The U.S. Army, which has only the most rudimentary understanding of operational art, William S. Lind says, has designed its tanks, especially the M-1 Abrams, for tactical utility with little thought for operational mobility:
This is typical of Second Generation, French-model armies. The Abrams is essentially the latest version of the French Char B.
In contrast, German and Soviet tanks were designed to serve a doctrine of operational mobility. Not many years ago, a friend of mine was being shown over the German Leopard II tank by a German officer, who kept stressing the tank’s wide tracks. Puzzled, the American finally asked, “What’s the big deal about wide tracks?” The German officer replied, “The Pripet marshes!”
Yeah, this is why the U.S. keeps losing wars to those countries that use Soviet-bloc equipment…
Lind is a buffoon. This is certainly not to say that the U.S. military is not in need of reform, but had we taken the advice of “reformers” such as Lind and James Fallows back in the 1980′s, we would be in much worse shape today.