Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Infantry Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: The Ghost Of Land Warrior Goes To Afghanistan
SYSOP    7/8/2009 5:22:53 AM
 
Quote    Reply

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest

kisscatman       7/8/2009 9:39:55 PM
All this high tech stuff is great, but what will we do when faced with a major conventional war?  This stuff needs to be saved for the SOF.  A major land war needs regular grunts with a rifle and canteen.
 
Quote    Reply

sjdoc       7/9/2009 7:08:38 AM

All this high tech stuff is great, but what will we do when faced with a major conventional war?  This stuff needs to be saved for the SOF.  A major land war needs regular grunts with a rifle and canteen.

The ability of leg, airborne, and mechanized infantry to control the battlefield is critically important even in "a major conventional war."  To the extent that the "high tech stuff" facilitates battlefield control, it enables these infantry units to call in artillery and air strikes as well as to engage with direct-fire weapons, ranging from personal small arms to their units' organic anti-tank and anti-aircraft guided missiles.
 
All of this enhances conventional war effectiveness, and should not be denigrated as mere "SOF" slickness.
 
Bear in mind the history of infantry operations, which has in just a few centuries gone from smooth-bore musketry massed in line or column to fast-moving, wide-ranging, tightly-coordinated, highly lethal, well-concealed, and extremely flexible tactical elements that the most able commanders of World War II, Korea, and Vietnam would scarcely be able to comprehend, much less counter.
 
"Son of Land Warrior" has to be appreciated in the context of modern combined arms warfare, where the Army has striven to keep it.  Insofar as I've been able to see, the research and development work has been done well, especially with regard to the close application of "real world" criteria - putting the gear into the hands of serving experienced enlisted men and officers and trusting to their sense of professionalism (at levels of competence the Army has never before been able to rely upon) to provide valid feedback as to practicability and effectiveness.
 
Given the U.S. Army's past history of inflicting upon combat troops some absolutely lousy stuff simply because a general officer or two had enough clout to push it into the inventory, this sort of "bottom-up" embrace of technology strikes me as the most viable way of enhancing mission capabilities and battlefield survival prospects, and I'm all for it.
 
Quote    Reply

cwDeici       7/10/2009 2:01:07 PM
Yes indeed, it is a wonderful boon to know what cover is around the corner, if there's a guy around the corner and how to get to your buddies.
 
Not that I'm against keeping more reserves.
 
Quote    Reply

JFKY       7/10/2009 2:14:32 PM

All this high tech stuff is great, but what will we do when faced with a major conventional war?  This stuff needs to be saved for the SOF.  A major land war needs regular grunts with a rifle and canteen.

Luuuuuxxxxxury! In MY day you had a spear and you drank out of your helmet...IF you were lucky!
That has to be one of the most profoundly silly comments I've seen, certainly in the top 10%, at least.
 
Quote    Reply

WarNerd       7/11/2009 6:18:23 AM

That has to be one of the most profoundly silly comments I've seen, certainly in the top 10%, at least.

Maybe he is a reserve member in a Graves Registration unit and is disappointed by not getting called up for deployment?
 
Quote    Reply

Patton       12/20/2010 12:35:09 PM
You're right kisscatman...couldnt agree with you more.  But the Army is moving from what is now called the "interim force" to the "objective force."  That is why I started a thread asking what the future of infantry is.  I wanted some opinions.  The technology mentioned is the equipment planned for "objective force infantry."  It was initially developed as the Single Integrated Personnel Ensemble or SIPE, which was part of the Force XXI concept.   The Army has also fielded an "objective weapon" in Afghanistan, the XM-25.  Field testing is not uncommon.  The XM-61 Vulcan was field tested in Vietnam by the 11th ACR.  I believe the Army is not counting on fighting the type of "conventional war" it has fought in the past due to the changing nature of global alliances.  NATO has pretty much stabilized Europe and Korea is the last remaining flashpoint for conventional forces to engage in open hostilities.  A new force has arisen... irregulars or terrorists.
 
Quote    Reply

mabie       12/22/2010 1:56:14 AM

The 'fog of war' applies to regular infantry as well as SOF. Anything that helps with SA will be very useful.
























 
Quote    Reply



StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2012StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy