Results 1 to 20 of 67

Thread: A Case Against Battle Drill Six

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    74

    Default Stormtroop Tactics and Cordon and Knock

    Great discussion. Couldn't agree more--we must be very careful training Marines/Soldiers for CQB using SWAT TTPs when the enemy is often hunkered down in what would have been considered pillboxes in WWII. Then 1stLt Elliot Ackerman, USMC, wrote a great Gazette article in the Sept 2006 issue titled "Relearning Stormtroop Tactics: The Battle for Fallujah" that provides insight into his experiences leading a rifle platoon in Fallujah. I tried to attach the PDF file but it's too big. Not sure if you've all had a chance to read it.

    In the article Ackerman initially describes how he felt unprepared to attack a highly determined irregular foe in a fortified urban defense commenting that he didn't think we'd "cracked the code" just yet on urban combat. He proceeds to describe all Marine units at first relying too heavily on CQB tactics only to realize very quickly that doing so equates to suicide. He then demonstrates how infantry squads/platoons quickly learned to first identify enemy positions and then moved to isolate/overwatch while calling in tanks, air, D-9s, CAAT, LAR, Bradleys, etc. to reduce before Marines moved into clear. It's in the latter clearing process that CQB skills should be emphasized and employed. In sum: CQB TTPs are fine, but the conditions must be set to employ them before entering the objective.

    Another and possibly even more important point brought on in the article is the importance of U.S. units using infiltration tactics when fighting irregular foes in Block III urban combat instead of strictly relying on on-line assaults that are currently recommended in our doctrine and the standard in most of our training exercises. Ackerman argues that using on-line tactics makes the enemy's job easy and falls right into his preferred strategy: attrit U.S. forces at range and then fall back through pre-made tunnels, jumping from roof-to-roof or over gates, etc as U.S. forces close and then to continue this pattern until you run out of room, at which point you execute your pre-determined E&E plan and live to fight another day. His argument in this respect is supported strongly by Poole's analysis in Phantom Soldier and Tactics of the Crescent Moon. Ackerman's experiences demonstrate the validity of urban night infiltration tactics as his platoon successfully infiltrated roughly 300 meters behind enemy lines and proceeded to wreak havoc on the enemy at first light when the enemy attempted to expolit what they perceived to be our predictable on-line attack preference shortly after the sun comes up in the morning.

    All this said it's still extremely important for U.S. forces to train for urban ops at the other end of the spectrum of conflict as well. This afternoon I spent an hour conducting an AAR interview w/ an infantry Lt recently back from Ramadi. Many of his comments emphasized the importance of Marines toning down their actions and being much less aggressive when conducting cordon and search operations and even raids. As his company's primary raid force he found after a few months that his unit was much more successful when knocking and talking vs. explosive breaching/kicking down doors--even when conducting raids. He argued that even when we think we have solid intel, we're still wrong or too late in acting very often, therefore, our SWAT hard hit tactics only serve to increase the pool of POIs (pissed off Iraqis). Besides, he said he'd always isolate the objective area first and then move to enter the house with more Marines and firepower than the enemy had. Many interesting points were made throughout the discussion. His company's experience in Ramadi only goes to show that a unit can succeed when doing everything possible to de-escalate as much as possible.
    Last edited by Maximus; 02-01-2007 at 04:50 AM.

  2. #2
    Council Member bismark17's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Seattle, Wa
    Posts
    206

    Default Re:

    Amazing. I will have to read that. Since reading Poole's books I have been highly interested in a more modern or less modern? approach to small unit combat. This bizarre hybrid of mixing police tactics with what our guys are going through over there is just crazy. As slapout mentioned SWAT/HRT/SPU/SRT is going into a uncontrolled environment from a highly controlled environment. They are picking the time and place to strike. They are forcing a dynamic entry without having to worry about their 6. Snipers are overwatching and there is a ton of perimeter security both near side and far side by uniformed officers. They are usually doing the hit after a long period of attempted talking and after a CS deployment plan. The cards are stacked very heavily in our favor. None of this equates to what is going on over there.

