFEX in Basrah. Also, the 14th Division already has a T55/BMP1-equipped tank battalion attached from 9th Division. That battalion is from the same brigade reported as having tank crews training on M1A1s.



4. The Presidentials were always described as planned to be a mix of armor, motorized, and light infantry. So far, the three brigades are only light infantry. Two of the brigades are missing battalions.



5. Not including the M1A1s and Strykers, there are approximately 24 tank/APC equipped battalions. If you consider the M113s as probable mechanized CSS or mortar carriers, that is enough armor for seven brigades:

9th Division is over strength by three battalions (15 line battalions):

* Two T72/BMP1-equipped tank battalions,
* Two T72/BMP1-equipped armored cavalry battalions,
* Two T55/BMP1-equipped tank battalions,
* Two BMP1-equipped “tank” battalions,
* One Type 63-equipped mechanized reconnaissance battalion,
* Two M113-equipped mechanized reconnaissance battalions,
* One EE9-equipped light armored reconnaissance battalion, and
* Three BTR80-equipped mechanized battalions.

To be delivered (two battalions):

* Two tank battalion’s worth of T72 tanks from Slovakia, donated by NATO.

Elsewhere in the Iraqi Army (6 or more battalions):

* Three BMP1-equipped “tank” battalions,
* One salvaged wheeled APC equipped motorized battalion, and
* At least two M113-equipped mechanized or mechanized engineer battalions.



6. The armor that is not assigned to the 9th Division is on attachment from 9th Division, and stated plans indicates the probable distribution of 9th Division’s armor as it upgrades:

* 14th Division in Basrah has the T55/BMP-equipped 1-36 Tank Battalion attached from 9th Division.
* 7th Division’s 29th Brigade in western Anbar has two BMP1-equipped “tank” battalions.
* 11th Division’s 44th Brigade in Sadr City has one BMP1-equipped “tank” battalion.
* 5th Division’s 20th Brigade in Diyala has two under strength battalions of salvaged APCs.
* 3rd Division (probably 11th Brigade) in western Ninawa has an unknown number of M113s.
* The Presidential Brigades and Baghdad Brigade have always been planned to be a mix of
armor, motorized, and light infantry. So far those three brigades are only light infantry. Two the three brigades are missing battalions.



[Have I completely confused you yet? Remember the basic policy change became known to me on 18 August 2009. What is the date of this post? How long has it taken me to put all this together? How long to make sense of all these factors? “Everything is simple in the military, and the simplest things in the military are most difficult.”]



What this means is the listed 9th Division brigades/battalions in detail 5 are being transferred to the brigades listed in detail 6. This means that Ninawa, Diyala, Anbar, and Basrah provinces are converting or expanding forces to a full-strength mechanized or armored brigade assigned to a division in each. One of the replaced brigades appears to be becoming an Iraqi Marine Brigade. The first upgrade and formation of the 5-36 Armor Battalion is already happening. The shift of forces has is already beginning with Basrah but, it was obscured by the previous policy.

The T55/BMP-equipped 1-36 Tank Battalion from 9th Division is attached to 14th Division in Basrah. The recent reference to 52nd Brigade (14 Div) as “Navy” and the recent training of members of the new 5-36 Tank Battalion on M1A1s indicate the 36th Armor Brigade (9th Division) is the first to upgrade to M1A1s. As the 36th Brigade upgrades, the 1-36 Tank Battalion in Basrah will probably be joined by the 2-36 “Tank” Battalion (BMP1s), and 3-36 Armored Cavalry Battalion (T72/BMP1) forming a new 52nd Armored Brigade with the addition of a new BSB.



The existing 52nd Brigade (14th Division) appears to be transferring to the Iraqi Marines.



The 3rd Division’s (probably) 11th Brigade in western Ninawa and the 11th Division’s 44th Brigade in east Baghdad will add armor and BSBs, becoming mechanized or armored brigades.



The 7th Division’s 29th Brigade in west Anbar and the 5th Division’s 20th Brigade in Diyala will each gain a tank battalion and a BSB, finishing their conversion to the 20th and 29th Mechanized Brigades.



The 37th Brigade (9th Division) is uniquely equipped with EE9 90mm gun armed Scout Cars and BTR-80 APCs organized in four battalions. I had asked repeatedly if the Iraqis were going to equip the Presidentials with the 37th Brigade's armor in early 2007. At the time, this was not planned. With the planned upgrade of the 9th Division, the 37th Brigade's armor and the two new tank battalions-worth of T72s are probably going to the 2nd Presidential Brigade and Baghdad Brigade. The praetorian brigades would get:

* Baghdad Brigade becomes armored: Two T72-equipped armored battalions formed from Slovakian donated tanks probably are to be formed and the existing 1st Baghdad Infantry Battalion upgraded with BTR80s transferred from the 37th Brigade.
* 2nd Presidentials become motorized: The EE9’s of the 4-37 Light Armored Reconnaissance Battalion will probably be added to form a new battalion and the two existing infantry battalions would be upgraded to motorized with the remaining 37th Brigade BTR80s.
* 1st Presidentials has the personal security role and would remain primarily light infantry mounted on HMMWVs.



