- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: 1990 US Desert Storm armed forces vs 2025 US armed forces: Who wins?
Posted on 8/11/25 at 8:29 pm to northshorebamaman
Posted on 8/11/25 at 8:29 pm to northshorebamaman
In a tank war? Yes. With large armored formations.
1
Posted on 8/11/25 at 8:31 pm to weagle1999
Now do 1990 forces vs 1955 forces …
Its obvious now isnt it
Its obvious now isnt it
Posted on 8/11/25 at 8:32 pm to antibarner
quote:I thought the op said "1990 US Desert Storm armed forces vs 2025 US armed forces". It wouldn't be a 'tank war.' At least not for long.
In a tank war?
Posted on 8/11/25 at 8:38 pm to weagle1999
The 2025 Air Forces would be as invisible to the 1990 Air Forces as the 1990 Air Forces were to the 1990 Iraqis. Not to mention our armed forces have been fighting real combat for the last 25 years as opposed to the 1990 armed forces that had very few guys with the proverbial green ink in their flight logs that weren’t wearing stars.
I don’t think people appreciate just how much tech has improved.
I don’t think people appreciate just how much tech has improved.
Posted on 8/11/25 at 8:41 pm to antibarner
quote:
In a ground war im not so certain. Numbers matter. I think the Desert Storm troops would be better led and more experienced in that type of war. They would adapt.
That would be our main advantage. We were very much trained and equipped for a conventional combined arms war. And we’d definitely have numbers on our side.
In Desert Storm we had:
3 Armored Divisions
1 Cavalry Division (an armored division in every way except name)
2 Airborne Infantry Divisions
2 Mechanized Infantry Divisisions (one of which was reinforced with an Armored brigade to basically make it an armored division)
2 Marine Divisions (they were basically mechanized as well then)
2 Armored Cavalry Regiments
7 Artillery Brigades.
And that’s just counting what had there in Saudi Arabia ready to go into Iraq and Kuwait. There were still a number of divisions and brigades in the US, Germany, and Korea that were not even used.
The US Army today has only 1 armored division and I think 3 or 4 infantry divisions, and they’re light on armored vehicles compared to their 1990 counterparts.
Would our better training and numbers tip the scales against the advanced technology of today? That’s a matter of conjecture.
Posted on 8/11/25 at 8:42 pm to elprez00
quote:
I don’t think people appreciate just how much tech has improved.
We still have Ranger battalions for a reason. Does all the tech in the 160th make them both better? Yes, but technique, fitness, and all that jazz are pretty significant.
NSFW Language
Posted on 8/11/25 at 8:44 pm to weagle1999
Drones alone mean this is over before it starts.
The advances in night vision and thermals (and widespread training, adoption, and doctrine) are an enormous advantage as well.
I last wore a uniform 13 years ago, and the advances in drones - and the implications for the battlefield - since then are nothing short of astounding. Small unit handheld drones were pretty rudimentary last time I was deployed.
The other thing is that you’ve got a military now full of mid-level and senior enlisted and officers who fought two wars. Not exactly from peer to peer fights, but plenty of lessons would apply.
The advances in night vision and thermals (and widespread training, adoption, and doctrine) are an enormous advantage as well.
I last wore a uniform 13 years ago, and the advances in drones - and the implications for the battlefield - since then are nothing short of astounding. Small unit handheld drones were pretty rudimentary last time I was deployed.
The other thing is that you’ve got a military now full of mid-level and senior enlisted and officers who fought two wars. Not exactly from peer to peer fights, but plenty of lessons would apply.
Posted on 8/11/25 at 8:45 pm to weagle1999
1990 with 2025’s technology
Recruitment seems to be a bigger problem and so does retention
Recruitment seems to be a bigger problem and so does retention
This post was edited on 8/11/25 at 8:51 pm
Posted on 8/11/25 at 8:45 pm to northshorebamaman
quote:
the Fulda Gap.
