alternatehistory.com

At the time of the 1991 Gulf victory--probably the most lopsided in history--some Americans insisted their success wasn't mainly due to superior weapons e.g. the M1 vs monkey model T-72. Stressing Iraqi incompetence, they said they could've beaten the Iraqis even had the weapons been swapped.
I'm curious about one thing: How inferior would US weapons have had to be before the Iraqis could've won, or at least stalemated the coalition? What would've happened if for example, US forces were equipped with Italian weapons of c 1940-41, including the M13 ("self propelled coffin")?
Top