| Submit your comments on this article |
| Syria-Lebanon-Iran |
| Hezbollah's Creative Tactical Use of Anti-Tank Weaponry |
| 2006-08-16 |
| Posted by:anonymous5089 |
| #7 A major point is that this is "stand-off" weaponry, affording the Hezbos to take and avail themselves from high ground. BTW, my understanding is that the downed helo was due to an SA-7 SAM, not an antitank missile. |
| Posted by: Captain America 2006-08-16 21:57 |
| #6 It is not creative, the Marines were using Bazookas against Japanese pillboxes in WWII; as was the Army against German machine gun nests. Creative would be figuring out a software mod for the AT missiles that would make them useful against low-flying aircraft, or using them against an Israeli coastal attack ship. |
| Posted by: Shieldwolf 2006-08-16 18:55 |
| #5 well now we knwo their strategy |
| Posted by: honkey 2006-08-16 18:28 |
| #4 If it's the only way you can kill the enemy, it's a good idea. We use artillery instead. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2006-08-16 10:53 |
| #3 And firing AT missiles at infantry IS creative, if by 'creative' you mean 'stupid'. |
| Posted by: Oldcat 2006-08-16 10:50 |
| #2 Using expensive anti-tank weaponry (i.e. wire-guided missiles, not RPG's) against tanks isn't particularly creative. Neither is using it against buildings - something that GI's did in WWII. Hezbollah's use of these missiles is indicative not of their creativity, but of the deep pockets backing them - primarily Iran, but secondarily Syria. This isn't just a few million a year - Iran is supposedly spending hundreds of millions. Note that Uncle Sam spent a billion a year in Afghanistan to wear down the Soviet presence. The Iranians are showing that despite being far poorer than Uncle Sam, they are willing to spend what it takes to maintain a well-equipped proxy army in the Levant. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2006-08-16 10:47 |
| #1 Using expensive anti-tank weaponry (i.e. wire-guided missiles, not RPG's) against tanks isn't particularly creative. Neither is using it against buildings - something that GI's did in WWII. Hezbollah's use of these missiles is indicative not of their creativity, but of the deep pockets backing them - primarily Iran, but secondarily Syria. This isn't just a few million a year - Iran is supposedly spending hundreds of millions. Note that Uncle Sam spent a billion a year in Afghanistan to wear down the Soviet presence. The Iranians are showing that despite being far poorer than Uncle Sam, they are willing to spend what it takes to maintain a well-equipped proxy army in the Levant. |
| Posted by: Zhang Fei 2006-08-16 10:45 |