If you factor in delivery time for the M1A1s and Strykers, this initial redistribution will happen over the next 18 months.



There are still a few more details missing concerning the redistribution of armor in Iraqi forces. For example:

* How much functional or salvageable armor does the Peshmerga have from the salvage of the old Iraqi Army’s1st Mechanized Division and 5th Mechanized Division plus other IA in the north from 2003? (This is estimated at a minimum of two brigade’s worth.)
* How much of the KRG's armor is going to the IA with the absorption of the Peshmerga?If there is enough and they are available, they could further upgrade more brigades of the Iraqi Army or they could incorporate a mechanized or armored brigade in the transferred Peshmerga Divisions.



It is possible that this analysis is wrong and the IA is not upgrading brigades and reinforcing locations that have armor already. Alternatively, they might:

* Start the formation of the 18th Mechanized Division in Maysan and/or 19th Mechanized Division in Wassit from the 9th Division’s replaced armor,
* Spread the replaced 9th Division armor and mechanized brigades/battalions throughout more divisions, or
* The Iraqi Army could go with independent brigades. Etc.



All predictions and analysis of Iraqi armor distribution in the near future are affected by this policy change in armor distribution. In September 2009, the 5-36 Armor Battalion will have its full strength of M1A1 crews trained. As the 5-36 completes battalion level training this fall, the next transfer of of a battalion to the provinces should occur.

--------------------------------

I was Fully Confused at first but if you read every word you will understand :)

Cheers ,,,
Almaleki

[Almaleki]

The forum these Days SUCKS !!! where are you people .........

[Ryan UK]

The forum these Days SUCKS !!! where are you people .........

Lurking in the shadows

But in all seriousness im just trying to take in what I just read through

[Almaleki]

Lurking in the shadows

But in all seriousness im just trying to take in what I just read through

kkkkkkkkkkkkkk

it have been 48 Days From someone ( Beside me ) ever Replay in this Forum !!!! Congratulations you are THE FIRST :D

[Tavarisch]

Some people are busier than others....

My only question is are these T-72s of the same model? (Hopefully not the M model...)

[Waylander]

The eastern european ones are M1 models.
Not much better but still...

The few left from old Iraqi armor stocks are also just M1s at best and probably just Ms or "Lions of Babylon".

[Tavarisch]

Instead of buying new ones that are just as bad, why don't they invest in crew training and upgraded fire-control systems or something? I'm pretty sure they're gunners would be able to hit targets if they actually could see in the first place at night. Not to mention, the poor quality of their munitions.

[Waylander]

The eastern european Ts where dead cheap or completely for free.
I agree that one might want to use other MBTs but in the end getting these T-72s meant that Iraq was able to field armored units very fast and for a very low price.

One can think of replacing them in the future with additional Abrams or a second modern MBT type but they are good enough for a start.

[eckherl]

----
My Comment :
This Article from a blog .... It is about a comment for the IMOD ( that will be Iraqi Ministry of Defense ) Minister for Arabic TV Show ... an American Commenter Who knows Arabic , Saw that interview and he is Named " Jack Winters " ,,,, Details in the Article about that Interview and it was addressed as Jack Winters Comment not The Iraqi Minister ( well i saw that interview and he said the same ) anyway to the Article ** :
----

Since 2005, it has been the Iraqi Army’s stated policy to keep the Soviet-designed tanks in one division, the 9th Division based at Taji. New, non-Soviet design tanks would go to upgrade other divisions. That policy has colored all analysis and projections of where the new M1A1 tanks and M1126 Stryker Armored Personnel Carriers (APC) were likely to go first. That policy has changed according to an 18 August 2009 comment by Jack Winters:



"On another topic about the M1 and where they're going to go, that question was asked by reporters to the defense minister; and he said they're going to the Ninth Div, and the T72's are going to go to other units in the army. So the idea they are going to go to Baghdad div is not in the mind set of the MOD."



This new detail significantly changes the probable distribution of Iraqi armor over the next 18 months and makes previous predictions obsolete. [The devil is in the details. Even small details can change everything]



This could also explain some of the confusing reporting recently concerning the 52nd Brigade’s (14th IA Division) Combined Arms Live Fire Exercise (CALFEX) in Basrah.



