Peshmerga

[alan131210]

Yes the BMP-1 is possible I think i have seen one can't remember which video but the other one I don't think so .

[ideas]

Sheytan the Peshmerga has some MRAPS, a very small amount, I think British made. I saw them on the border with Turkey with Zakho. They should invest in more. I don't believe the Peshmerga can make much use of tanks, maybe some to defend the plains, but other than that, they will be useless, infact I'd rather have some sophisticated MANPADs than tanks.

In my opinion:

1. Transport/attack helicopters.
3. Sophisticated air-defense weapons.
2. Quick armoured vehicles (MRAPS etc)
3. MANPADs
4. Heavy artillery and light artillery installed in remote mountainous locations.
5. Mortars and automatic grenade luachners.

A battalion of tank destroyers armed with modern MANPADs is much better and cheaper than a division of tanks for the Peshmerga, quite frankly.

[alan131210]

Ideas yes we should have a well trained battalion of MANPADS as well as a battalion of advanced tanks . Those t-72s can be upgraded to t-90s as well.

[Rando]

here is a smaller size , if you want to remove one of them

btw they are Peshmerge of Kirkuk.

what weapon is he holding? M4?

[ideas]

Alan. Tanks should not be our main priority because without proper air defense they will be vulnerable to air attacks, where as a group of men armed with sophisticated MANPADs will be less vulnerable and can even have some degree of air defense, off course without air defense the whole ground force would be vulnerable and so the main priority should be air defense for Kurdistan.

Besides, I think the US is planning to build a base in Kurdistan by the looks of the building going on around Hawler. Though we shouldn't be overdependent on a force that can and will leave at some point.

[alan131210]

this is called "Gyro-copter" and now Sulaimani has bought some as well

http://gksat.tv/Default.aspx?page=article&id=571&l=3

[brendar]

What is the role of that small plane? looks nice though

[alan131210]

What is the role of that small plane? looks nice though

they can be used for military means

military copter

[alan131210]

BMP-1 + T-55

[crazyhorse]

Destroyed by the brave Peshmerga of Kurdistan with their light arms!

[alan131210]

Amna suraka

[diako_ber]

here is a smaller size , if you want to remove one of them

btw they are Peshmerge of Kirkuk.

what weapon is he holding? M4?

I think an m16 with red dot

[sheytanElKebir]

Sheytan the Peshmerga has some MRAPS, a very small amount, I think British made. I saw them on the border with Turkey with Zakho. They should invest in more. I don't believe the Peshmerga can make much use of tanks, maybe some to defend the plains, but other than that, they will be useless, infact I'd rather have some sophisticated MANPADs than tanks.

In my opinion:

1. Transport/attack helicopters.
3. Sophisticated air-defense weapons.
2. Quick armoured vehicles (MRAPS etc)
3. MANPADs
4. Heavy artillery and light artillery installed in remote mountainous locations.
5. Mortars and automatic grenade luachners.

A battalion of tank destroyers armed with modern MANPADs is much better and cheaper than a division of tanks for the Peshmerga, quite frankly.

hi ideas.

The Zerevani AT105 Saxons are not MRAPS. What I mean is a fleet of "standardised" MRAP platform that can be used for a very wide variety of purposes.

I would fit these MRAPS with self defence measures and cages to give them a measure of protection better than most APCs. I would then use this "platform" as the basis for the full range of offensive and defensive "weapons stations" for the Kurdish Army. including a fire support vehicle "light tank" as well as "tank hunter" vehicles with anti tank missiles and SP artillery. This "commonality" ensures ease of maintenance for the Kurdish Army.

Also, these MRAPS are within the technological ability of Kurdistan to assemble locally and modify with necessary weapons stations locally too - with help from expert countries like South Africa.

For the tanks, there is NO POINT buying anything that doesn't match the M1A1SA / K2 tanks. As I wrote earlier, and you reiterated, tanks are needed only for the plains. but since Erbil is vulnerable to armoured blitzkrieg from the west and south, Kurdistan WILL need a considerable number of tanks there.

Air Defence is key. But its also important to make the "correct" choices. no point in spending a single penny on AAA, I would go for a short/medium altitude ground based mobile AD systems (russian is pretty good), and for the "high altitude" rely on the fighter jets.

[jjmuneer]

Couldn't T-90s go through and in mountains? For defending plains, why not just use land mines? Much cost effective if you ask me.

[sheytanElKebir]

Land mines won't protect you if your enemy is happy to use thermobaric weapons to clear routes. mines would delay them for about 5-10 minutes.

T90s may be better in mountains than heavy tanks, but they are still too heavy for the Mabey bridges criss crossing the Kurdish mountains and valleys. For that only landcruisers with weapons stations are useful.