I don't get this talk about tanks being obsolete. All warfare comes down to bang bang and vroom vroom. IFVs? Not enough bang. Artillery? Not enough vroom. Tanks? Perfect balance of bang and vroom.
As such, all a military needs is lots of tanks.

I mean, what does infantry do anyways? Take a hike and chat with the enemy over biscuits and tea? Pfft. Tanks go vroom vroom and bang bang. War over.

History shows this to be true: WWI - won because Allies had more tanks. WWII - Germans won most at first because they had most tanks. Then the US and Soviets had more tanks, they won. Desert Storm - more tanks. OIF - more tanks.

War simply comes down to tanks.

Vietnam? Not enough tanks. Thus America lost.
Israel? Israel used tanks better.
Napoleonic Wars? Sadly, no tanks. Napoleon should have used tanks.

Russia vs Georgia, 2008: Russia had more tanks. They won.
Agincourt: They wore the armor like a hipster shirt, instead of sitting in the tank, so the French lost. You have to be IN the tank for it to work!

American Civil War? Union side had Sherman. Traitors had Lee. M4 v M3. Obviously Sherman won.
Emu War:? Emus turn out to be built like tanks. They won.

Arnhem? Imagine British Paras with tanks - they would have won.