The question becomes, where is the armor currently in 9th Division and the not yet delivered two battalions of T72s going? To make such a prediction, there are several additional details that need to be considered:



1. The comment said "units". Plural. This means the Iraqi Minister of Defense is talking spreading the armor out as the 9th Division upgrades to M1A1s and Strykers. Probably in brigade strength since the support battalions are at that level but, to several different divisions.



2. The last 9010 Quarterly Report to Congress said that the Iraqi Army is looking at converting “4th Battalions” to support units. E.G. Use the two battalions of M113 APCs in 9th Division for mortar carriers and mechanized combat service support (CSS). That removes those two battalions from the equation as mechanized reconnaissance battalions. The new brigades would need brigade support battalions, so new BSBs would be formed utilizing the redistributed armor. Plus the current and future brigades are adding 120mm mortars to their strength. Some of those M113 APCs will probably be converted to mortar carriers.



3. 52nd Brigade (14th Division) was called a "Navy Brigade" in the press report on the CALFEX in Basrah. Also, the 14th Division already has a T55/BMP1-equipped tank battalion attached from 9th Division. That battalion is from the same brigade reported as having tank crews training on M1A1s.



4. The Presidentials were always described as planned to be a mix of armor, motorized, and light infantry. So far, the three brigades are only light infantry. Two of the brigades are missing battalions.



5. Not including the M1A1s and Strykers, there are approximately 24 tank/APC equipped battalions. If you consider the M113s as probable mechanized CSS or mortar carriers, that is enough armor for seven brigades:

9th Division is over strength by three battalions (15 line battalions):

* Two T72/BMP1-equipped tank battalions,
* Two T72/BMP1-equipped armored cavalry battalions,
* Two T55/BMP1-equipped tank battalions,
* Two BMP1-equipped “tank” battalions,
* One Type 63-equipped mechanized reconnaissance battalion,
* Two M113-equipped mechanized reconnaissance battalions,
* One EE9-equipped light armored reconnaissance battalion, and
* Three BTR80-equipped mechanized battalions.

To be delivered (two battalions):

* Two tank battalion’s worth of T72 tanks from Slovakia, donated by NATO.

Elsewhere in the Iraqi Army (6 or more battalions):

* Three BMP1-equipped “tank” battalions,
* One salvaged wheeled APC equipped motorized battalion, and
* At least two M113-equipped mechanized or mechanized engineer battalions.



6. The armor that is not assigned to the 9th Division is on attachment from 9th Division, and stated plans indicates the probable distribution of 9th Division’s armor as it upgrades:

* 14th Division in Basrah has the T55/BMP-equipped 1-36 Tank Battalion attached from 9th Division.
* 7th Division’s 29th Brigade in western Anbar has two BMP1-equipped “tank” battalions.
* 11th Division’s 44th Brigade in Sadr City has one BMP1-equipped “tank” battalion.
* 5th Division’s 20th Brigade in Diyala has two under strength battalions of salvaged APCs.
* 3rd Division (probably 11th Brigade) in western Ninawa has an unknown number of M113s.
* The Presidential Brigades and Baghdad Brigade have always been planned to be a mix of
armor, motorized, and light infantry. So far those three brigades are only light infantry. Two the three brigades are missing battalions.



[Have I completely confused you yet? Remember the basic policy change became known to me on 18 August 2009. What is the date of this post? How long has it taken me to put all this together? How long to make sense of all these factors? “Everything is simple in the military, and the simplest things in the military are most difficult.”]



What this means is the listed 9th Division brigades/battalions in detail 5 are being transferred to the brigades listed in detail 6. This means that Ninawa, Diyala, Anbar, and Basrah provinces are converting or expanding forces to a full-strength mechanized or armored brigade assigned to a division in each. One of the replaced brigades appears to be becoming an Iraqi Marine Brigade. The first upgrade and formation of the 5-36 Armor Battalion is already happening. The shift of forces has is already beginning with Basrah but, it was obscured by the previous policy.

The T55/BMP-equipped 1-36 Tank Battalion from 9th Division is attached to 14th Division in Basrah. The recent reference to 52nd Brigade (14 Div) as “Navy” and the recent training of members of the new 5-36 Tank Battalion on M1A1s indicate the 36th Armor Brigade (9th Division) is the first to upgrade to M1A1s. As the 36th Brigade upgrades, the 1-36 Tank Battalion in Basrah will probably be joined by the 2-36 “Tank” Battalion (BMP1s), and 3-36 Armored Cavalry Battalion (T72/BMP1) forming a new 52nd Armored Brigade with the addition of a new BSB.



The existing 52nd Brigade (14th Division) appears to be transferring to the Iraqi Marines.



The 3rd Division’s (probably) 11th Brigade in western Ninawa and the 11th Division’s 44th Brigade in east Baghdad will add armor and BSBs, becoming mechanized or armored brigades.



The 7th Division’s 29th Brigade in west Anbar and the 5th Division’s 20th Brigade in Diyala will each gain a tank battalion and a BSB, finishing their conversion to the 20th and 29th Mechanized Brigades.



The 37th Brigade (9th Division) is uniquely equipped with EE9 90mm gun armed Scout Cars and BTR-80 APCs organized in four battalions. I had asked repeatedly if the Iraqis were going to equip the Presidentials with the 37th Brigade's armor in early 2007. At the time, this was not planned. With the planned upgrade of the 9th Division, the 37th Brigade's armor and the two new tank battalions-worth of T72s are probably going to the 2nd Presidential Brigade and Baghdad Brigade. The praetorian brigades would get:

* Baghdad Brigade becomes armored: Two T72-equipped armored battalions formed from Slovakian donated tanks probably are to be formed and the existing 1st Baghdad Infantry Battalion upgraded with BTR80s transferred from the 37th Brigade.
* 2nd Presidentials become motorized: The EE9’s of the 4-37 Light Armored Reconnaissance Battalion will probably be added to form a new battalion and the two existing infantry battalions would be upgraded to motorized with the remaining 37th Brigade BTR80s.
* 1st Presidentials has the personal security role and would remain primarily light infantry mounted on HMMWVs.



If you factor in delivery time for the M1A1s and Strykers, this initial redistribution will happen over the next 18 months.



There are still a few more details missing concerning the redistribution of armor in Iraqi forces. For example:

* How much functional or salvageable armor does the Peshmerga have from the salvage of the old Iraqi Army’s1st Mechanized Division and 5th Mechanized Division plus other IA in the north from 2003? (This is estimated at a minimum of two brigade’s worth.)
* How much of the KRG's armor is going to the IA with the absorption of the Peshmerga?If there is enough and they are available, they could further upgrade more brigades of the Iraqi Army or they could incorporate a mechanized or armored brigade in the transferred Peshmerga Divisions.



It is possible that this analysis is wrong and the IA is not upgrading brigades and reinforcing locations that have armor already. Alternatively, they might:

* Start the formation of the 18th Mechanized Division in Maysan and/or 19th Mechanized Division in Wassit from the 9th Division’s replaced armor,
* Spread the replaced 9th Division armor and mechanized brigades/battalions throughout more divisions, or
* The Iraqi Army could go with independent brigades. Etc.



All predictions and analysis of Iraqi armor distribution in the near future are affected by this policy change in armor distribution. In September 2009, the 5-36 Armor Battalion will have its full strength of M1A1 crews trained. As the 5-36 completes battalion level training this fall, the next transfer of of a battalion to the provinces should occur.

--------------------------------

I was Fully Confused at first but if you read every word you will understand :)

Cheers ,,,
Almaleki

Okay,


Iraq is in the process of recieving a estimated figure of 270 BTR-80 upgraded from Ukraine, where are they all going, as you can see there is enough vehicles for around 5 battalions, also what is the status of the Pakistani APC vehicles ALTAL that Iraq recieved.

[Almaleki]

Iraq Already have BTR-80 and his Tank Recon Mission is Given to the BMP-1/2 and the APC role to the Stryker /// the Pakistani Donation as i know was a canx ... i have no Joy on a New BTR-80 Donation .. as the APC role will be used by Stryker ...

[eckherl]

Iraq Already have BTR-80 and his Tank Recon Mission is Given to the BMP-1/2 and the APC role to the Stryker /// the Pakistani Donation as i know was a canx ... i have no Joy on a New BTR-80 Donation .. as the APC role will be used by Stryker ...

Whats wrong with the uparmored BTR-80s, surely they could have some use in a urbanized role. Also how many of the Pakistan APCs did Iraq get.

[Almaleki]

no ,, when i say " No Joy " it means " Negative " i told i heard that those Were canx before 1.5 Year ago

[Tavarisch]

Whats wrong with the uparmored BTR-80s, surely they could have some use in a urbanized role. Also how many of the Pakistan APCs did Iraq get.

What kind of "up-armored" BTR-80s would those be? I'm just curious. Would they be able to, say, survive at least one round from a short range AT launcher?

[eckherl]

What kind of "up-armored" BTR-80s would those be? I'm just curious. Would they be able to, say, survive at least one round from a short range AT launcher?

Ukrainian rebuilds, more than likely could not take a flank RPG 7 shot, not Ukrainian gen 1 version at least.

