Quote Originally Posted by slapout9 View Post
But something else was also happening. The relative importance of the vehicle to the weapon was changing. A shift was taking place. Although a very specialized vehicle was still needed, the weapon itself was becoming more important than the vehicle. Would the Army and Navy allow this?
Of course the Army and Navy would allow this. And they did. Guided anti-tank missiles often cost as much (or more) than the non-specialized vehicle that carries them (APC, light truck, all terrain vehicle). The combination of non-specialized vehicles with high-tech, high-cost weapon systems had proven to be very effective, allowing light infantry units to engage armored forces (see for instance the battle of Debecka Pass Iraq, or the Toyota War in Chad, or the operations of Egyptian infantry against Israeli armor in the Sinai during the early phases of the Yom Kippur War). The same goes for fire-and-forget light anti-air missils. For the Navy, the demise of the big-guns battle ship in favor of the frigate carrying sophisticated missile weapon systems represents a similar evolution.