<http://schema.org/articleBody>
" A recent\u00A0competition hosted in part by the U.S. Army and\u00A0designed to test core tank crew skills saw European crews take the top honors, while crews from the U.S. Army failed to place. The results\u00A0raise the question of whether the Army\u2014after more than a decade of focusing on\u00A0guerrilla warfare\u2014has devoted adequate training to address &amp;quot;big war&amp;quot; skills. Held from\u00A0May 10 to\u00A012 and jointly hosted by the U.S. Army and the German Bundeswehr\u00A0at the Grafenwoehr Training Area in Germany, the\u00A0the Strong Europe Tank Challenge\u00A0included challengers from six NATO countries: Denmark, Germany, Italy, Poland, and Slovenia\u2014which\u00A0sent tank platoons of four tanks each to compete\u2014 and the United States, which sent two platoons.        The competition involved tank crews conducting both offensive and defensive operations, and both mounted and dismounted activities. Crews fired ten main gun rounds from various positions. In one event, crews had to correctly identify 25 friendly and unfriendly (read: Russian) vehicles while traveling a course. Other events involved operating in the aftermath of a chemical weapons attack, dealing with improvised explosive devices, and medical emergencies. A German tank crew from Mountain Panzer Battalion 7, Panzer Brigade 12 took top honors, followed by a Danish crew from their country&amp;#039;s 1st Tank Battalion in second. Third place went to a Polish crew from the 34th Armored Cavalry brigade. It&amp;#039;s unknown where the American crews placed, only that they weren&amp;#039;t in the top three.\u00A0\u00A0 NATO sponsored tank challenges like this\u00A0were routine during the Cold War\u2014including the famous\u00A0Canadian Army Trophy\u2014but the Strong Europe Tank Challenge is the first multinational tank challenge to take place since 1991, the year the Soviet Union dissolved.\u00A0  As for the tanks themselves, the German platoon brought Leopard 2A6 tanks. An upgrade\u00A0of the Cold War Leopard 2, the -A6 model features modified turret armor, giving the turret a more angular appearance. The -A6 also features enhanced mine protection and a 20 percent\u00A0longer main gun barrel, imparting a higher velocity to projectiles.\u00A0 Both Denmark and Poland brought Leopard 2A5 tanks, slightly older models but ones with largely with the same capabilities as the -A6. Italy brought a platoon of home-grown Ariete tanks. Slovenia brought M84 tanks, a copy of the Russian T-72 manufactured by Yugoslavia before the country&amp;#039;s civil war. The United States brought its M1A2 Abrams tanks.\u00A0  This isn&amp;#039;t the first time U.S. Army tankers have found themselves in an embarrassing situation.\u00A0North Carolina National Guard tankers beat their Regular Army counterparts\u2014and crews from the U.S. Marine Corps and Canadian Army\u2014at the U.S. Army&amp;#039;s 2016 Sullivan Cup. A tank crew consisting of an insurance adjustor, Pepsi truck driver, college student, and aspiring police officer beat fifteen other reserve and active duty tank crews to place first.\u00A0  For decades, the U.S. Army&amp;#039;s Armor Corps was a pillar of land power expected to fight the tank forces of Soviet Union on the European battlefield. After 9/11, with the exception of the invasion of Iraq, fighting so-called &amp;quot;high intensity conflict&amp;quot; took a back seat to fighting insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan. While most of the countries involved in the Strong Tank Challenge also sent ground forces to both countries, their commitments largely allowed their tankers to stay oriented on training and operation\u00A0related to more\u00A0traditional tank missions\u2014i.e. fighting in big wars against other tanks.\u00A0 The results in both competitions echo recent comments made by Army Chief of Staff Mark Milley and published in last Sunday&amp;#039;s New York Times. Milley stated, &amp;quot;Today, a major in the Army knows nothing but fighting terrorists and guerrillas, because he came into the Army after 9/11. But as we get into the higher-end threats, our skills have atrophied over 15 years.&amp;quot; The primary &amp;quot;higher-end threat&amp;quot; is Russia. Russian land power is clawing back from two decades of neglect. Moscow is building several new families of armored vehicles, including the T-14 Armata main battle tank, T-15 heavy infantry fighting vehicle, Kurganets-25 infantry fighting vehicle, and Bumerang family of wheeled armored personnel carriers. Russian campaigns in Ukraine and Syria, and aggressiveness against border states, has shown that President Vladimir Putin can and will use his army to achieve state goals.\u00A0 Suddenly, the\u00A0skills tested in the Strong Tank Challenge are more relevant than they&amp;#039;ve been in fifteen years. Although the loss must sting, it&amp;#039;s at least a list of places to start when\u00A0making much needed improvements. And, hopefully, making them fast.\u00A0  Source:\u00A0Washington Post "^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string>
<http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/a20917/us-crews-fail-to-place-in-nato-tank-competition/>