[Tavarisch]

Ukrainian rebuilds, more than likely could not take a flank RPG 7 shot, not Ukrainian gen 1 version at least.

Well, I guess it's a start for the Iraqis. Hopefully, they don't stick to these forever. There are plenty of other options out there, cost notwithstanding.

[eckherl]

As a follow up,

Iraq will recieve 70 additional T-72's from NATO friendly countries, two BMP 1 battalions will be getting upgraded to either M1's or T-72's.

[cameron200]

Iraq Already have BTR-80 and his Tank Recon Mission is Given to the BMP-1/2 and the APC role to the Stryker /// the Pakistani Donation as i know was a canx ... i have no Joy on a New BTR-80 Donation .. as the APC role will be used by Stryker ...

You have to understand that iraqs military once more will be filled with russian junk if even in the wildest deams of iraq they can buy US or european weapons they can never get thier minds around how to use them well. the small amount of tanks and APC that were sold to them were just done to fet them started of to get ride of the burden of doing most of the job (US). Even the air force will most likely buy russian Migs or su 27 the US will never sell F16 OR ANY OTHER FIGHTER to the iraqi government just for the fact that you are the secound most corrupt nation on the planet with close ties to Iran so think logically will the US ever sell these weapons to iraq no way in hell and the little bit that they will do will be so inferor that will pose no threat to any one. so am sorry to tell u but it seems in Easter block junk for Iraq againe T72 and BTR systems

[eckherl]

You have to understand that iraqs military once more will be filled with russian junk if even in the wildest deams of iraq they can buy US or european weapons they can never get thier minds around how to use them well. the small amount of tanks and APC that were sold to them were just done to fet them started of to get ride of the burden of doing most of the job (US). Even the air force will most likely buy russian Migs or su 27 the US will never sell F16 OR ANY OTHER FIGHTER to the iraqi government just for the fact that you are the secound most corrupt nation on the planet with close ties to Iran so think logically will the US ever sell these weapons to iraq no way in hell and the little bit that they will do will be so inferor that will pose no threat to any one. so am sorry to tell u but it seems in Easter block junk for Iraq againe T72 and BTR systems

I think that you should do some research before making comments like this, Iraq more than likely will be flying the F-16 and getting additional M1 series tanks with some advance features including TUSK armor upgrade packages, the U.S is commited for a long term goal of Iraqs security, we can achieve this with less boots on the ground. Russia is more than likely quite pissed off seeings how Ukraine has won arms purchases over them, and we are talking a large amount of money for aircraft trainers, helicopters, APC's and T-72 upgrades, so not Russian junk but Ukrainian.;) (That was a joke).

[cameron200]

i think that you should do some research before making comments like this, iraq more than likely will be flying the f-16 and getting additional m1 series tanks with some advance features including tusk armor upgrade packages, the u.s is commited for a long term goal of iraqs security, we can achieve this with less boots on the ground. Russia is more than likely quite pissed off seeings how ukraine has won arms purchases over them, and we are talking a large amount of money for aircraft trainers, helicopters, apc's and t-72 upgrades, so not russian junk but ukrainian.;) (that was a joke).

buddy ive done enough research the fact the us paid most of the money for those weapons from ukranine shows that they are more then happy for iraq to get only eastern block weapons, there are may reasons for that one iraq cant afford most of them even with oil deals that toke place which will take 6 years to take affect and thats if the iraqis dont screw it up. And the secound the us and most of the european nations do not trust iraq yet and that will take years to put right but iraqs worme realation ship with iran and the majority shitte population means that trust will never be there. It is true that u have some us weapons but the reason for that is simple to reduce the number of us soldiers in the citys now that has happaned there is less reasons for the us sell heavey weapons to iraq such as f16 duo to fear it might fall into iranian hands. So sorry to let u know but all recent sighns show that iraq army will still be built with russian and chines weapons lets face it iraq will never be turky or saudi or uae for that matter

[cameron200]

I think that you should do some research before making comments like this, Iraq more than likely will be flying the F-16 and getting additional M1 series tanks with some advance features including TUSK armor upgrade packages, the U.S is commited for a long term goal of Iraqs security, we can achieve this with less boots on the ground. Russia is more than likely quite pissed off seeings how Ukraine has won arms purchases over them, and we are talking a large amount of money for aircraft trainers, helicopters, APC's and T-72 upgrades, so not Russian junk but Ukrainian.;) (That was a joke).

Text deleted.they should as the french to sell some of thier weapons as this will but some pressur on the US but still then majority weapons will be easter block weapons with t72 making up most of the tanks and migs or su27 for the air force

Mod edit: Deleted derogatory comments. See later post for warning issued.
-Preceptor

[the road runner]

Iraq more than likely will be flying the F-16 and getting additional M1 series tanks with some advance features including TUSK armor upgrade packages,).

