Quote Originally Posted by RJ View Post
Ratzel,
What are the advantages of a SF unit that is Armor designated vs. a regular US Army Mechanized Infantry unit.
The unit would be a Ranger unit but mechanized. And the purpose would the same as why we have airborne Ranger units. The 82nd can seize airfields and pretty much do anything a Ranger unit can do, but we have Ranger units for missions which require a more highly trained unit. The advantage of this unit would be the same advantages of why we have airborne Ranger units.

It would have a mix of light tanks, APC's, Weasels, and other assault vehicles. All of the vehicles would be small enough to be transported by aircraft. The troops would have better training and better equipment than the regular army. Troops would go to this unit after RIP just like ABR units and E-4 and above would be required to have a Ranger tab.

A mission scenario would be a small invasion into Pakistan. Lets say we wanted to capture and hold some nuclear storage facilities but required the mobility of a battalion of "Mech-Rangers." Part of the unit's capabilities would be to have a whole battalion on the ground in 12 hours or so. An ABR unit would size the airfield and the "Mech-Rangers" would follow on.

I guess the bottom line is:

Is there a need for a highly trained Ranger type unit that trained with, thought about, and fought with vehicles? We could be creative with how this unit used its assets as well? Why not a company with 4 weasels, four light tanks, four APCs (w/2 squads) , 2 mortar vehicles, 1 medic and 1 mechanic track?