Posted on 8/11/25 at 8:50 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
The US Army today has only 1 armored division and I think 3 or 4 infantry divisions,
1ID
2ID
3ID
4ID
10th MTN
25th ID
11th Airborne
82nd Airborne
101st Air Assault
1st Armor
1st Cav
eta- by strict interpretation to OP's wording ( 1990 US Desert Storm armed forces vs 2025 US armed forces) that's 11 army divisions in 2025 vs. 7 in Desert Storm
This post was edited on 8/11/25 at 9:00 pm
Posted on 8/11/25 at 8:51 pm to GeauxGutsy
quote:
The Veterans from the 1990’s are all drawing 100% disability.
This is 100% false. I will NEVER claim any disability from my service. I was honored to serve during Desert Storm.
Posted on 8/11/25 at 8:54 pm to AbuTheMonkey
quote:
The advances in night vision and thermals (and widespread training, adoption, and doctrine) are an enormous advantage as well.
I don’t know exactly what they have today that’s different from what we had in the 80s and early 90s. But I’ll say, and I’m only speaking for tanks here, we were fully capable of operating day or night either way using our thermal sights. In fact, we usually used our thermal sights even in the daytime because it made vehicle targets standout more. We could move and shoot in the middle of the night virtually the same as in broad daylight.
I don’t think infantry forces from that time had the same level of thermals as we did in the tanks (or on the Bradleys) though. They did have some night vision capabilities, but not like today where every grunt has them.
This post was edited on 8/11/25 at 8:58 pm
Posted on 8/11/25 at 8:57 pm to northshorebamaman
Oh yeah. I always forget the 4th and 25th ID.
I could be wrong, but aren’t most of the infantry divisions now what guys from my time would call light infantry divisions? I know none are categorized as mechanized infantry any longer.
What was your MOS? I was thinking you were a grunt but I can’t remember.
I could be wrong, but aren’t most of the infantry divisions now what guys from my time would call light infantry divisions? I know none are categorized as mechanized infantry any longer.
quote:
northshorebamaman
What was your MOS? I was thinking you were a grunt but I can’t remember.
This post was edited on 8/11/25 at 9:00 pm
Posted on 8/11/25 at 9:06 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:I'm a decade out of date on formations and doctrine, but no mech divisions anymore but there are BCT's that somewhat took that space. I was actually an 11m when I enlisted but we were folded into 11b a few years later.
I could be wrong, but aren’t most of the infantry divisions now what guys from my time would call light infantry divisions? I know none are categorized as mechanized infantry any longer.
Posted on 8/11/25 at 9:06 pm to weagle1999
Weaponry? 2025
Personnel? D.S.
Personnel? D.S.
Posted on 8/11/25 at 9:09 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
I don’t know exactly what they have today that’s different from what we had in the 80s and early 90s.
Darth I don’t doubt you and you actually drove Abrams so I’m not going to try to correct you. I worked with a guy that was in the SEAL teams. He used the 4 barrel NODs. He said it was like going from one of those fancy rear projection TVs to a 4k LED display.
From all the podcasts I’ve listened to with F35 pilots and their sighting system that projects on the helmet hud, they essentially have no loss of vision and spatial awareness in total darkness. That helmet and system is insanely awesome.
Again Darth, one day we need to do a teams meeting or something with some of the non-dick posters here. I’d love to hear Tanker stories. Don’t know any armor guys personally. Jocko did an episode with Gen Macfarland and I loved hearing the early 80s armor officer stories.
Posted on 8/11/25 at 9:11 pm to Darth_Vader
quote:
I don’t know exactly what they have today that’s different from what we had in the 80s and early 90s. But I’ll say, and I’m only speaking for tanks here, we were fully capable of operating day or night either way using our thermal sights. In fact, we usually used our thermal sights even in the daytime because it made vehicle targets standout more. We could move and shoot in the middle of the night virtually the same as in broad daylight. I don’t think infantry forces from that time had the same level of thermals as we did in the tanks (or on the Bradleys) though. They did have some night vision capabilities, but not like today where every grunt has them
Grunts were using PVS-7’s back then. The PSQ-20 is the platform of choice now for regular units. It’s like a Maserati vs. a 1990’s Toyota. Similar differences for mounted platforms on vehicles, tracked or not. The optics in a Stryker are a whole leap on their own. Also have to remember that today’s military all have the JBC; there wasn’t even an antecedent for it prior to 9/11.