Have to agree .....i see no reason why the US would not sell a version of the F-16 to Iraq.

Iraq has show alot of intrest in the F-16,and with US troops set to leave iraq by 2012,i would hope a contract will be signed soon.

Iraq seeks to buy US-made F-16 fighter jets - Times Online (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/article6017412.ece)

Iraq aims to buy 18 F-16 fighters in '09 | Reuters (http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE53035J20090401)

As for M1 Abrams,Iraq has shown intrest aswell....

You never know what santa is going to bring:)

Regards

[Feanor]

What's wrong with the BTR-80? As a (lightly) armored taxi it's quite capable.

[cameron200]

Have to agree mate.....i see no reason why the US would not sell a version of the F-16 to Iraq.

Iraq has show alot of intrest in the F-16,and with US troops set to leave iraq by 2012,i would hope a contract will be signed soon.

Iraq seeks to buy US-made F-16 fighter jets - Times Online (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/article6017412.ece)

Iraq aims to buy 18 F-16 fighters in '09 | Reuters (http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE53035J20090401)

As for M1 Abrams,Iraq has shown intrest aswell....

You never know what santa is going to bring:)

Regards

yes i understand they show intrest these reports have been going around for a year they have also shown intrest in 2000 t72m's. but the US is worried about iraq after the pull out after the recent rise in violnce ut shows iraq cant take of it self duo to corrupt military who mainly are shia and loyal to iran. i think migs are on the horizon or if the french agree maybe mirage 2000

[Onkel]

yes i understand they show intrest these reports have been going around for a year they have also shown intrest in 2000 t72m's. but the US is worried about iraq after the pull out after the recent rise in violnce ut shows iraq cant take of it self duo to corrupt military who mainly are shia and loyal to iran. i think migs are on the horizon or if the french agree maybe mirage 2000

Do you speculate or have you sources for this?

[eckherl]

buddy ive done enough research the fact the us paid most of the money for those weapons from ukranine shows that they are more then happy for iraq to get only eastern block weapons, there are may reasons for that one iraq cant afford most of them even with oil deals that toke place which will take 6 years to take affect and thats if the iraqis dont screw it up. And the secound the us and most of the european nations do not trust iraq yet and that will take years to put right but iraqs worme realation ship with iran and the majority shitte population means that trust will never be there. It is true that u have some us weapons but the reason for that is simple to reduce the number of us soldiers in the citys now that has happaned there is less reasons for the us sell heavey weapons to iraq such as f16 duo to fear it might fall into iranian hands. So sorry to let u know but all recent sighns show that iraq army will still be built with russian and chines weapons lets face it iraq will never be turky or saudi or uae for that matter

For one, I am not your buddy nor anyone elses.;)

Iraq is not only getting Ukrainian but U.S weapons platforms also, who cares what the monetary arrangements are, do you think that the U.S is the only country that may be contributing to Iraqs cause, my country did a pretty good job of destroying most of Iraqs infrastructure and there is many priorities that are at bay in terms of what needs to be addressed for the sake of the Iraqi people, with that said Iraq is doing pretty good with it`s oil output for funding some of these projects that are currently under way, things will hopefully get better in time. I do not think that the version of F-16 that my country decides to part with will be a show stopper if the Iranians get there hands on one, Iran could quite easily give good old Hugo Chavez a holler if they need information in regards to some of the technologies of that aircraft model. For the Iraqi needs assessment it only makes sense that they go with some of the Russian designed based vehicles, they can get their hands on them rather quickly while the more advanced model purchases are being converted or manufactured, be it from the U.S or anyone else for that matter, I bet that the new Iraq army with support will do just fine regardless of what type of vehicles that they are sporting, you under estimate along with some others that may be on this forum vehicle capability in regards to Russian designed weapons systems, a well trained and structured army would be quite potent and a force to be reckoned with.

[eckherl]

What's wrong with the BTR-80? As a (lightly) armored taxi it's quite capable.

There is nothing wrong with it, for urbanized settings or recon missions it is a capable vehicle that will serve a purpose with some countries, this vehicle design can be upgraded also to fit the theater of operations that it will serve in. With that said though I must add that I am not a fan of side mounted exit doors.

[eckherl]

Have to agree mate.....i see no reason why the US would not sell a version of the F-16 to Iraq.

Iraq has show alot of intrest in the F-16,and with US troops set to leave iraq by 2012,i would hope a contract will be signed soon.

Iraq seeks to buy US-made F-16 fighter jets - Times Online (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/article6017412.ece)

Iraq aims to buy 18 F-16 fighters in '09 | Reuters (http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE53035J20090401)

As for M1 Abrams,Iraq has shown intrest aswell....

You never know what santa is going to bring:)

Regards

Yes, we are scrambling to lesson our burden and place it with the Iraqis but we will be giving them support for a very long time and rightfully so. I think that by the next month or two we will have a somewhat sketchy picture on the amount of F-16s that will be purchased by Iraq. I know that it was just announced that Turkey is getting additional F-16s and this may extend out on when Iraq will start getting phased in with aircraft and support, if this is even the case.

[cameron200]

For one, I am not your buddy nor anyone elses.;)

Iraq is not only getting Ukrainian but U.S weapons platforms also, who cares what the monetary arrangements are, do you think that the U.S is the only country that may be contributing to Iraqs cause, my country did a pretty good job of destroying most of Iraqs infrastructure and there is many priorities that are at bay in terms of what needs to be addressed for the sake of the Iraqi people, with that said Iraq is doing pretty good with it`s oil output for funding some of these projects that are currently under way, things will hopefully get better in time. I do not think that the version of F-16 that my country decides to part with will be a show stopper if the Iranians get there hands on one, Iran could quite easily give good old Hugo Chavez a holler if they need information in regards to some of the technologies of that aircraft model. For the Iraqi needs assessment it only makes sense that they go with some of the Russian designed based vehicles, they can get their hands on them rather quickly while the more advanced model purchases are being converted or manufactured, be it from the U.S or anyone else for that matter, I bet that the new Iraq army with support will do just fine regardless of what type of vehicles that they are sporting, you under estimate along with some others that may be on this forum vehicle capability in regards to Russian designed weapons systems, a well trained and structured army would be quite potent and a force to be reckoned with.
first of all u can kiss my Expletive deleted, secound of all you live in a dream land let them take of thier own problems and am not saing iran wants the technology am saing they want the jet do u think iraq can pull it self out of the civil war if u do u realy need to get you head out of the clouds those iraqis nd Arabs can never work togather now you think the US government is going to give them weapons

Mod Edit: Warning issued. Abide by the forum rules (http://defencetalk.com/forums/rules.php) which amongst other things means no derogatory comments about other nations, or other forum members. Also, no using foul language. It is not necessary, does not add weight to ones argument and brings down the quality of discussion. Failure to comply will result in a relatively short stay on DT.
-Preceptor

[sunshin3]

first of all u can kiss my Expletive deleted, secound of all you live in a dream land let them take of thier own problems and am not saing iran wants the technology am saing they want the jet do u think iraq can pull it self out of the civil war if u do u realy need to get you head out of the clouds those iraqis nd Arabs can never work togather now you think the US government is going to give them weapons

I would strongly recommend you re-think that last comment, as well as your tone and style of engagement. eckherl has expertise in armour vehicles and is a war veteran. Whereas you are just an insolent kid. Therefore I strongly urge you to re-think on your mode of engagement on DT. With respect to Iraqi armour, I would read what eckherl says more carefully.

BTW I always enjoy reading his lucid and insightful posts in sharp contrast to your knowledge poor drivel.

[cameron200]

I would strongly recommend you re-think that last comment, as well as your tone and style of engagement. eckherl has expertise in armour vehicles and is a war veteran. Whereas you are just an insolent kid. Therefore I strongly urge you to re-think on your mode of engagement on DT. With respect to Iraqi armour, I would read what eckherl says more carefully.

BTW I always enjoy reading his lucid and insightful posts in sharp contrast to your knowledge poor drivel.

is it i realy belive that, it seems every one is a veteran on this sight or maybe just some computer nerds with too much time beside the discussion is between me and him why u getting involved we have a diffrence of opinion so u just mind your own business unless you have some think to add to it

Mod. last warning on how you engage,

[the road runner]

is it i realy belive that, it seems every one is a veteran on this sight or maybe just some computer nerds with too much time beside the discussion is between me and him why u getting involved we have a diffrence of opinion so u just mind your own business unless you have some think to add to it


Seems like there is no christmas spirit hear.:heart
Cameron i would think that you would realise that alot of ex service men and women from all over the world have joined this forum.

Im just a civilian who has an intrest in defence matters.
Lucky for me i can ask questions and learn from members who have first hand knowladge.

We should be thankful they take the time out to teach us punters.Also the defence personel are screened by the members hear,so we dont have Sparks or kopp leading the blind.....

Regards

[sunshin3]

is it i realy belive that, it seems every one is a veteran on this sight or maybe just some computer nerds with too much time beside the discussion is between me and him why u getting involved we have a diffrence of opinion so u just mind your own business unless you have some think to add to it

His credentials are verified by the Mods on the board. I'm intervening only because you have obviously not read the rules and you are obviously not aware that you are interacting with someone who is in the know. I'm a civilian and female. And even I find your whiny nonsense irritating.

It's a privilege to interact and learn from actual professionals who know what they are talking about. Stop behaving like a child and do the right thing. Behave. IMHO, if you don't like the rules here and tone of other forum members like me, feel free to join other forums and spew your bile there.

His opinion is based on combat experience and years of in-depth work in the relevant field. Therefore his opinion is valued in this forum. OTOH, given the quality of your posts, I really don't give a hoot about your opinion.

[gf0012-aust]

it seems every one is a veteran on this sight

Everyone who is a defence professional goes through a validation process. that means they are either confirmed through a contact in the military they work in, through contacts in the defence sector, through official defence and military email addresses, or via their discharge papers

there are any number of people who have come in here and claimed to be ex service, or ex industry and found out to be liars. they're banned for life immediately.

I'd worry about how you present before worrying about the credentials of others who are identified as DefProfs.(blue)

It would be worth your while to note that there are also Senior Members (green) who are also ex industry or ex service and don't want to make it common knowledge.

in short, the quality of debate will be pretty self evident in the end.

also, a number of the Mods (red) and Super Mods (brown) also have either service or industry credentials.

[Feanor]

In other words, cameron, stop being rude, and demonstrate some knowledge if you want to argue a point. So far you've made generalized commentary, and opinionated judgement calls that are at odds with what professionals in the field have to say. You've not demonstrated any graps of the subject. Yet you have already demonstrated a rather uncivil approach to discussions, and a complete unwillingness to read what others have to say.

[eckherl]

first of all u can kiss my Expletive deleted, secound of all you live in a dream land let them take of thier own problems and am not saing iran wants the technology am saing they want the jet do u think iraq can pull it self out of the civil war if u do u realy need to get you head out of the clouds those iraqis nd Arabs can never work togather now you think the US government is going to give them weapons

Mod Edit: Warning issued. Abide by the forum rules (http://defencetalk.com/forums/rules.php) which amongst other things means no derogatory comments about other nations, or other forum members. Also, no using foul language. It is not necessary, does not add weight to ones argument and brings down the quality of discussion. Failure to comply will result in a relatively short stay on DT.
-Preceptor

:onfloorl: Again, you keep stating that the U.S will not give them weapons, but we are giving them weapons, Iraq has started training with those weapons.

PS: If that is the worst thing that people will say to me then I am doing pretty good, please calm down.

[cameron200]

:onfloorl: Again, you keep stating that the U.S will not give them weapons, but we are giving them weapons, Iraq has started training with those weapons.

PS: If that is the worst thing that people will say to me then I am doing pretty good, please calm down.

sorry am not saing the US is not giving weapons, but not or will not give f16 the fact is iraq today was pretty much invaded by iran
AFP: Iraq protests against Iranian takeover of oil well (http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jfcON_F5mmKkLQAhyxFAF9B1pURg)
yet iraqi government did little or nothing do stop this. this shows the corruption and loyalty to prety much a terrorist nation (iran), so do you belive that the US will sell those f16 to a nation whos loyalty is not to iraq but to iran , and this is not my opinion the US governmet has stated many time that the iraqi government is full of iranin loyalist. we may sell them weapons but nothing too important to pose a threat to other nations such as saudi or israel which f16 will do and i know in those little numbers is a small threat but the threat will still be there selling small arms is diffrent to selling fighters or large amount of tanks.

[Feanor]

There we go. See? A civil, relatively nuanced, and well founded argument. :) But the M1 Abrams deal is all but complete. Morever at this point the F-16 is not all that new or impressive, in particular the variant that will get sold to Iraq. So in all honesty. I don't see anything stopping the deal from going through.

[cameron200]

There we go. See? A civil, relatively nuanced, and well founded argument. :) But the M1 Abrams deal is all but complete. Morever at this point the F-16 is not all that new or impressive, in particular the variant that will get sold to Iraq. So in all honesty. I don't see anything stopping the deal from going through.

lol. i agree 110% the f16 is not the best fighter in the world yet is better then most of iran fighters. but if the sell does go though plus moew m1 thanks to a government that in all honesty can turn on us in a blink of a eye just like iran did in 1979. now is our government willing to take that risk i think not even the one of the iraqi minister has stated that they are looking for other fighters as the f16 deal is some what a long shot, now the french, russian and china is willing to sell weapons so maybe iraq will turn to them

[Feanor]

In all honesty if Iran does get their hands on some F-16 technology, this will mean little for the balance of power. It will be quite some time before that technology finds it's way into Iranian aircraft, and by the time it does it really won't matter.