Anti tank weapons become anti personel weapons

[Merv Benson]

Jerusalem Post via PrairiePundit:

Jerusalem Post:

Lt. Ohad Shamir was commanding a surveillance team hiding in Maroun a-Ras. Their mission was to locate Hizbullah fighters still operating near the village after it had been captured by Golani and Paratroopers units. Shamir's men felt pretty safe - during the 10 days they spent in the village, not a shot had been fired at their building. But then an antitank missile hit the structure and Shamir was lightly wounded.

On Wednesday, he was being treated at Safed's Ziv Hospital for fragments in his back.

"They are small teams, three of four people, hiding in the undergrowth, firing out of nowhere. They're the biggest danger," he said of the Hizbullah gunmen.

The same story repeats itself time and again in the hospital wards where wounded solders are recovering and comparing experiences. No one has yet begun analyzing the causes of casualties in this war, but the indisputable fact is that the great majority of wounds and deaths were a result of antitank missiles - more than from gunfire, grenades and other explosive devices together.

The term "antitank" is misleading; the missiles were originally designed to be used against tanks, but the IDF's Merkava tanks and upgraded armored fighting vehicles are capable of withstanding most missiles in Hizbullah's arsenal. But Hizbullah isn't using them only against tanks. The range of these missiles - up to three kilometers - and the force of their explosive charges make them ideal for attacking groups of soldiers and IDF positions from afar.

...

Over the last two weeks, the tactic used by many of the Hizbullah teams has been to avoid close-range combat, where IDF soldiers' high level of training gives them the upper hand. Instead, the Hizbullah men have been moving to positions high above villages and continuing to fire missiles at the IDF forces. Large stores of missiles were prepared in the hills in advance, for this eventuality.

...

This is a tactic I noticed in the early days of the war in Iraq also. Many of the casualties in the major combat operations phase of the war were from RPG's and antitank weapons. I think there are several reason for this. First body armor has made the AK-47 a less effective weapon. Second the Islamist "fighters" are not very good in close combat, i.e. they get destroyed. Their response to these realities is to use the antitank weapons as antipersonel weapons in a stand off range, in small units. Dispersal like this makes it impossible for them to actually take and hold a position, but it does allow them to inflict casualties before retreating.

[Jedburgh]

Second the Islamist "fighters" are not very good in close combat, i.e. they get destroyed. Their response to these realities is to use the antitank weapons as antipersonel weapons in a stand off range, in small units. Dispersal like this makes it impossible for them to actually take and hold a position, but it does allow them to inflict casualties before retreating.

The tone is typical of the conventional military's disdain for irregular warfare. While failing miserably to eliminate the problem, they imply that the enemy is a lesser foe by referring to their reluctance to meet conventional forces head-on, and their constant retreats after each engagement. Hizballah, like any other irregular force, has no interest in meeting the enemy head-to-head in close combat, nor in taking and holding ground. They are not throwing their manpower away in pointless seeking for martyrdom. The far ambush using AT weapons is excellent tactics on their part. Hit and run is classic guerrilla warfare, and given the Israeli homefront's sensitivity to IDF casualty numbers, it is also good IO. To "win" this fracas, Hizballah only needs to survive. They are doing a bit better than that right now.

[Steve Blair]

Once again, shades of Vietnam. Both NVA and VC units would use RPGs to initiate ambushes, and frequently used "anti-tank" weapons as a very effective squad level fire support weapon. As Jed pointed out, it's simply good tactics on their part. Not only does the RPG-type weapon provide a good shock value and an area attack, it causes casualties that can slow or paralyze a unit long enough for the attacker to decide to either continue the fight or to break contact depending on the situation. And both Vietnam and later involvements showed the utility of the RPG as an anti-helicopter weapon.

[bismark17]

This shouldn't be news. I remember the Marines in Beirut prior to the Embassy bombing having to deal with mass firings of RPGs at them. It makes sense to utilize as much of a stand off capacity as you can. It's just like gunfighting in this country. The stats prove the farther out that Law Enforcement can engage suspects the better we do. It seems like Israel is falling into the same troubles that we do when fighting a non conventional force.

[Jones_RE]

Historically speaking, small arms tend to be the smallest contribution to casualties in any war - whether World War I or Operation Iraqi Freedom. It's not surprising that insurgent forces would turn the RPG (often their only heavy weapon) to every possible use.

Western forces have no equivalent to the venerable RPG-7. The AT-4 and LAW are single shot and vastly less flexible. On the other hand, western forces have access to air support and artillery. Would you say our Marines are cowardly for relying on helicopter gunships when they could close with insurgents? Of course not, you'd say they were smart.

The same theory applies to mortar, rocket and IED attacks. Each is a crude, cheap and easy to use weapon which is more powerful than a small arm and widely available to insurgent forces.

With regard to Hezbollah, it should be no surprise that they have stocked up on anti-armor weapons. Their most likely opponent is the Israel Defense Forces, which are famously armor heavy. They restrict themselves to man portable systems out of a justifiable concern for IAF airpower and the lack of maintenance assets which would enable vehicle borne weapons to operate effectively.

[Tom Odom]

Per Les Grau, my friend and a great American:

The RPG-7 and asymmetrical future combat

The RPG-7 will be around for a good while yet. It is a proven, cheap killer of technology which will continue to play a significant role--particularly when conventional forces are pitted against irregular forces. Russian veterans are enthusiastic about the RPG-7 and have suggested that the Russians need to develop an antipersonnel round, an incendiary round, a smoke round, an illumination round and other special-purpose rounds to give the RPG-7 more flexibility in future combat. (27) US soldiers need to be aware of the RPG-7 and how it has been deployed. The chances are, whenever a US soldier is deployed to a trouble spot, the RPG-7 will be part of the local landscape.

From:

A Weapon For All Seasons: The Old But Effective RPG-7 Promises to Haunt the Battlefields of Tomorrow

At: http://fmso.leavenworth.army.mil/documents/weapon.htm

Best

Tom