Is there something wrong with this comment? I think this guy has done a good job of it. Especially the last word- Perseverance.
Abu Akkrab Some guy from Ottawa, Canada writes: This is just like the old 'tracks and wheels' debate, eh Chris. The Iltis - GWagon debate is a red herring, the GWagons were already contracted for, but not ready for the first deployments to Kabul. The Armour Patrol Vehicles, however, were purchased to defeat a specific threat. I am confident that the tanks will be as successful as the LAV III in terms of throwing a new problem at the enemy. (Had the Mobile Gun System worked out, it would have provided a more operationally mobile and sustainable platform for direct fire.) Our field commanders’ likelihood of success will increase with a wider variety of equipment and flexibility of response. By changing and morphing tactics, Canadian soldiers can keep the Taliban guessing. In the end, it won't be the equipment that wins the day; it will be determination, flexibility of thought, and diversity of action (both lethal and non-lethal) by Canadian soldiers and their commanders. Remember the old Army adage, 'our priority is to equip the commander, not to command the equipment'. - Perseverance.
Posted 23/09/06 at 2:34 PM EDT | Link to Comment
edit to strike out offensive name.
