• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

US to deliver M50(?) tanks to Lebanon

CougarKing

Army.ca Fixture
Inactive
Reaction score
0
Points
360
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
Published: 19 Dec 12:10 EST (17:10 GMT)

BEIRUT, Dec 19, 2008 - The United States plans to deliver M-50 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.

David Hale, U.S. deputy assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern affairs, denied the U.S. is in competition with Russia, which announced on Wednesday that it would give Lebanon 10 MiG-29 fighter jets.

"Support for the Lebanese Armed Forces remains a pillar of our Lebanon policy," he told reporters after a meeting with Prime Minister Fuad Siniora, without saying how many tanks the U.S. will supply.

"We are working to provide the training and equipment the LAF needs... to maintain internal security and to fight terrorism in Lebanon," Hale added.

In addition to supplying the tanks, the U.S. is "preparing a new package of assistance including close air support capabilities with precision weapons and urban combat gear much of which will also be provided in the spring of 2009."

The United States has given 410 million dollars in military aid to the Lebanese army since 2006 but this has been limited to light weapons and vehicles.

Hale said Russia's announcement on Wednesday was "a signal of strong international support for Lebanon, for its institutions, for the Lebanese Armed Forces."

"There is no competition," Hale added.

The 15-week battle the army fought against Islamists in the northern

Palestinian refugee camp of Nahr el-Bared in 2007 left over 160 soldiers dead and highlighted the need for improved military equipment and capabilities.
 
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.

All weapon systems on the M50 were limited in ammunition-carrying capacities. The 106mm recoilless rifles were limited to just 18 projectiles spread across the six guns. The 12.7mm spotting machine guns were limited to just 80 rounds of ammunition. Not to be left high and dry against advancing enemy infantrymen, an additional 7.62mm machine gun was mounted to the top of the turret for self-defense.

Besides the limited ammunition situation, crew quarters once inside the machine were cramped at best. Additionally the weapon systems could only be reloaded from outside the vehicle, exposing the crew to dangerous enemy fire. The system saw action in South Vietnam and in the hands of the United States Marines. No longer in service with the Marine Corps, no replacement vehicle was selected to succeed the M50 Ontos on the modern battlefield, the assumption being that other weapon systems are more likely up to the task of tank destroyer than a similar self-propelled recoiless rifle design like the Ontos.
 
I wonder how long it will be before Hizbollah is using all this new equipment ?
 
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
 
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
 
I would not have thought there were any left, but they say here Supershermans:

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

David Hale, US deputy assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern affairs, denied the US is in competition with Russia, which announced on Wednesday that it would give Lebanon 10 MiG-29 fighter jets.

"Support for the Lebanese Armed Forces remains a pillar of our Lebanon policy," he told reporters after a meeting with Prime Minister Fuad Siniora, without saying how many tanks the US will supply.

"We are working to provide the training and equipment the LAF needs... to maintain internal security and to fight terrorism in Lebanon," Hale added.

In addition to supplying the tanks, the US is "preparing a new package of assistance including close air support capabilities with precision weapons and urban combat gear much of which will also be provided in the spring of 2009."

The United States has given 410 million dollars in military aid to the Lebanese army since 2006 but this has been limited to light weapons and vehicles.

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.

A source at the U.S. administration told the daily As Safir on Thursday that the first batch consisting of 10 tanks will arrive in Beirut before May 2009.

The M60 main battle tanks are capable of defeating enemy forces. They are suitable as an assault weapon in offensive operations and can also be employed at night and under conditions of limited visibility.
   
 
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
 
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.
 
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.
 
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
 
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
 
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
 
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

BEIRUT: The Lebanese Army is incapable of integrating Hizbullah's fighters and weapons into its force, Defense Minister Elias Murr has said in an interview with Future Television. In the interview, aired Monday night, Murr said the army did not have the capacity to absorb Hizbullah's armed wing and warned that the continued presence of the group's weapons caches could serve as a pretext for another Israeli strike. 

"Why don't those who armed Hizbullah and claim to be keen on Lebanon provide the army with needed weapons?" he said. "I am keen on my country's safety and do not want to give Israel a pretext to destroy it again - on our heads - as it did in 2006."

Murr has presided over a large-scale re-equipping of the army. The United States has pledged $410 million of military aid, including training, Humvees and M-60 battle tanks. And last week during a trip to Moscow, Murr secured from Russia a promise to deliver 10 MiG-29 fighter-bombers.

While many parties in Lebanon have lauded the Russian aid, members of the March 8 opposition, particularly Hizbullah, have been relatively silent.

During the interview, Murr also offered a strong defense of parliamentary majority leader Saad Hariri, who is widely credited with helping to facilitate Lebanon's agreement with Russia over the 10 fighter-bombers.

"Are we supposed to hold Saad Hariri accountable because he helped us and because he used his good offices to arm the Lebanese military?" Murr asked. "I do not represent the Future bloc in the Cabinet, and I don't have personal interests with Hariri, but I say to those who criticized Hariri that it is important [to help] Lebanon."

"Let them achieve 10 percent of what Hariri has achieved instead of taking part of visits and flashy receptions. Then they can criticize him," Murr added.

His comments appeared to be aimed at Free Patriotic Movement leader Michel Aoun, who recently embarked on a high-profile visit to Syria.

Meanwhile, in an apparent setback to plans of full-scale armament, Germany is highly unlikely to deliver tanks to the Lebanese Army, according to sources familiar with the issue. President Michel Sleiman had asked for the tanks when he visited Berlin earlier this month.

The Central News Agency on Tuesday reported that Berlin had agreed to deliver 50 Leopard tanks, the heaviest combat tank the German Army has.

A spokeswoman for Germany's Economy Ministry, the body mainly responsible for authorizing arms exports, declined to comment Tuesday. "The work of the National Security Council is confidential," she said.

However, sources in Berlin pointed out that in Germany, arms exports to potential conflict areas were forbidden by law. Lebanon, they said, still was such an area and hence a delivery of tanks was "highly unlikely to say the very least."
 
Back
Top