http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1087100112849&p=1078027574121?

Jun. 13, 2004 23:31

By ARIEH O'SULLIVAN

The army is to decide this month whether to purchase the controversial Stryker, the US Army's advanced armored personnel carrier that has had mixed reviews in action in Iraq, senior IDF officers say.

The senior command in the Ground Forces Command is pushing to purchase a "critical mass" of Strykers to equip at least two brigades. They are expected to cost $1.5 million each, but will likely undergo reinforcement to make them more protected, boosting their cost by up to $500,000. Each US Army brigade equipped with Strykers contains 300 vehicles. Israeli brigades are smaller and the number would be considerably less. If chosen, the Stryker would seriously bury a plan by local industries to produce an armored personnel carrier for the IDF to replace the APCs currently in use.

OC Ground Forces Command Maj.-Gen. Yiftah Ron-Tal is a strong proponent of the Stryker, which was designed as the light, high-speed battle taxi tailor-made for urban conflict. Developed at a cost of $4 billion, the 19-ton Stryker is an eight-wheeled armored vehicle designed to be more mobile and more responsive than heavier tanks and treaded vehicles. The IDF wants to use it to replace the Vietnam-era M113 APCs and their variants, such as the ones destroyed last month in the Gaza Strip that killed 11 soldiers.

"The need for the future battlefield is for light armor, not heavy. So we don't want to get involved in manufacturing heavy armor," said a senior officer in the Ground Forces Command.

"This is a vehicle with an advanced computerized system [that is] easier to maneuver. Because it is on wheels it will reduce the destruction of urban infrastructures," another senior officer said.

IDF Armored Corps officers said that the Americans put a lot of faith in the Stryker and its invincibility to rocket-propelled grenades. The Americans have lauded the state-of-the-art Stryker as a very protective battle taxi. It has been layered with thick armor and enveloped in a "cage" to detonate rockets before they hit. But a number have been destroyed in Iraq by improvised explosive devices.

Newsweek reported recently that the Stryker also did not stand up to the protection criteria set by the American military. It reportedly was vulnerable to rocket-propelled grenades, bombs, and mines. The magazine also reported that American officers in Iraq were asking for more heavily armored vehicles, such as the Bradley. Critics of the Stryker in the US have attacked their vulnerable wheels and inadequate armor, but in Israel the focus is on the price tag.

The IDF would pay for "a few hundred" Strykers from the $2.2 billion in annual US military aid. According to a senior defense official, the state-owned plant that produces the Merkava tank and other upgraded APCs has put together a prototype of a heavy armored battle taxi that rivals the Stryker. It is called the Namer (Tiger), and is built on the chassis of the Merkava I tank. It too would cost $1m.-$2m. each. The drawback is that US military grant money could not be used to pay for these, since the bulk of that aid must be spent in the United States.

A senior officer in the Ground Forces Command said that this Israeli program could go ahead irrespective of the Stryker deal, since it involved a "heavy" APC, while the Strykers are "light." Opponents of the Stryker in the IDF said the US is putting pressure on Israel to procure it and make it part of the IDF's arsenal in order to enhance the Stryker's status.

Following the catastrophe last month in which the Palestinians succeeded in destroying two APCs, the army deployed its heavy Achzarit APCs, built on the chassis of Centurion tanks, which had been given to the Golani Brigade. The IDF also has developed other heavy APCs such as the Nagmachon and Nakpadon and Puma, built on the hull of Soviet T-52s. They are heavy and relatively slow, which serves Israel's conventional warfare plans. The Stryker is attractive, though, because it is quiet and speedy and made for the digitalized, urban battlefield, such as the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

I hope the IDF is smarter than that.  What they need is enhanced M113A3s with super charged diesels, band tracks, applique armor, and 25mm bushmasters.  Others could be equipped with 50 cal turrets to provide more space for dismounts.

If they do buy them I hope they use that thing within its limitations.  If they use them as IFVs the tangos will eat their lunch.  In some applications they are better as "battle taxis" than HMMWVs and trucks, but that is as far as the concept goes.

Hell, that is what the 3rd SBCT is doing anyway.  Their using that piece of shit within its limitations (on main roads) and maximizing the advanced electronics in them.  By not using them outside of their limitations they are avoiding getting too many of them chewed up by tango tactics, therefore it will make their performance here in Iraq look better on paper.

It is all a charrade.

"Do you know against what type of men you'll have to fight? We who dine on sharpened swords and drink down blazing tourches as our wine. Then for dessert they bring us broken Cretan darts and splintered pike shafts. Our pillows are shields and breastplates and beside our feet  lie bows and slings. We crown ourselves with catapult wreaths."  - Mnesimachus, Macedonian playwrite- 350 BC.  

I have nothing against mankind, its people I can't stand.