Are Tanks as Obsolete as Battleships?

This is about the millionth dumb article by NationalInterest posted here. Frankly, they aren't thought provoking. Mainly, they are clickbait articles that are poorly researched and have little basis in fact, written by someone who has not served, not talked to anyone that has. Putting one weapon system against another in one on one scenarios, without a cohesive battle plan, is dumb. My 2 cents....

When I attended Infantry OCS in 1966, we learned how to kill tanks. There were all kinds of weapons systems designed specifically to defeat tanks. By the time we were done, we all swore that we'd never get in, near, or around a tank. Then came our instruction in armor. My first exposure was sitting in the gunners seat in an older model tank (late model Patton?). I received about 30 seconds of instruction and then engaged a fast-moving target traversing the range to my front. I destroyed it with the COAX machine gun. I got out and was replaced by the next candidate in line. As I reflected on the experience, it occurred to me that I had done pretty well with almost no preparation. Imagine, I thought, the effectiveness of a tank with a well-trained crew. I had a lot more respect after that. Then came our introduction to a Sheridan tank. We weren't so cavalier after that.

Not if they are part of a combined arms team they are not obsolete. Pair them up with mechanized infantry dismounted Infantry and the A-10 Warthogs, they can do severe damage and they have less of a chance of being destroyed if they have close air support and Dismounts to protect the tanks. We also need to have fighter support and helicopters as well. Wouldn't hurt to have any cobras or Apaches in the area. Too bad they didn't keep the Kiowa helicopters