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: Most feared modern army
smudge    4/18/2004 10:46:27 AM
What army would be the most feared not in terms of size and equipment but in terms of tactics,history, and over all profesionalism? the mongol army israel defence force
 
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 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45   NEXT
ChdNorm    Cato   8/11/2006 10:51:26 PM
"Officer Bs story seems the more likely of the two to be repeated. While I laud the testicular fortitude of a man who is willing to take two steps into the muzzle of a rifle, would your department's SOP be to calmly step out of the building? Are there SOPs for this type of situation? Do you guys have protocols WRT oficers being in eyesight of eachother while on a call? Don't know, just asking. Inglewood Ca PD dispatches two units to "connubial dysfunction" calls, but I from what I understand, they have a realatively large number of units on the street for the city's population (thank God)." Last things first ... We do have SOPs in the policies and procedures in regard to these types in cases. However, they are usually intentionally vague allowing the officer the room to assess the situation and use his best judgment. There is no obligation to retreat, nor is there an obligation to immediately attack. Tactics are constantly evolving and changing as needed. Departmental policies and procedures are more of a constant, allowing the current accepted tactics to be the rules to play by in this type of situation. Some departments severely limit the ability of the individual officer to use his/her best judgment and be able to apply the best tactic for the specific scenario he is presented with. It's somewhat progressive thinking by an administration to allow the officers to have as much leeway as we do. When stacked up beside comparable agencies by either size or adjoining areas with very restrictive guidelines though, we actually see far fewer misuses of force or other comparable mistakes. It's one of the few things they got right around here. That said, all three of the officers in my examples did make mistakes that led to or contributed to the positions they found themselves in. I was actually most critical of Officer A, whose ass half performance in investigating his call led directly to his predicament (dismissing fresh tools marks with the knowledge of a prior break in two months prior. He didn't properly secure the scene, while having the knowledge that the business contained the very Remington 870 that came into play (giving reasonable cause to believe any possible suspects that were inside could/should be considered armed). He cleared the call prematurely with dispatch, leading them and his fellow officers and supervisors to consider him back in service and away from any potential threats (who would have sent cover elements automatically otherwise). Basically he shined the light around and shook a couple of doors (which only served to alert the two inside of his presence, which mistook his radio traffic clearing the call as him calling in the cavalry), and was going to be on his way. Personally, I still believe he knew that a burglary had occurred and was just going to leave it for the morning shift to handle (he just figured they'd already left). But that's just my opinion. He walked away a hero regardless. Officer B2, the secondary officer in the second example, in my mind, was fairly blameless. She was barely a year into it, and followed the directions of Officer B1, a 15 year veteran. Her actions upon her arrival back inside the residence were text book sharp and carried out with skill. Verbal commands followed up with two shots center mass, with no hesitation, when he didn't comply. But, the way things work ... she walked away with the reputation of letting her partner get beat damn near to death and quit within six months. Officer B is hard to crucify, because he is a walking example of the little mistakes we have all made, and somewhere an officer is making right now as I type this. Several procedural errors, that otherwise are the kind that always get overlooked and aren't taken too literally a lot of the time. The two big no-nos ... sending his secondary outside and allowing the husband to go in the bedroom without an escort for his ID. You can, with little imagination, easily see how the whole thing never would have happened if those mistakes had not been made in the first place. But, more relevant to the topic of the actual disarm attempt, I supported his decision once presented with the threat. Some points on his decision to make the attempt; 1. The threat appeared to him at very close range, well within the 21 feet rule. Three to four feet between them, but the muzzle of the rifle itself was within lunging/grasping distance. 2. The threat presented itself between Officer B and his safest line of retreat, almost effectively blocking his retreat. 3. The possibility of retreat was immediately dismissed by Officer B, because he now considered himself also responsible for the safety of the wife .. and was unwilling to retreat and leave her in danger. 4. The verbal commands I mentioned of the husband's weren't exactly verbatim The threats made by the husband were confusing and contradictory to the officer. Everything from "I'm going to f'n kill you" to "get out of my f'
 
Quote    Reply

ChdNorm    Joe6pack   8/11/2006 10:58:03 PM
I'm sure a lot of it does come to personal philosophy. I just tend to think that, if retreat is an option, the time for it is long before it comes to the point of having to consider a disarm or not. If slowly backing away while being able to keep the option to effectively respond should the threat turn into an attack, then that is definately an option worth considering. I wouldnt be ashamed to run like hell, I'm just not a huge fan of turning my back to the threat and leaving yourself that unprotected.
 
Quote    Reply

Jawan    RE:Gurkhas - Olive Greens   8/12/2006 4:10:06 AM
""Jawan, are you sure your figure of 50,000 does not include Gurkhas in Central Paramilitary forces? Of course Indo-Tibetan Border Police's Gurkha Coys, and Gurkhas in BSF and Assam Rifles are practically light infantry... but technically not."" The Indian army has seven regiments of the Gurkha Rifles made up of 42 battalions of roughly 1,000 men each. The proportion of Nepalese and Indian Gurkhas in these battalions is 75:45, while there are some ‘pure’ Nepali and Indian Gurkha battalions. http://www.navhindtimes.com/articles.php?Story_ID=081058 Paramilitary forces are line infantry basically trained for patrolling and holding territory, BSF, CISF, home gaurds et all. Some Gurkhas get recruited in them ususally the ones who get rejected in the Indian Army. They are usually Indian origin Gurkhas. ITBP is a well trained force both for offensive as well as patrolling functions. The differnce here is they come under Home Ministry like BSF et all.
 
Quote    Reply

Cato    ChadNrm   8/14/2006 1:36:33 PM
Thanks for the outstanding expatiation. I guess there are times when being on the job sucks, and no option looks good. I hope officer B was able to regain the majority of his faculties. Leaving the ICU with a heartbeat is never a bad thing. Usually means things are looking up. I hear you about tweekers. Not the most reasonable types around. Fortunately, in the incident I described earlier, the pt. wasn't high. He was at a halfway house, and began to behave erratically. The staff called the police and fire/EMs. We were to transport him to the psych ER at a nearby county hospital, and since the transport would only take a matter of minutes, I declined to bring a LEO in the back of the box with us. Normally the cops aren't thrilled about having to ride along with us, but if we ask they've gotta come. A mistake I NEVER repeated following that incident. I was fortunately sitting behind the pt. in the jumpseat. If I'd been sitting on his left on the bench, he probably would have been able to choke the living sh!t out of me. I was fortunately able to pinnion his shoulders under my chest, and put my left elbow into his neck. As bad as tweekers are, from all I've heard, dealing with PCP is worse by an order of magnitude. Yikes. Cato
 
Quote    Reply

Tiber1    RE:Tiber1- AlbanyRifles & Cato   8/14/2006 3:23:05 PM
"Albany, You're on to something. I think the light guys have got it wrong...you don't bring a SAW to a knife fight, you bring a tank heavy company team." See Light doesn't think like that. We expect to be stationed in the middle of a swamp, with no access for vehicles of any kind. We could be in the middle of the Sahara Desert or the Antarctic and they'd find a nice, moist, sludge filled swamp for us to play in...
 
Quote    Reply

Herc the Merc    See I told u Indian infantry considered more experienced than IDF grunts.-OLive/Jawan   8/14/2006 7:56:33 PM
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/08/05/world/main1868086.shtml Get enuff Sikhs there--there will be no war-game over--add some Gurkhas--that positively petrify the Hezboo, talk about fear factor. Sikhs and Gurkhas facing u--- (CBS) India is planning to pull out its 673 soldiers along the Israeli-Lebanon border. The troops are part of the United Nations force in Lebanon. Indian officials are angry at accusations by some Western networks that the present U.N. force in Lebanon has not been able to prevent Hezbollah attacks. The Indian contingent consists of tough Sikh infantry soldiers who have more combat experience than either the Israeli or Lebanese armies. But under the "passive peacekeeping" operation rules they have only light weapons and often no weapons at all. "They are not there to impose peace with force", an Indian officer said. (To do that they would need sophisticated weaponry.) Ironically, most of these soldiers could carry out better infantry pincer movements against the Hezbollah than the Israelis but that's not their assignment.
 
Quote    Reply

HoundOfHello    RE:See I told u Indian infantry considered more experienced than IDF grunts.-OLive/Jawan   8/16/2006 7:15:18 PM
I think the Indian author of the article is injecting more than a little of his own biased opinion into the article. Or maybe you didn't think of that Hercy. -HoH
 
Quote    Reply

Herc the Merc    RE:See I told u Indian infantry considered more experienced than IDF grunts.-OLive/Jawan   8/16/2006 7:36:09 PM
It was a CBS story, last I know they are still from NY. IDF does not have arecent war in its belt, last war was 1973. India is always at war with its own people or others. Practice makes perfect.
 
Quote    Reply

HoundOfHello    RE:See I told u Indian infantry considered more experienced than IDF grunts.-OLive/Jawan   8/17/2006 5:32:25 PM
I never said CBS was at fault, but rather the author, one Mr. RANJAN GUPTA. It's ok to argue that practice makes perfect, but simply stating that Indian soldiers are tougher than Israeli soldiers without offering specifics (which would have been beyond the scope of the article) is a foolish thing to do and carries little or no weight or merit. -HoH
 
Quote    Reply

GOP    RE:See I told u Indian infantry considered more experienced than IDF grunts.-OLive/Jawan   8/17/2006 6:41:39 PM
Don't think for a second that because the IDF struggled with Hezbollah, that they are less experienced with the Indian infantry or somehow weaker than the Indian infantry. Hezbollah is very well trained to be a terrorist group (much better than Al-Qaeda, and they even seem to be better than the Chechyans), and they were prepared for the IDF 'offensive' (if you want to call it that). The problem that I see with the IDF is strategy...not training/experience. They used small thrusts into Souther Lebanon instead of a full-fledged offensive which would have brought all of their power to bear on Hezbollah, overwhelming them, and destroying them (for the most part). Instead, they basically tried to avoid casualties and played 'not to lose', instead of playing 'to win'. They could have achieved complete victory, but weak politicians decided to play it safe (in my opinion). I promise you, if Sharon was healthy and in power, the IDF would have gone into Southern Lebanon and cleaned house.
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics