I don't think anyone of note fails to realize that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
JMA
The one fact remains constant and that is conventional foot patrols in open terrain do just not make sense. Can someone tell me what they achieve other than to provide the enemy target practice at a place and time of HIS choosing?
Which is why most units in Iraq and Afghanistan made or make extensive use of vehicles -- lots of vehicles, usually four to six per infantry platoon -- especially issued in excess of normal allowances to generally preclude foot patrols where they are inappropriate.
OTOH, in urban areas and in some mountainous areas as opposed to generally open area, some foot movement is desirable or necessary
The problem in Afghanistan in particular is in the areas of the nation with terrain that is largely mountainous but does have occasional broad valleys. The lack of roads and a conscious and deliberate decision by the US not to use tracked vehicles means that some insertions of infantry units by truck or helicopter are going to occasionally have to cross open ground. More common is foot movement in the mountains themselves where vehicle movement is not possible.
If you have solutions to those two problems, we'd be glad to hear them...
Watch those bells, us old guys have tinnitis and you may hear something that wasn't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
JMA
I don't claim to have solutions but I do have comments. When I read some of this stuff bells start ringing and lights go on.
Comment away, that's why we're here
Quote:
It is pointless patrolling open ground on foot or by vehicle unless the enemy are to be found sitting in the open ground.
Uh. Well, yeah. I think we can all agree with that. However, one may have to cross open ground on foot or by vehicle to get from one's current location to the possible location of the evil enema. What then?
Quote:
If one assumes that movement on foot in the open is merely to cross what the commander sees as a "danger area" and where some degree of tactical maneuver procedure is applied then OK. To sweep through open ground is plain ridiculous.
Well, we can agree on that. That answers my question and trashes your objection, though... :D
Quote:
.
Vehicles. What good is a vehicle 'patrol' confined to a road which gives many minutes of advanced noise warning to the enemy to clear the roads and standby to fire the IEDs? Crazy.
Of course it is. What does one do, however, if one has to move a convoy down such a road for resupply purposes because of a lack of any other way to resupply a location deemed tatically necessary.
Quote:
As a 2Lt I learnt this first hand...So if you ask me whether it is sane to travel on roads where at any place and at any time some guy with a cell phone can blow you to hell and back... it is not. You just have to make a new plan to get around.
Wish it were that simple. While I certainly agree with your statement and I'm sure many folks in Afghanistan also agree, there are times when one has to cross open areas; there are times when one has to travel on roads that are highly probably going to have mines or IEDs. It does the people that have to do those things little good to tell them or the world that it's insane -- they know that. War is insane. However, if you have to fight one do your very best and learn from your experience -- just do not presume that your experience in one war translates well to others. Every war is different. While there are timeless tactical principles that can generally be applied, there are no guarantees that they can always be applied. Or that they'll always work. It is also dangerous to assume from fragmented reporting and a position of less than full knowledge that what appears to have happened actually did happen; often the actuality is totally unlike the initial reports...
Worst thing about wars is not everyone will do it your way. Troops learn that, so they adapt and cope -- just like you did. These kids aren't stupid, they, like you did, are doing what they have to do the best way they can.