    I was pretty impressed with the earlier thread in what would be the ideal Infantry squad and wish we would explore that further along with better TTPs. I suppose most of the discussion is better left off the net but it does make me wonder. I grew up as a 3rd generation infantryman/paratrooper and I have heard enough stories that span from WW2-Korea and then with my dad in Vietnam to know the dangers of massing people, even in a temporary situation, for a stack prior to a room entry. I am looking forward to getting my hands on that Marine Officers' AAR.

  3. #3
    Council Member slapout9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    4,818

    Default Swat

    Everybody knows what SWAT stands for don't they? Sit-Wait-And-Talk

  4. #4
    Council Member Stan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Estonia
    Posts
    3,817

    Default Swat

    Hey Slapout,
    My brother-in-law is a DC bomb squad dog handler, going on 17 years.
    SWAT teams, in his opinion, perform swift and heartless maneuvers with little compassion. Do we need these folks ? You bet !

  5. #5
    Council Member slapout9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    4,818

    Default

    Stan, Yep some people will always cross the line. That is when put out the STOP sign. I actually saw this put on a ballistic shield. The higher powers made him take it off of course but it looked cool for awhile.
    Last edited by slapout9; 02-01-2007 at 01:47 PM. Reason: spelling

  6. #6
    Moderator Steve Blair's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    3,195

    Default

    Sure, we will always need SWAT-style units, and in some cases their tactics may be useful for military ops. But, as seems the case in far too many things, the powers that be want a one-size-fits-all theory for things. "If this works for LAPD SWAT/Delta snatch teams/Chuck Norris, it MUST work for the line grunts as well." You need to retain those capabilities for situations where they are appropriate, but they will not always work.

  7. #7
    Council Member Stan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Estonia
    Posts
    3,817

    Default SWAT and Chuck Norris

    Hello Steve,
    I not only agree, but think we have somehow forgotten our grunts. We have a good laugh using them as the brunt of a joke (they were afterall in the early 70's those with the lowest GT scores).

    Often however, we worry a tad too much. That was the case with Operation Support Hope. The General posted a two-man gate guard with a SAW out front, but no ammo ?

    Yes, Africans are slow to learn, but it doesn't take much to figure out the weapon is empty and the grunt holding it like a sack of potatoes didn't help much either.

    Somewhere between SWAT man Chuck and an empty weapon with common sense.

    Regards, Stan

  8. #8
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    74

    Default

    I have a bunch of notes from the AAR with the Lt. I'll post shortly. I can also send Ackerman's article over e-mail. Just let me know.

  9. #9
    Council Member slapout9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    4,818

    Default

    Tom, in the old days the first man did not go through the door! he would lie on the ground OUTSIDE! the door and look first. If he fired nobody else went through the door until he yelled go, if he didn't fire, he yelled go and the rest of the team would enter and clear their sector. Not perfect but better than going through blind and low tech and cheap to.

  10. #10
    Council Member Stan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Estonia
    Posts
    3,817

    Default the first man did not go through the door!

    Good evening Folks !
    Slapout, God I love the way you pen this Sierra
    You could've been a grunt ! Errr, naw forget that one

    I love the movies, cops and EOD. One low, the other high and guns a blazen.
    Later, is it the white wire, or the blue one ? WHO CARES ?

    We alway just blow the flippin thing with a water canon and go home.

    Tom,
    check out "Kaur's" link RE culture for the Army. Sierrra ! I think someone actually listened to you in the end. Don't let that go to your (bald) head

    Regards, Stan

  11. #11
    Council Member Tom Odom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    DeRidder LA
    Posts
    3,949

    Default Precision UO

    Quote Originally Posted by slapout9 View Post
    Tom, in the old days the first man did not go through the door! he would lie on the ground OUTSIDE! the door and look first. If he fired nobody else went through the door until he yelled go, if he didn't fire, he yelled go and the rest of the team would enter and clear their sector. Not perfect but better than going through blind and low tech and cheap to.
    Agreed if it's safe to be out on the street in the first place. But everything is METT-T dependent; we worked this issue hard in 2003-2004. You can see the result as CALL Newsletter 03-4.

