# US to deliver M50(?) tanks to Lebanon



## CougarKing (21 Dec 2008)

Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> odd...I thought the Lebanese were leaning towards the west. Guess not



Looks like you spoke too soon. Are we having a battle of wooing the Beirut government occurring here or something?

And M50s??? Please tell me this isn't just a typo or are they referring to Super Shermans or the Ontos??? They probably meant M60 MBTs?



> *U.S. to Supply Tanks to Lebanon in Spring 2009*
> http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=3871558&c=AME&s=TOP
> 
> Agence France-Presse
> ...


----------



## Cloud Cover (21 Dec 2008)

Probably meant to say 50 M-60's.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (21 Dec 2008)

Probably these M-50's (ONTOS) ;D

http://www.militaryfactory.com/armor/detail.asp?armor_id=205



> The impressive-looking M50 Ontos (in the Greek meaning "The Thing") was built to a United States Marine Corps tank destroyer specification. With five prototypes built, and each fitted with differing calibers of recoilless rifles, the T156 design was born. No fewer than 24 of the type were ordered for further trials, each armed with six of the powerful 106mm recoilless rifle type. From the T156 trials emerged the T156E2 which gave rise to the production M50 - each slightly modified from the predecessor. A switch to a Chrysler-based petrol engine produced 294 models of the M50A1 series, which in itself included evermore modifications to the system.
> 
> At it's core, the M56 was fitted with a common turret mounting six of the M40A1C recoilless rifles. Additionally, the top four 106mm mounts were fitted with 4 x 12.7mm (.50 caliber) heavy machine guns to act as spotters when aligning the main guns. The use of the spotting machine guns was directly after optical sighting was completed. The spotter machine guns were then fired to accurize contact. Shortly thereafter, the recoilless rifles could be fired with some degree of accuracy.
> 
> ...


----------



## tomahawk6 (21 Dec 2008)

I wonder how long it will be before Hizbollah is using all this new equipment ?


----------



## 1feral1 (21 Dec 2008)

I thought this eqpt was long since used as hard targets on ranges  ;D

The ole 106 R/R. I remember it well, but in Australia all have been either destroyed or turned into museum/garden guns.

OWDU


----------



## Nfld Sapper (21 Dec 2008)

Overwatch Downunder said:
			
		

> I thought this eqpt was long since used as hard targets on ranges  ;D
> 
> The ole 106 R/R. I remember it well, but in Australia all have been either destroyed or turned into museum/garden guns.
> 
> OWDU



 ;D
In related news Canada buys M50's from the US.

 ;D


----------



## larry Strong (27 Dec 2008)

I would not have thought there were any left, but they say here Supershermans:

http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=1370


----------



## Colin Parkinson (27 Dec 2008)

Larry Strong said:
			
		

> I would not have thought there were any left, but they say here Supershermans:
> 
> http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=1370



http://www.mishalov.net/military-vehicles/pictures/img_1915.html


----------



## Blackadder1916 (27 Dec 2008)

Larry Strong said:
			
		

> I would not have thought there were any left, but they say here Supershermans:
> 
> http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=1370



While some of the commentary and analysis from Debka.com is very fine work, I generally take what they have to say with a grain of salt and only after carefully comparing it to other sources.  In this case, I think that they simply took the original news story that incorrectly (either through a typo or bad fact checking) identified the tanks as M50s and continued from there.  What I did find interesting about the Debka piece are the claims of concern within Israel that these tanks (and other weapons) will eventually end up in Hezbollah's hands.  There has been very little (practically nonexistent) reporting about any official Israeli response to the US arms package to Lebanon.  There have been several news organizations (including AFP, the source attributed in the opening post) that correctly identified the tanks as M60s.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5iKZVr5Hgl_v_Dsv0qZYJLnjAOQQA


> US to supply tanks to Lebanon in spring 2009
> Dec 19, 2008
> 
> BEIRUT (AFP) — *The United States plans to deliver M-60 tanks to Lebanon in spring next year as part of a commitment to help the country's army, a senior US state department official said in Beirut on Friday*.
> ...



http://www.naharnet.com/domino/tn/NewsDesk.nsf/0/C3EB306D4CA2A8F3C225751C00391D43?OpenDocument


> 1st Batch of 66 U.S. Tanks to Arrive in Lebanon before May
> Beirut, 11 Dec 08, 11:09
> 
> *The U.S. Department of Defense is preparing to ship 66 M60 tanks to the Lebanese army.*
> ...


----------



## geo (27 Dec 2008)

M60s ??? 
well... Egypt had 1700 of the darned thing while Israel has (or had) +/- 850

might as well let lebanon have a few.  Not like 66 will make much of a difference if Lebanon picks a fight with it's neighbour


----------



## retiredgrunt45 (27 Dec 2008)

I also thought the M60's were all alocated to the target ranges. What's an M-60 going to do to, besides putting a few dents into an Israely merkava.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (28 Dec 2008)

currently they are using M48's and some T series tanks so the M60 will be welcome. A more robust Lebanese army will force Hezbollah to cover it's back at all times.


----------



## ironduke57 (28 Dec 2008)

There are also rumors that they get 50 Leo´s (probably 1´s) from us and maybe some tanks from Russia. Also already sometime ago they should had gotten some Leo´s from Belgium, but AFAIK through the political problem´s in Belgium there delivery was postponed.

Regards,
ironduke57


----------



## geo (28 Dec 2008)

To a mechanic, a mix of M48s, M60s + some T series + some Leo1s thrown in for good measure = one big headache & extremely long supply train.... not a good idea IMHO


----------



## ironduke57 (28 Dec 2008)

CSA 105 said:
			
		

> ...  I had never heard of the Belgian or German Leo 1 presence - interesting.  Do you have a link or more information on this?



Regarding Belgian Leo´s:
- http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/showthread.php?p=155335

Regarding rumors about German Leo´s:
- http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?t=148496

Regarding rumors about Russian Tanks:
- http://208.84.116.223/forums/index.php?showtopic=26953

Regards,
ironduke57


----------



## Blackadder1916 (28 Dec 2008)

ironduke57 said:
			
		

> There are also rumors that they get 50 Leo´s (probably 1´s) from us and maybe some tanks from Russia. Also already sometime ago they should had gotten some Leo´s from Belgium, but AFAIK through the political problem´s in Belgium there delivery was postponed.





			
				CSA 105 said:
			
		

> . . . .  I had never heard of the Belgian or German Leo 1 presence - interesting.  Do you have a link or more information on this?



I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for German Leopards to get to Lebanon, or for that matter any from Belgium (but that may be more likely).  While this latest round of rumours seem to have originated in the Middle Eastern media, there is nothing in the European press (that I've found in English language) that sheds any light on a change in German official policy with regards to providing weapons to that region.  The following article (from a  Lebanese outlet) is probably the most balanced piece I've come across with perhaps an accurate picture of the German government's response.

*Murr: Lebanese Army incapable of absorbing Hizbullah's assets*
http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=1&categ_id=2&article_id=98677


> 'I ... do not want to give Israel a pretext' for new war
> 
> By Nicholas Kimbrell and Fidelius Schmid Daily Star staff Wednesday, December 24, 2008
> 
> ...


----------

