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: Best Light Infantry in the World?
S-2    8/26/2005 11:27:05 PM
Let's broaden this broad topic even more. Go from 1939 to present. Justify with examples. Variations on this theme- best mission equipped troops, fieldcraft, training rigor, attacking, defending. Who impresses you, and why?
 
Quote    Reply

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6   NEXT
S-2    RE:Best Light Infantry in the World?   8/28/2005 5:55:22 PM
I started this, so I guess that I'll weigh in. NVA, and Vietminh predecessors. Rangers and Royal Marines are superb, so are other "elite units". But for large forces sustained in long term battle, NVA/Vietminh (and even V.C. mainforce battalions and divisions, though few) may have been perfectly conditioned, trained, and equipped to perform their missions. Zulus? Thought I'd set the early limit at 1939, otherwise I might agree.
 
Quote    Reply

flamingknives    RE:Best Light Infantry in the World? - Sam/Ambush   8/28/2005 6:06:34 PM
what is the deal? Why can't we get the training thing right? We spend an ungodly amount of money on training, much, much more than any other nation, but everyone talks about the Brits. What is the deal? Because throwing money at a problem doesn't solve it? The British have been training some of their units, like the RMs, as light infantry since WWII at least. It's also been using them as such during most of that time. Furthermore, during that time they have been mostly volunteers so the British armed forces have been able to build up a wealth of exerience.
 
Quote    Reply

S-2    RE:Best Light Infantry in the World?   8/28/2005 6:18:09 PM
"...what is the deal? Why can't we get the training thing right? We spend an ungodly amount of money on training, much, much more than any other nation, but everyone talks about the Brits. What is the deal? Because throwing money at a problem doesn't solve it?" What's the problem? Our units are excellent, and LARGE. Turnover is higher, cohesion a bit lower, but nothing real fundamentally wrong in overall performance to me. If you'd seen U.S. infantry in the mid-seventies, you'd notice a huge difference for the better these days, across the board.
 
Quote    Reply

ChdNorm    lrsrng   8/28/2005 9:58:54 PM
"Detachment101 OSS A handful of Americans and hordes of Kachins secured parts of the Burma -Ledo road between India and China,sabotaged enemy lines of communication Killed more than 15000 hostiles destroyed or captured 3500 tons of supplies rescued 550 allied air crews designated 85% of targets the Tenth Air Force attacked furnished bomb damage assessment and never lost a battle.My second choice would be Merrill's Marauders in the same Theater." lrsrng I seem to recall reading something about their escapades once in a book on the OSS. Are they the ones that requested the old 1863 Springfields to arm indigenous troops with in order to be able to pretty much provide for their own resupply in the field? That's always been one of those stories that stuck with me since I read it ... muskets in WWII!
 
Quote    Reply

ambush    RE:Best Light Infantry in the World? - Sam/Ambush   8/29/2005 1:50:50 PM
>>RE:Best Light Infantry in the World? - Sam/Ambush 8/27/2005 7:07:41 PM Since you have worked with these guys, I am pretty sure you are right. But, what is the deal? Why can't we get the training thing right? We spend an ungodly amount of money on training, much, much more than any other nation, but everyone talks about the Brits. What is the deal?<< Where to begin? First, our individual Infantry Battalions, Marine, Ranger, Light, Airborne and Air Assault are among the finest in the world depending where they are at in their training and personnel cycle. These cycles are also part of the problem. In part you are dealing with numbers here. The US Marine Corps is about 20 times larger than the Royal Marines. It needs 5 to 6 times as many recruits a year as there are total personnel in the Royal Marines. US Airborne School puts far more students through a far easier course than British Jump School, which is far more demanding as is service in the Para Regiment vs. the 82nd Airborne and all the jump billets in 18th ?Airborne Corps. Simply put it boils down to money, high attrition equals wasted money so training standards are in part a representation of the attrition you are willing to pay for. This true for Infantry Traingn School also. Another factor is Airborne, Air Assault and to a limited extent Ranger School are ticket punching exercises so demanding high attrition training would be counter productive toward all those officers getting their badges and devices they will never use. Think of that money wasted when you talk about all the money we spend on training Another is that at heart we are a bunch of Candy a**es afraid of the moms of America. A recruit getting killed in Marine Corps basic training can threaten the existence of the Corps and couple of troops die in the swamps of Camp Rudder and Ranger School under goes fundamental changes for the worse. It certainly is not has stressful as it was in 1980 if everything I hear is true (they get more sleep and food and the RIs even have to watch their language) This is reflected in all training in the US military except for the elite units (I am talking SEALs and the like here). If Ranger School was open only to those actually assigned to or going to a Ranger unit it could perhaps avoid the effects of momism. Then again I would not have been able to attend as a Marine. I am not speaking out in favor of trainee abuse or ignoring common sense safety procedure but unfortunately realistic training has some risks if it is to be of any value at all. We do not fire life rounds over the heads of our own troops during training. Even at infiltration courses the noise of a machine from ?gas guns? is used instead of real machine guns least some dummy stand up and catch a round in the brainpan. Instead of lifting and shifting fire during and assault on an objective during training all fire is stopped once troops are forward of the firing line. Should an accident (there is a reason they are called accidents) occur a commander can kiss his career goodbye. So they become risk adverse in outlook toward training. Then there is this damn individual replacement system we cannot seem to get rid of. The Army has an excellent opportunity to go to a true regimental system with its Units of Action (which should be called Regiments or Brigades so as not to sound gay). Getting rid of the stupid up or out policy can offset the resulting lack of promotion opportunities in a Regimental system. But this will probably be another missed opportunity by the Army because too many careers and jobs are wedded to the current personnel system. I always maintain it is not really how much you spend but how you spend it. We spend a lot of money moving people around for ?career development?. The UK with their Regimental system suffers from far less personnel turbulence and it is possible on enlist in the UK military for twenty years on single enlistment. As good as NTC, JRTC and 29 Palms training is how often do the same units keep making the same mistakes each time they rotate through there. How many units rotate through their with even 75% of the personnel they had on their last rotation? This is particularly true of unit leadership. Troop leaders are not allowed to spend a lot of time leading troops before they are moved on to non-leadershiop career enhancing positions.
 
Quote    Reply

ambush    RE:Best Light Infantry in the World? - Sam/Ambush   8/29/2005 2:53:29 PM
>>RE:Best Light Infantry in the World? - Sam/Ambush 8/27/2005 7:07:41 PM Since you have worked with these guys, I am pretty sure you are right. But, what is the deal? Why can't we get the training thing right? We spend an ungodly amount of money on training, much, much more than any other nation, but everyone talks about the Brits. What is the deal?<< To continue: I trained with Royal Marines in Norway twice and was impressed with their professionalism. They always practiced the fundamentals well, which is really what separates good and ?elite? units from the rest. Their op orders (O group) were not dependent on gadgets like laser pointers to give them. They were clear, concise and followed the KISS principle. I think the UK is an example of how to keep things simple and how you do not need to spend a lot of money but just some money well spent. They had personnel in the same unit for more than 4 years which I think makes a real difference. They have the advantage of small numbers, which makes standards easier to maintain. This is not to say they do not have their problems, particularly in this age of political correctness. I understand that the obstacle course at the commando course has had hand rails installed. They also have had to graduate their first woman from the course. I understand it took her three attempts and she only had to repeat those parts she failed. I am not sure that the same opportunity was offered to her male counter-parts. Before we Americans beat ourselves up too bad we have shown we can get it right. The light Infantry Divisions (based on my experience training with 10th Mountain) we among the best trained units in the world in the 1980s because of their light fighter training and requirement of Ranger School for unit leaders. These standards suffered the peace dividend cuts of the 90s. A Marine Infantry Battalion that has completed its MEU (SOC) qualification train up is also among the best in the world as is a Ranger Battalion at the peak of its training/personnel replacement cycle. The problem is that we cannot maintain these levels because of our personnel policies.
 
Quote    Reply

Ehran    RE:Best Light Infantry in the World?   8/29/2005 3:12:37 PM
turnover is a nutbuster for this sort of thing. it's a bit like any kind of crew of trademen. you have one crew with a bunch of apprentices with an average of 4 years experience vs a crew with a couple apprentices and an average experience of 9 years. you can guess who is going to be that bit faster and smoother.
 
Quote    Reply

S-2    RE:Best Light Infantry in the World?- Ambush and Others   8/29/2005 3:54:13 PM
Great threads. I will say that while Ranger School is a ticket punch important for all branch-qualified infantry officers and useful to others (artillery, ada, armor), I also believe that their attendance has excellent effect downrange in other branches that need some modicum of the skill sets/field leadership that Ranger School nurtures in its candidates. Opening the course up has been beneficial. I spent a lot of time with the 7th I.D. (Light) in the mid-eighties. This unit had been a joke through much of the seventies, and the lightfighter course was remarkable in the transformation of these guys into very proficient light infantry. The emphasis was there in the eighties, and anybody who served with the 25th, 6th, 10th, 7th, or even Virginia's 29th Infantry Divisions couldn't help but notice the increasingly high quality small unit leadership skills and fieldcraft on display. I felt that these divisions benefited from a very cost-effective enhancement. I hate seeing it's demise.
 
Quote    Reply

ambush    RE:Best Light Infantry in the World?- Ambush and Others   8/29/2005 4:05:43 PM
Have to agree that Ranger school was (and probably still is) an excellent leadership under stress course and there is benefit to having other branches attend the course but it also contributes to the poltical correctness that has hit the course. Can you imagine a career grunt being upset by the language used by an RI enough to complain? Worse still is having a General who would take such complaints seriously.
 
Quote    Reply

lrsrng    RE:Best Light Infantry in the World?   8/29/2005 4:09:50 PM
S-2 I agree.Good thread! my third choice was 1st Ranger BN 84-88 LOL.The troops with the least always seem to do the most.Why? Maybe out of nessicity.What do you all think?
 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6   NEXT



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