The vote from the peanut gallery . . .
. . . is for a new thread. I don't recall seeing nonlethality being discussed here in depth before, and I'd like to see some of the council's opinions on it.
Back to the subject at hand - Dr. Metz referred to "plug-and-play" capabilities, suggesting a standardization of the infantry company to be able to accommodate such external capacities. To me, that sounds like a further extension of the MAGTF concept from the larger scales (MARDIV/Air Wing, RCT, even MEU) down to company-level, except with armor or other support packages being replaced with intel, civil affairs, and SF type capacities.
I remember Ken arguing that GP infantry forces are capable of a lot of small-unit or "special" missions that we tend to associate with Ranger or other such specialized formations, and I'm wondering if typical infantry companies already don't operate closely with these sorts of external bu associated capabilities attached for particular missions.
Regards,
Matt
Western CO-Infantry Company
William F. Owen:
As you know the Portuguese fought a very long and largely successful counter insurgency in their African Empire for almost two generations. Their Army was very, very poor. The Portuguese turned this poverty into a virtue. They deployed lightly armed and equipped infantry companies. These companies could foot patrol into a target area as a unit. They were not road bound. The company could actually move as a unit cross country.
These companies were very hard to interdict. Essentially they could go where ever they wanted to. The insurgents had great difficulty developing secure "liberated areas".
The French Colonial Parachute Battalions had the same concept during the Algerian war. Eventually the British followed a similar pattern during the Malaysian Emergency (See Faber Shoot to Kill).
I think it would be wise not to try and turn an Infantry Company into a combined arms task force with many different skills and a lot of equipment. On the other hand it may be wise to place it under the operational control of a Special Forces Detachment.
100 Man Foot Company for Counter Insurgency
1. Headquarters Squad with 4-man reconnaissance patrol
2. Infantry Platoon x 3
A. Platoon Headquarters: 3-men
B. Rifle Squad x 3: 9-men
Please note that there are no organic support or service personnel or vehicles. The strength of the company is its ability as a unit to move on foot at night across any type of terrain without a lot of motors and squealing tracks; and at teh same time to be easily picked up and transported great distances by aircraft or truck. I suggest that the support personnel as in the WWII Special Service Force be grouped into a separate unit. Finally such a unit would be operating besides more heavily armed and mounted companies.
Regards
Richard W
When in Rome do as the Romans do
A lot of the thought has to be to stop relying on the Army to provide so much. Stick me in a village with bare necessities and let me live like the locals. Too many of us have gotten use to "luxury" items. If I'm doing the right thing many of my needs will be supplied by the locals. Then my only logistical requirements can come by parachute in the middle of the night. Those items should be what I need to help the locals, not pamper myself. If creating COIN companies then they would need to realize what "snake eaters" really are. Ever had camel?:D Taste like chicken.....not really!