This post was edited on 8/11/25 at 9:13 pm
Posted on 8/11/25 at 9:11 pm to northshorebamaman
quote:
I'm a decade out of date on formations and doctrine, but no mech divisions anymore but there are BCT's that somewhat took that space. I was actually an 11m when I enlisted but we were folded into 11b a few years later.
Yeah. I think 11M doesn’t even exist any more. I think when the army did away with mechanized infantry divisions, they did away with the 11M MOS. That was about rid same time they started replacing Bradleys in a lot of infantry battalions with Strykers I think. All that was well after my time though.
And speaking of doing away with MOS, I heard the army has now done away with 19D as well. That’s kinda surprising.
Posted on 8/11/25 at 9:23 pm to elprez00
quote:
Darth I don’t doubt you and you actually drove Abrams so I’m not going to try to correct you. I worked with a guy that was in the SEAL teams. He used the 4 barrel NODs. He said it was like going from one of those fancy rear projection TVs to a 4k LED display.
I can’t speak to the sights used in other platforms, I do know though that on my tank (the M1A1), the gunner and commander had basically the same exact sight. So they were both looking at the same target at the same time. However, starting on the M1A2, the commander got his own independent sight. And like the gunner’s sight, it had both daytime and thermal capabilities. The advantage here is that while the gunner was acquiring and engaging one target, the TC could be laying on and lazing the next target. As soon as the gunner fired on his target, the turret will immediately lay the gun on the TC’s target with a ballistic solution already calculated. As long as the loader is worth his salt and can load and arm the main gun in 4 seconds or less, you can engage and destroy two targets in less than 5 seconds.
When it comes to tank warfare, that’s a massive advantage. And we didn’t have it yet 1990, at least not out in the line units. I think it was already in development though. I first saw them in either 92 or 93 at Ft. Knox when I was a gunnery instructor at the US Army Armor School.
quote:
Again Darth, one day we need to do a teams meeting or something with some of the non-dick posters here. I’d love to hear Tanker stories. Don’t know any armor guys personally. Jocko did an episode with Gen Macfarland and I loved hearing the early 80s armor officer stories.
That sounds fun.Oh, I do love to tell stories from back in the day.
This post was edited on 8/11/25 at 9:26 pm
Posted on 8/11/25 at 9:34 pm to northshorebamaman
quote:
I'm a decade out of date on formations and doctrine, but no mech divisions anymore but there are BCT's that somewhat took that space. I was actually an 11m when I enlisted but we were folded into 11b a few years later
11 ABCT’s in the active duty force - equivalent to just under ~4 full divisions. Dispersed throughout 1st Armored, 1st Cav, 1st ID, 3rd ID, and 4th ID. They have combined arms battalions (tank companies + mech infantry companies, 2 each) + fires battalion and support.
7 SBCT’s in the active duty force. Dispersed throughout 2nd ID, 4th ID, 25th ID, 2CR, 3CR. SBCT’s were the capability most drawn down post-GWOT given the heavy lifting they did in both theaters.
5 light infantry BCT’s - 10th MTN and 25th ID.
5 airborne BCT’s - 82nd, 25th ID, 173rd.
3 air assault BCT’s - all in the 101st.
31 active duty BCT’s at the moment (+ 12 aviation brigades and a bunch of other support and service support brigades). I think we were in the 40 - 45 BCT range at the height of the GWOT.
All that not including the 9 or so RCT equivalents + armor support that the crayon eaters have.
Page 3 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News