    The debate over situations is on the mark. And one not subject to a checklist approach. Precision UO is just such a case; precise is a relative term. Aachen WWII and Fallujah 2 are at one end of the spectrum; the other is as discussed here the "call out" to the locals. Each has their place depending on situation.

    Best
    Tom

  12. #12
    Council Member Ender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    81

    Default Tough subject...

    This is a very interesting subject that often comes down to two factors, the current ROE's and your (in)ability to precisely pinpoint an enemy position. There are many times when you "know" the enemy is in a particular place but are unable to provide the evidence to higher that would warrant a JDAM or AC-130 response...OR can not justify the use of higher order munitions because said enemy is (intentionally) lodged inside a mosque, or near a piece of "critical infrastructure," or embedded within the civilian populace. It is in times like these (and these days they seem to outnumber any other kind) that all of the CQB pays off.

    In the scope of small wars and unconventional conflict we tend to gravitate towards surgery as opposed to wholesale destruction. This preference lends itself to the close fight. There is a reason why we are NOT fighting standing armies, with uniforms and formal, extended supply lines. There is a reason why conflict has largely evolved from the fields and plains to the rooftops and apartments. The reason is that they really are "safer" (nowhere is safe) not because we can't get to them, but because we WON'T get to them or at the very least, are far more HESITANT to get to them.

    I dont think anyone here is saying we should have less focus on CQB but rather remember that there are other options out there, and to get entrenched with one method is going to be fatal, is that right? The message I would want to take away from this is that if circumstance and situation warrant, stop take a breath, assess, and then go ahead and call air or arty or the neighborhood Abrams and don't just rush into the stack because that is what you have been training on for the last X number of years. Training and muscle memory tend to have us dialed in on the last thing we worked with or on and it is critical to stay mentally flexible so that when the tactical situation arises you are not leading or being led by lemmings.

    As an aside and in defense of the stack. In my experiences there were very few times where we would have been able to send one person to look inside a doorway, room etc... because of a courtyard system or the construction of the building or door itself. I like the idea though and will certainly take that tactic and put it into my mental Rolodex! We were decidedly not allowed to drive our vehicles through ANYTHING, (why trash our trucks?) except in the very rare occasions when ROE's were loosened, but even THEN that kind of liberty was time and space dependent. As I said above the majority of the times we "knew" someone was somewhere, but couldn't provide the pictures, birth certificates and fingerprints of the person there to appease the popular press should the attack go wrong. It is the fear of the fourth estate that is the catalyst for highly trained soldiers and Marines to line themselves up and thow themselves into a potential meat grinder. We may not have cracked the code (yet! )and MOUT/CQB may still be one of the more dangerous components of modern combat but in spite of all of this, we are getting better and learning new ways to integrate technology with the commanders need to know what is in the building next door, without having to send in CSI afterwards.
    Last edited by Ender; 03-31-2007 at 11:42 AM.

  13. #13
    Council Member jcustis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    SOCAL
    Posts
    2,152

    Default

    I dont think anyone here is saying we should have less focus on CQB but rather remember that there are other options out there, and to get entrenched with one method is going to be fatal, is that right? The message I would want to take away from this is that if circumstance and situation warrant, stop take a breath, assess, and then go ahead and call air or arty or the neighborhood Abrams and don't just rush into the stack because that is what you have been training on for the last X number of years. Training and muscle memory tend to have us dialed in on the last thing we worked with or on and it is critical to stay mentally flexible so that when the tactical situation arises you are not leading or being led by lemmings.
    You're dead on the money.

  14. #14
    Council Member slapout9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    4,818

    Default

    Not the best picture but, here is what a lot teams are using. The battering ram is attached to the vehicle and is used to punch a mouse hole in the building and allows the team to enter from an unexpected direction. It will not tear up the vehicle either. This is a picture of an older model MP type vehicle converted to LE colors. Notice the smiley face

    http://www.swatguide.com/photos/9705STMIE.gif

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •