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
Massive    RE: Albanyrifles   11/16/2004 2:31:47 PM
You could be right. But, then again, you would expect the marines involved to be some of the best trained in Iraq. Let's wait and see.
 
Quote    Reply

AlbanyRifles    Massive   11/16/2004 2:53:25 PM
Agree
 
Quote    Reply

USN-MID    RE:US infantry individual infantry skills   11/16/2004 7:06:46 PM
Link to AP news report: http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&e=4&u=/ap/20041116/ap_on_re_us/marine_shooting_10 The story of the event corrobrates with what my XO relayed to us. Remember, these guys have been fighting suicide bombers. You have to wonder what a combat infantryman would think if what seemed like a dead body from a previous firefight suddenly got up nearby. It doesn't make it right, but it gives perspective.
 
Quote    Reply

Aussiegunner    RE:Aussiegunner and all others-please read MY post before jumping to conclusions!   11/16/2004 7:59:44 PM
"The doctrine has changed....you mass fires so you have to crowd people together to get their weapons to bear." Sounds like a doctrine for suicide to me. One RPG or mortar bomb or claymore mine and whamo, there goes your section and no amount of body armour is going to save you. I'd be interested to see some documentation on that doctrine as well as an explanation of from whose experience it has been developed, given that this is the first major urban conflict for US troops for a lot longer than 5 years. .
 
Quote    Reply

USN-MID    RE:Aussiegunner and all others-please read MY post before jumping to conclusions!   11/16/2004 8:13:06 PM
In Somalia, soldiers survived RPG near hits. In the Battle for Baghdad, a Marine survived an RPG going off literally a foot from his head while riding in a AAV. Mortars seem difficult to use in urban combat. Claymores seem like the thing the new body armor is designed to stop, as it's basically a big shrapnel bomb.
 
Quote    Reply

Aussiegunner    RE:Aussiegunner and all others-please read MY post before jumping to conclusions!   11/17/2004 6:29:04 AM
"In Somalia, soldiers survived RPG near hits. In the Battle for Baghdad, a Marine survived an RPG going off literally a foot from his head while riding in a AAV." That doesn't mean you should go out of your way to make yourself vulnerable! I'd be willing to bet that those survival stories involved serious injuries that put them out of action. "Mortars seem difficult to use in urban combat." Tell that to the troops who have been fired upon by them in Iraq, since the insurgency began.
 
Quote    Reply

Aussiegunner    All Americans   11/17/2004 6:33:54 AM
I'm feeling really bad about appearing to unrelentingly bag your troops and have been looking hard at the news for examples of US soldiers using the right techniques. However, I just continually see them doing it wrong. Today, I saw two clips of troops neutralising insurgents in cellers with explosives and grenades. 6 or 7 troops outside were all just standing in a group, watching the fireworks. In a combat zone on such an operation, they should have been in all-round defence. The stress of being under fire was not an excuse in this instance, because they weren't. Sorry, these things just keep popping up but I'll keep looking for more positive examples.
 
Quote    Reply

AlbanyRifles    RE:All Americans   11/17/2004 9:02:34 AM
And once again AG, I ask "Were you there?" Did you see if the rest of the platoon was in overwatch? Were the part of a Bradley Vehicle squad, in which case the vehicle provides the rear security? I am not saying they were or weren't....what I am saying is you are seeing the actions through a straw. As for where the doctrine changes come from.....I still work with the US Army since I retired and I have read most of the AARs coming out of theater over the previous several years. Try the Center for Army Lessons LEarned or the USMCs websites. Read Thunder Run, The Road Up and In The Company of Soldiers....read Armor magazine and Infantry Magazine. Heck, you even referenced our experiences in Somalia where we learned from our errors (See Mike Golf's war stories). What I am stating is that what is taught in the Aussie Army may not be taught that way in the US Army or Marines....I remember having a long discussion on thsi very point in 1985 with an Australian major at the US Army Infantry School over how to employ armor in wooded terrain.
 
Quote    Reply

Aussiegunner    RE:All Americans   11/17/2004 9:17:56 AM
"And once again AG, I ask "Were you there?" Did you see if the rest of the platoon was in overwatch? Were the part of a Bradley Vehicle squad, in which case the vehicle provides the rear security? I am not saying they were or weren't....what I am saying is you are seeing the actions through a straw." And once again Albany Rifles, if I had only seen this once I would be the first to agree with you. However, I'm seeing it every night, so I stand by my comments. As for doctrinal issues, I think that doctrine which by and large doesn't involve having infantry spread out as far as is practicable, is rotten doctrine. Relying on a vehicle to cover your six while you stand around in the open is particularily ridiculous. Attacks can come from any direction, especially in an at best semi-secure close environment like Falluja. A force of infantry needs to deploy its weapons for 360 degree cover to minimise the risk of casualties. .
 
Quote    Reply

AlbanyRifles    RE:All Americans   11/17/2004 9:41:33 AM
And not seeing your news coverage I can not speak to those specifics, but if the squad in the picture is all looking one way. maybe the rest of the platoon is facing out and covering their back...As I said, I don't know, but I would like to hear if the camera pans 360....from what i have seen on US TV (and by that, I mean the longer coverage we get on PBS which includes reports by ITN, PBS and other reporters,) I can honestly say I don't see an overall problem. There are times when I can watch and tell right away whether the troops are Soldiers or Marines by how they do things....different, not better. And I know you should spread out whenever you can, but sometime to mass fires you have to get folks close together because of the obvious...the walls are in the way. Bottomline, I don't see any evidence of a systemic problems with docrine or training.
 
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