Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Infantry Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: US infantry individual infantry skills
Aussiegunner    11/11/2004 10:42:57 AM
I saw a TV news report tonight of a contact by a USMC foot patrol, which had just been bumped by a group of insurgents in Falluja. I have to say I was extremely un-impressed with the indivudual skills the Marines displayed on the contact. This corrosponds with actions I have seen on previous reports, though they have usually involved US Army personal. I'm suprised about this, because Marine Infantry training is generally more highly regarded than that of its army counterparts. Anyway, the specific concerns were, 1. On contact the soldiers bunched together, didn't take cover or move near a wall to limit their exposure to fire and didn't crouch or lie prone with nearly enough of a sense of urgency. 2. When they were scanning for the enemy, they didn't allow their weapons to follow their gaze, ie, "patrol their arcs" for an immediate shot on identification. 3. One USMC rifleman based on a roof to provide covering fire, did so by holding his rifle above his head while remaining under cover. There was no chance of proper target identification, let alone an aimed shot, so it was just pissing away ammunition while giving away his position and risking ricochets against any bystanders for no good reason. Note that there was a GPMG based on the same roof providing effective aimed fire, so there was really no excuse for the rifleman not to do the same. 4. One soldier sent around a corner to investigate where the fire came from described his experience. It went something like "I went around the corner and the insurgent in that garage took a shot and threw a frag at me. I ran back, tripped over a dead body(one of theirs, not ours), and came back here. For Christ sake, hadn't he ever heard of looking around the corner with a mirror, before walking around!?! Lucky the insurgent was a rotten shot! 5. An insurgent ran across a roof, bobbing above a ledge, about 100 metres away from our rifle squad. The Marinesl, still bunched together so one RPG would kill about six of them, fired with half aimed automatic bursts and some semi-automatic fire from their M-16's. At this point I must say that I've never seen a properly aimed shot from anything smaller than a 120mm tank gun from the US military in these reports. Do they teach proper marksmanship during US basic training nowdays? 6. Anyhow, something managed to hit the insurgent, because he ended up wounded between two buildings behind some sort of a barrier. So, one of the Marines pops his head over the barrier and shoots the insurgent. He's lucky he didn't get his head blown off. A grenade is the weapon of choice in such a situation, IMHO at least. I note that the news reports are claiming about a 3 to 1 kill ratio in favour of the US in Falluja at the moment. That isn't that flash giving a large numerical and a huge technological advantage. If this report is an indication of the general standard of individual infantry skills amongst US troops, no wonder this is the case. As citizen of an allied nation, I'm not trying to be smart or play one upmanship, but the US really needs to look at the way it trains its troops. Try looking at a few nations that use the British model, if you want some tips. It would be better at keeping your boys and girls alive, than all the high-tech wizardry you buy for them.
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14   NEXT
Heorot    RE:what they heck   11/12/2004 4:09:35 PM
Press enter to go to a new line before you post.
 
Quote    Reply

ambush    RE:US infantry individual infantry skills   11/12/2004 6:19:03 PM
I am going to jump on this band wagon and say that US infantry training, to include the Marines, is neither long enough nor intensive enough. Sadly it is just enough to get by. Having said that, I can recall seeing a lot the same problems during Nam era as you see now. Raising the rifle over the wall or firing from the hip, using the "spray and pray" technique. To be fair I will also add that I saw a lot of good techniques in the Iraq footage, well aimed fire, good individual and team movement so maybe the problem is not force wide but limited to a few units who happen to make it on TV. There are also some other possible explanations (not excuses though) for the bad form being exhibited. The big one is the train up these Marines receive prior to deployment. Marines deploying as part of scheduled Marine Expeditionary Unit go through and intense pre-deployment train up, including refreshers on the basics. These Marines probably did to get normal MEU train up since they are not part of a MEU rotation (that is a guess). Second is are the reservists? Not an excuse but the reality is that most reserve units do not get the quality training they should. They are hampered by personnel shortages, lack of locations to train in many cases, and having their monthly weekend drills so bogged own with administrative nonsense that they don't have time. This of course makes a strong case for not having any combat arms reserve or NG units. Finally let us ask, when was the last time we faced a quality opponent? That has a lot to do with it. The mistakes we armchair generals see from the comfort of our recliner with a beer in hand may not be registering with the troops on the ground (who are not so comfortable) because they are not facing an opponent who can capitalize on our guys mistakes. This reduces the idea that they need to change the way they do things. Lets face it; is easy to criticize from where we are at, but from all accounts the good guys are doing a great job.
 
Quote    Reply

Aussiegunner    RE:US infantry individual infantry skills   11/13/2004 10:01:58 AM
"To be fair I will also add that I saw a lot of good techniques in the Iraq footage, well aimed fire, good individual and team movement so maybe the problem is not force wide but limited to a few units who happen to make it on TV." I've seen some good techniques used along with a majority of bad ones. That tells me the consistancy isn't there. "There are also some other possible explanations (not excuses though) for the bad form being exhibited. The big one is the train up these Marines receive prior to deployment. Marines deploying as part of scheduled Marine Expeditionary Unit go through and intense pre-deployment train up, including refreshers on the basics. These Marines probably did to get normal MEU train up since they are not part of a MEU rotation (that is a guess)." The skills I saw were very poor, even for peacetime troops who haven't had a pre-operation train up. In any case, if they didn't get properly prepared, the brass has a lot to answer for. In fact, they have a lot to answer for poor emphasis on indivudual skills full stop, because the buck stops with them when it comes to training their troops. "Second is are the reservists? Not an excuse but the reality is that most reserve units do not get the quality training they should." These were Marine riflemen in the assault on Falluja. I doubt that they are reservists on such a high profile operation. "Finally let us ask, when was the last time we faced a quality opponent? That has a lot to do with it." Australian and British forces haven't faced quality opponents for a very long time either. However, when we have had infantry action in recent years, they have proven that the forces have a good enough institutional memory to maintain excellent skills. The US forces really need to take a look at why they are not doing the same. "Lets face it; is easy to criticize from where we are at, but from all accounts the good guys are doing a great job." Firstly, it is more the leadership of the US military that I would hold to account. They obviously need to emphasise individual skills in their training programs far more. I don't blame the troops. They just do the best they can with the training they have. Secondly, I hate to say it but the US military isn't doing a great job with regards to the Iraqi insurgency, as opposed to the conventional wars in Iraq and elsewhere, where they performed fantastically. If you want to win these types of wars indivudual skills an important factor in doing so. It is one of the main reasons the Commonwealth forces are so successful at controlling their AO's, when they are deployed within the alliance on various different missions. If this was just a case of my opinion, as somebody who has only served in peacetime, I'd be more reticient about critisising. However, I have heard the same critisisms by family members who have served in various conflicts, including one ex-British Parachute Regiment NCO. He describes US infantry training as having not progressed beyond teaching the troops to be cannon fodder, which is a pretty damning inditement really.
 
Quote    Reply

Aussiegunner    RE:US infantry individual infantry skills - AG/Joe   11/13/2004 10:08:21 AM
We get good coverage off the Australian Broadcasting Commission. They get a lot from the reporters embedded with the troops.
 
Quote    Reply

masterE    RE:US infantry individual infantry skills   11/13/2004 1:20:33 PM
I spent time in the US Infantry just prior to the Persian Gulf War. I know for a fact that the US Infantry training does not promote grouping while under fire. My time in the military was prior to all the "high tech wizardry." My fear is that we do rely more heavily on this stuff than we should. But, I also agree with joe6pack on the matter that the troops are being used outside of the training that they've recieved. Although every soldier goes through basic training and has to exihibit a certain level weapons familiarity, the infantry MOS is a specialized function, which is not mastered until the individual goes through further training in their permanent unit. Unfortunately, for this war in Iraq, it does not seem like enough of these trained individuals exist. Oh, and by the way, the USMC is not a testament to the skills of the specialized US Army infantry units. The USMC is notorious for being under supported. They are the last to get everything. I feel that this must pass on to their training. They simply have a very strong marketing campaign and reputation for being the most "hard corps."
 
Quote    Reply

Ehran    RE:US infantry individual infantry skills   11/13/2004 1:28:30 PM
I've had a number of friends in the Canadian army almost all of whom have exercised with the americans over the years. to a man they considered the marines more professional and competent than their counterparts in the us army.
 
Quote    Reply

WinsettZ    RE:US infantry individual infantry skills   11/13/2004 2:16:39 PM
"They are the last to get everything". Yep, they'll put all the money into Osprey first. The Marines got the M16A2 in 83 with the Army following in 85. Back on topic. Anyone have a link to the aforementioned clips?
 
Quote    Reply

ambush    RE:US infantry individual infantry skills   11/13/2004 3:12:16 PM
Truth be told the Marines are not always the last to get everything. Like the M16A2 the Marines were also the first to get the M198 Howitzer. The crimes that are Osprey and Sryker are a whole other thread Speaking as both a former Marine Grunt and Army Combat Engineer I will have to say the Infantry training is about equal. You can access both their training schedules below: http://www.lejeune.usmc.mil/soi/trnglinkpg.htm http://www.benning.army.mil/itb/ If you look at these schedules you will find them both lacking. I know we think it should all be like Ranger school but realistically that is not possible. On the other hand they can do better than they are. This of course leaves the improvement up top the units. This means that quality is going to vary. We have all served in bad and good units. In the Marine Corps I have run across leaders who thought high PT scores were everything and a Comapany Commander who actually had his troops keep their rucks on sacks on during actions on the objective phase. In the Army while supporting Infantry outfits I ran across a battalion commanders who drilled the heck out of is troops in conducting attacks and setting up defensive positions but thought patrolling was really a waste of time. I also ran across one an M113 outifit who always had his squads dismount the M2 from the vehicle and bound forward with it during attacks while leaving the M113 behind. I have seen Bradley outfits who lived the motto "Death Before Dismount." Most of these "leaders" brushed aside their NCO's "recommendations and suggestions" and did not last long in their positions but the damage they did took a long time to correct. Nor does the US have a monopoly on this. I cannot faultthe British because the only troops of theirs I trained with were the Royal Marines in Norway and at Lejeune and almost to a man (there is always that 10%)they were professional and knew their stuff. But judging the rest of the UK military by the Royal Marines would be like judging the US Army by the Rangers. I have only what I have read about he performance of some Mech Units in the Falkland Islands to go on and it indicates to me that all British Regiments are not equal. My experience with Canadians was limited to a small group at 29 Palms and I was not impressed (maybe it was the climate) but they seemed more concern withe keeping their beer cold. Nor have I been that impressed with The Dutch (granted they were long haired hippy reservists) the Germans I thought were over-rated and even the Turks were a lttle disappointing. On the other hand the ROK Marines and ROK Rangers were extremly hard core if a little weak on some fundamentals. We can sit back here in the comfort of our armchairs and critique all we want but we only have the single cameras veiw of a city wide battle. Sadly what sticks with most it would seem is the individuals not doing it "how I'd to it". Try sitting back with that beer in your hand and realy look for those who are doing it right. You will find you have less to complain about.
 
Quote    Reply

Aussiegunner    RE:US infantry individual infantry skills   11/14/2004 1:00:00 AM
"We can sit back here in the comfort of our armchairs and critique all we want but we only have the single cameras veiw of a city wide battle. Sadly what sticks with most it would seem is the individuals not doing it "how I'd to it". Try sitting back with that beer in your hand and realy look for those who are doing it right. You will find you have less to complain about." Then again if nobody raises it nothing will be done about it, except perhaps when it is too late for some poor bastard who has to die because people were to scared of seeming like an "armchair warrior" to say their piece. The fact is that soldiers and ex-soldiers are the people most likely to identify these problems, even if they are just from seeing it on TV. Its just that serving soldiers can't say anything about it in the public domain, so I think there is a place for former service personal to do so. Veterens groups wouldn't think twice about raising awareness about equipment deficiencies. What is so sacred about training, that it can't be critisesed? If I were to consistantly see similar evidence of poor training amongst Australian troops, in numerous news stories, I'd be raising the concerns via the letters to the editor section in various newspapers, as well as raising it with lobby groups like the Australian Defence Association. It might bruise a few egos along the way, but its better than having young people killed because of some too-pround old fools with lots of gold on their shoulders.
 
Quote    Reply

Aussiegunner    RE:US infantry individual infantry skills - WinsettZ    11/14/2004 1:01:58 AM
I don't have a link to the clips sorry, as they have been on Aussie TV.
 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics