Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 61 to 78 of 78

Thread: Improving PSYOP (and CA as a tangent)

  1. #61
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Austin
    Posts
    16

    Default

    Another point contended in this post hits kinda close to home...

    I'm not an elegant writer so I'm not going to use euphemism and literary tools like "rolled sleeves", "burned by brass" and their like, but I will try to convey my experiences and opinions as concisely as possible.

    First off let me say, I'm a grunt... 11B, and a Marine 0331 before that. I will always be a grunt, regardless if my paperwork says 35F, or not.

    When it comes down to the effectiveness of the "Tactical Corporal" being the end user of PsyOp Product or the deliverer of the message to the mass populace, he's just as good as the next guy. When it comes down to it 90% of an average low income Iraqi's image of the USA is that American soldier. He doesn't have MTV, he doesn't know enough English to understand what 2Pac is saying on that CD, even though he likes the beat. What he knows is the guys in ACU's who drives around his village once a week.

    That being said, PsyOps is way more effective in handling situations that the "Tactical Corporal" can not, or should not be involved with. For example, dealing with local black marketers or gun/drug runners without shooting or arresting them. For you commanders out there... PLEASE use us like this!
    There are thousands of ways that PsyOps can be utilized, and we only get used in 1% of our many facets. This is usually due to a bad CAPEs breif, but sometimes by the supported unit's commander's choice.


    Another facet of the Grunt Vs. PsyOp, etc... argument is the mental capacity that is required for each task... and something about fight vs. flight adrenaline... reaction determined by training... blah, blah, etc.. etc...

    OK, first off... from my personal experience, which is actually next to nil (only had rounds go my direction once), I can say training doesn't determine your actions. Training makes you instinctively ask questions, i.e. where are the shots coming from, All sorts of situation awareness questions like where am I situated amongst my comrades, are there any adjacent units, the list can go on, but I believe someone posted up a pretty good list of things earlier on in the thread. All this happens in a split second, I think only one question get asked after you start firing back... "What where those dang ROE's?"

  2. #62
    Council Member marct's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    3,682

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Voodoun View Post
    hell, cross cultural nothing, there's miscommunication going on rampantly right here!
    Always ! Part of the medium (BTW, I'm actually serious about that - miscommunication using text-form electronic exchange has a 400% increase in miscommunication over f2f communication).
    Sic Bisquitus Disintegrat...
    Marc W.D. Tyrrell, Ph.D.
    Institute of Interdisciplinary Studies,
    Senior Research Fellow,
    The Canadian Centre for Intelligence and Security Studies, NPSIA
    Carleton University
    http://marctyrrell.com/

  3. #63
    Council Member Ken White's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8,060

    Default You need to consider a couple of things, I think

    Quote Originally Posted by Voodoun View Post
    First off, I presented a case that was not MINE, I was RELAYING an explanation, I was not saying one thing was true and one wasnt, I was asking questions to explore a notion, and I was bending over backwards to qualify that discussion with words like 'assume' and 'perhaps wrongfully' but you're still jumping down my throat? Sure thing!
    Relaying hearsay and couching it as fact doesn't draw many backers; if you do it, then you should expect it to be challenged.
    So what have we learned? Don't ask questions, don't be informed or have an informed opinion, because the only thing that matters here is military experience, accept everything presented at face value, never drill deeper for substantiation, absolutely never reject straw men and defend your contention...
    If that's what you learned from this, you weren't paying attention. You might have, possibly should have, learned that if you ask a question, you'll get an answer and if it's one that you don't agree with, that does not necessarily mean the answer is incorrect. There's nothing wrong with having an opinion and stating that opinion; you after all were welcomed here and encouraged to ask questions and if there's one thing that can be said about this board is that diverse opinions are welcome -- however, when you state an opinion that starts "I've been told..." you're probably going to catch some flak. You can drill deeper for substantiation but when several people confirm what you were originally told and you tell all them they're wrong because you were "told something else." they're going to lose interest in you pretty quickly.
    most importantly we have just discovered that PSYOP is a job anyone can do, because there's no cognitive difference between being an infantry soldier and a PSYOP soldier, despite what former infantry guys turned PSYOP say about it - and even having the audacity to be curious about this, to simply want to discuss it, is condescending and insulting.
    That's an interesting take on what's above in this thread. I suggest you go back and relook it. The point made was simply that infantry types have cognitive requirements as well -- they differ, certainly, but they exist. RTK tried to point out a few of them and your response was a dismissive "Nope, sure can't. Wouldnt have a clue how to start." Not exactly top of the line discussion.

    You provided three links; none of them refuted what I said:

    "" If you know that, you're ahead of me -- I have yet to see any goal other than to confront the actors and attack their funding and (to an extent and not too well done) their credibility. IMO, that's not the same thing as attacking the ideology -- which would be futile in any event.""

    The first is from 2005 when we were groping (we still are IMO, your mileage may vary --and that's okay); the second doesn't change much and the third sort of seems to agree with me citing 23 reasons given for the various wars...

    So, you said
    "So yes, when the president calls the GWOT a long lasting struggle with ideology, and launches a campaign directed to "transform Islam", I think its pretty safe to say we were confronting more than just the actors, but attempting to bring transformative change.

    But my sleeves were cuffed while I pulled those up, so there's no validity to substantive points made."
    You quote a man who has given 23 different reasons for his actions -- which is irrelevant because all I did was state my opinion and suggest that attempts to attack an ideology would not succeed. history is pretty much on my side on that, I think...

    Conversely, if one were to try to wean people away from an ideology, a quite different thing, one might succeed. Attacking ideologies (we've done it before) will get you a few fellow travelers and the marginally involved, it will not change the true believers an iota. That was my point.

    So what you took as a personal attack wasn't even close to being one; I was merely making the point that no matter what was said, it's unlikely to happen.
    I guess I'm just a raging dillhole that has clearly offended many of you with my unforgivable questions and constant reminders that I know very little about soldiering, and am just trying to learn and understand.

    SWEET. Got it. <----------- tongue in cheek sarcasm, just to ensure no one misunderestimates my tone and intention
    It might help if you wouldn't try to impress everyone with your wit (my wife gets on me about that constantly for some reason... ) and would realize that no one here started there day with the mantra "Get Voodoun.' You ask questions, get answers, assess them, make up your own mind on what to retain and what to discard -- but if you respond to answers that you don't like with sarcasm or condescension, you're likely to get it right back and if you get overly defensive about flak you've almost invited -- and you did -- then things spiral out of control. Your choice.

    No one's trying to pick a fight with you. How about you?
    Last edited by Ken White; 01-24-2009 at 03:29 AM.

  4. #64
    Small Wars Journal SWJED's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Largo, Florida
    Posts
    3,989

    Default To no one in particular...

    ... but to all.

    Stay professional, civil, and on topic - do I need to type a tome to explain what I mean? Don't damage our reputation here at the Council. Won't tolerate it - to the new guys and the old timers - house rules.

    Dave
    Last edited by SWJED; 01-24-2009 at 03:03 AM.

  5. #65
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    ATX
    Posts
    2

    Default

    I signed up for the board primarily so I could jump into this thread.

    In particular I want to share my thoughts on this little bit...

    Quote Originally Posted by Voodoun View Post
    ... and most importantly we have just discovered that PSYOP is a job anyone can do, because there's no cognitive difference between being an infantry soldier and a PSYOP soldier, despite what former infantry guys turned PSYOP say about it - and even having the audacity to be curious about this, to simply want to discuss it, is condescending and insulting.
    As a CAPOC comrade, I think I can understand where this bit of sarcasm is coming from. It is pretty disheartening to hear that the time you sacrificed at SWCS does not make you a uniquely valuable asset. I will agree with the other posters (RTK and Ken White, I believe) that PSYOPs, and also CMO, can be performed by any soldier, they are not some arcane art.

    So, why bother having a TPT or CAT-A anyway? Because someone somewhere (probably in Virginia) thought a TPT or CAT-A would be a valuable asset to a BN commander. It's up to you as a TPT or CAT-A member to prove them right, . You do this by being a SME - sure anyone can do PSYOPs, but you need to be able to do it more effectively. As a SME you can be assigned critical PSYOP missions, and assist identifying potential applications/effective tactics.

    In my opinion CMO is very difficult to teach in a classroom environment, and I expect that PSYOP is similar. I seem to recall that you're relatively new - in which case it's very unlikely that you are the SME you need to be. If this is the case, let me encourage you to go into sponge mode. Learn as much as you can about tactical psyops from the NCOs leaving your unit, and from other sources outside of CAPOC, such as perhaps this board. Learn what people have done, what's worked and what hasn't. When you're deployed use your critical thinking skills, and figure out why things do or don't work as you experience them.

    Oh yeah, and I'd recommend keep the knowledge that as a member of CAPOC you're on average more intelligent, better educated, and better looking than the rest of the armed forces internalized. Myth or reality, it's good for esprit de corps in the unit, not so much when playing our support role.

  6. #66
    Council Member Ken White's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8,060

    Default Well, I'll give you better looking,

    he said grudgingly...

    Good post hdc_bst. Like somebody said, we're all in this together. Your advice on becoming the SME is important. Credibility is won by competence and little else. What one know counts not nearly as much as what one does...

  7. #67
    Council Member ODB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    TN
    Posts
    278

    Default Anger management may be in my future

    kville79 Another point contended in this post hits kinda close to home...

    I'm not an elegant writer so I'm not going to use euphemism and literary tools like "rolled sleeves", "burned by brass" and their like, but I will try to convey my experiences and opinions as concisely as possible.
    Has nothing to do with "euphemisms" or "literary tools". Simple answers to simple questions, nothing more, nothing less.

    When it comes down to the effectiveness of the "Tactical Corporal" being the end user of PsyOp Product or the deliverer of the message to the mass populace, he's just as good as the next guy. When it comes down to it 90% of an average low income Iraqi's image of the USA is that American soldier. He doesn't have MTV, he doesn't know enough English to understand what 2Pac is saying on that CD, even though he likes the beat. What he knows is the guys in ACU's who drives around his village once a week.
    Actually kinda funny. Didn't know low income Iraqi's only image of the US was us soldiers. If memory serves me right these same low income families are the ones who are the most manipulated in the country. They are bought by a number of players on the ground in Iraq, be it us, local sheiks, foreign influences, criminals, the list goes on. Understand these "low income Iraqis" are where the fight is being won and lost on many levels. Sometimes it is as easy as employing them to wear PT belts and guard the highway, but to continue to foster that relationship sometimes one must "persuade" the local sheik to not be so greedy with his "take" of their profits. There are so many different levels to this, do not start to group them and put percentages on them. Last time I checked there were more houses with Satellite dishes than without. Do not underestimate their knowledge or perceptions.

    That being said, PsyOps is way more effective in handling situations that the "Tactical Corporal" can not, or should not be involved with. For example, dealing with local black marketers or gun/drug runners without shooting or arresting them. For you commanders out there... PLEASE use us like this!
    There are thousands of ways that PsyOps can be utilized, and we only get used in 1% of our many facets. This is usually due to a bad CAPEs breif, but sometimes by the supported unit's commander's choice.
    Serious heartburn forming here, but will not diminish the effectiveness of this forum. Just remember that competency can go a long way. In reality I want to know what you can do for me, quite simply with you or without you I will change what is happening in my AOR. I will deal with the gray area guys, might already be doing so. Yes my perspective is different than others on here, but if you can't sell your abilities/capabilities then you end up not being utilized, but to pull security. Seems like you acknowledge the fact that it usually do to a bad CAPEs brief, so one only has to look as far as ones own product. For my own knowledge what quantifies PsyOps to deal with the black market/gun dealers/smugglers more so than the "Tactical Corporal"? This gets at the heart of my point about competency. Don't take this the wrong way, but if the info in your briefs resemble the info you post I can see why your under/misutilized.....just remember competency.


    Another facet of the Grunt Vs. PsyOp, etc... argument is the mental capacity that is required for each task... and something about fight vs. flight adrenaline... reaction determined by training... blah, blah, etc.. etc...
    Never have claimed to be a smart man. Obviously if I was I wouldn't be doing what I do for the same paycheck others get for doing less. Unfortunately I love what I do and wouldn't change it for the world. Has nothing to do with mental capacity of one vs the other. Simply some are more adept to things than others.

    OK, first off... from my personal experience, which is actually next to nil (only had rounds go my direction once), I can say training doesn't determine your actions. Training makes you instinctively ask questions, i.e. where are the shots coming from, All sorts of situation awareness questions like where am I situated amongst my comrades, are there any adjacent units, the list can go on, but I believe someone posted up a pretty good list of things earlier on in the thread. All this happens in a split second, I think only one question get asked after you start firing back... "What where those dang ROE's?"
    Violent disagreement here. Training does determine your actions. Human instinct is flight. No one in their right mind wants to stay around to be shot at. Luckily we overcome this instinct through training. Sorry but no questions arise here. Going in already know what I have available, the only thing is how I'm going to utilize it. Situational awareness should be constant, not something that you suddenly realize when the bullets start flying. I already know who is where and what assets I have. Through training I make the decision how to employ them and where. One reacts instinctively based on training, we rewire our brains, some better than others and then some just are not wired right to begin with, just ask my wife.

    Again apologize if this seemed outta context, not eloquent with words like some are, but working on it.
    ODB

    Exchange with an Iraqi soldier during FID:

    Why did you not clear your corner?

    Because we are on a base and it is secure.

  8. #68
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,444

    Default I think you're both right.

    Quote Originally Posted by kville79 View Post
    I can say training doesn't determine your actions. Training makes you instinctively ask questions, i.e. where are the shots coming from, All sorts of situation awareness questions like where am I situated amongst my comrades, are there any adjacent units, the list can go on, but I believe someone posted up a pretty good list of things earlier on in the thread.
    Quote Originally Posted by ODB View Post
    Violent disagreement here. Training does determine your actions. Human instinct is flight. No one in their right mind wants to stay around to be shot at. Luckily we overcome this instinct through training.
    I think you've both got a good point. I cannot speak from the perspective of the 19-year-old rifleman, because I never was one. But I can speak from the perspective of the LT and CPT. The thought of fleeing enemy contact never entered my head. In hindsight, with our training and doctrine in mind, it probably should have a couple of times. But, the "flight" reaction never kicked in (aside from physiological responses) because of a sense of duty and responsibility to my Soldiers. The duty is ingrained through organizational culture. The responsibility, in my opinion, is instinctive. We are pack animals. So, I think you're both right - training and instinct. Most of the time, I think the pack animal instinct reigned. But whenever I needed to think through a decision, the sense of duty seemed to dominate in my brain - "if I don't think through this properly, some of my guys are going die due to my stupidity."

    Particularly when one is responsible for the pack (i.e. - the leader), one's instinctive protectiveness of one's clan kicks in. I suspect that it similarly kicks in for the PVT and SPC to protect the guys next to him.

    Quote Originally Posted by ODB View Post
    Through training I make the decision how to employ them and where. One reacts instinctively based on training, we rewire our brains, some better than others and then some just are not wired right to begin with, just ask my wife.
    I'd say that's true of things like reflexive firing, magazine changes, etc - things that are motor memory. To some extent, maybe even small unit coordination within a small unit that is cohesive - you just develop a sense of what the guy next to you is seeing and thinking based upon very subtle behaviors that he exhibits. But there is still a whole lot of decision-making that gets decided on the basis of how much ammo we've got left, how many casualties we've taken, how long before we're reinforced, et cetera. Those weren't instinctive. Those decisions were all followed by the thought of, "I hope I made the right decision."

  9. #69
    Council Member reed11b's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Olympia WA
    Posts
    531

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ODB View Post

    Violent disagreement here. Training does determine your actions. Human instinct is flight. No one in their right mind wants to stay around to be shot at. Luckily we overcome this instinct through training. Sorry but no questions arise here. Going in already know what I have available, the only thing is how I'm going to utilize it. Situational awareness should be constant, not something that you suddenly realize when the bullets start flying. I already know who is where and what assets I have. Through training I make the decision how to employ them and where. One reacts instinctively based on training, we rewire our brains, some better than others and then some just are not wired right to begin with, just ask my wife.
    I have to violently disagree with you on this. If only training and drills kept soldiers from fleeing when they made contact w/ the enemy then M day National Guard soldiers would have all broken in Iraq. It is the sense of duty and the support of your peers that keeps us in the fight. I also feel that saying that "you must always have situational awareness, not just when the bullets start flying" is a cop out. While it is technically true, once the bullets start flying, obviously the situation has changed and how it has changed must be assessed. You do think in combat. The ability to make choices in high stress situations is what separates good leaders from bad ones and the ability to make far reaching decisions under stress is what separates great leaders from the merely good ones.
    Reed
    Quote Originally Posted by sapperfitz82 View Post
    This truly is the bike helmet generation.

  10. #70
    Council Member RTK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Wherever my stuff is
    Posts
    823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ODB View Post
    Violent disagreement here. Training does determine your actions. Human instinct is flight. No one in their right mind wants to stay around to be shot at. Luckily we overcome this instinct through training. Sorry but no questions arise here. Going in already know what I have available, the only thing is how I'm going to utilize it. Situational awareness should be constant, not something that you suddenly realize when the bullets start flying. I already know who is where and what assets I have. Through training I make the decision how to employ them and where. One reacts instinctively based on training, we rewire our brains, some better than others and then some just are not wired right to begin with, just ask my wife.
    Quote Originally Posted by Schmedlap View Post
    I think you've both got a good point. I cannot speak from the perspective of the 19-year-old rifleman, because I never was one. But I can speak from the perspective of the LT and CPT. The thought of fleeing enemy contact never entered my head. In hindsight, with our training and doctrine in mind, it probably should have a couple of times. But, the "flight" reaction never kicked in (aside from physiological responses) because of a sense of duty and responsibility to my Soldiers. The duty is ingrained through organizational culture. The responsibility, in my opinion, is instinctive. We are pack animals. So, I think you're both right - training and instinct. Most of the time, I think the pack animal instinct reigned. But whenever I needed to think through a decision, the sense of duty seemed to dominate in my brain - "if I don't think through this properly, some of my guys are going die due to my stupidity."
    Quote Originally Posted by reed11b View Post
    I have to violently disagree with you on this. If only training and drills kept soldiers from fleeing when they made contact w/ the enemy then M day National Guard soldiers would have all broken in Iraq. It is the sense of duty and the support of your peers that keeps us in the fight. I also feel that saying that "you must always have situational awareness, not just when the bullets start flying" is a cop out. While it is technically true, once the bullets start flying, obviously the situation has changed and how it has changed must be assessed. You do think in combat. The ability to make choices in high stress situations is what separates good leaders from bad ones and the ability to make far reaching decisions under stress is what separates great leaders from the merely good ones.
    Reed
    I think you're all talking on the same level. What I'm getting from all three of you is violent agreement with:

    Have you been trained to place yourself in the proper mindset, sense of duty, loyalty to ones fellow Soldiers/Marines, and innoculated yourself of the stress that hinders decision making to the vast majority of people?

    That begins on day 1 of basic training. I think each of you are on point. As they say in Arabiya "Al-tikrar yi'allim al-shuttar" - repetition teaches the clever ones.
    Example is better than precept.

  11. #71
    Council Member ODB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    TN
    Posts
    278

    Default See if I can clear this up

    From FM 7-8 Chapter 4

    FM 25-101 defines a battle drill as "a collective action rapidly executed without applying a deliberate decision-making process."

    a. Characteristics of a battle drill are--

    They require minimal leader orders to accomplish and are standard throughout the Army.

    Sequential actions are vital to success in combat or critical to preserving life.

    They apply to platoon or smaller units.

    They are trained responses to enemy actions or leader's orders.

    They represent mental steps followed for offensive and defensive actions in training and combat.

    b. A platoons ability to accomplish its mission often depends on soldiers and leaders to execute key actions quickly. All soldiers and their leaders must know their immediate reaction to enemy contact as well as follow-up actions. Drills are limited to situations requiring instantaneous response; therefore, soldiers must execute drills instinctively. This results from continual practice. Drills provide small units with standard procedures essential for building strength and aggressiveness.

    They identify key actions that leaders and soldiers must perform quickly.

    They provide for a smooth transition from one activity to another; for example, from movement to offensive action to defensive action.

    They provide standardized actions that link soldier and collective tasks at platoon level and below. (Soldiers perform individual tasks to CTT or SDT standard.)

    They require the full understanding of each individual and leader, and continual practice.

    What one has to look at is at what point in the fight we are putting into context. I'm sensing a reoccuring theme here of late.......training.

    Originally posted by reed11b

    I also feel that saying that "you must always have situational awareness, not just when the bullets start flying" is a cop out.
    How so? It's a cop out that I am constantly aware of my surroundings and changes to it. Be it everyday life, driving down the road, going out to dinner, the mall, you name it, to combat it constantly applies. If any thing I'd say it's the product of being properly trained somewhere along my career.

    RTK.....I was getting there, just took me longer to type than you!
    Last edited by ODB; 01-24-2009 at 08:57 PM.
    ODB

    Exchange with an Iraqi soldier during FID:

    Why did you not clear your corner?

    Because we are on a base and it is secure.

  12. #72
    Council Member Ken White's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8,060

    Thumbs up If your wife leaves you, I'll

    Quote Originally Posted by ODB View Post
    I'm sensing a reoccuring theme here of late.......training.
    marry you

    (Well not really -- but I could fall in love with your sensing. Particularly since you said it so I didn't need to... )

  13. #73
    Council Member ODB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    TN
    Posts
    278

    Smile Great offer

    Quote Originally Posted by Ken White View Post
    marry you

    (Well not really -- but I could fall in love with your sensing. Particularly since you said it so I didn't need to... )
    but I promised myself if this one runs away I'm marrying extremely rich and younger the next time.

    I did have to consult the thesaurus because I myself am getting tired of the same word......training. Found the synonyms quite interesting:

    background
    basics
    buildup
    chalk talk
    coaching
    cultivation
    discipline
    domestication
    drill
    education
    exercise
    foundation
    grounding
    groundwork
    guidance
    indoctrination
    instruction
    practice
    preliminaries
    principles
    readying
    schooling
    seasoning
    sharpening
    teaching
    tuition
    tune-up
    tutelage
    upbringing

    Sums it up nicely.
    ODB

    Exchange with an Iraqi soldier during FID:

    Why did you not clear your corner?

    Because we are on a base and it is secure.

  14. #74
    Council Member Ken White's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8,060

    Default Durn, Trumped on two counts...

    Good list. My wife likes that 'domestication' bit...

    I like the 'sharpening.'

  15. #75
    Council Member ODB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    TN
    Posts
    278

    Default I'm somewhere

    in between domestication and indoctrination. Between the wife and daughter and the fact all pets are females it's a constant battle that I try to incorporate foundation, education, and principles.
    ODB

    Exchange with an Iraqi soldier during FID:

    Why did you not clear your corner?

    Because we are on a base and it is secure.

  16. #76
    Council Member reed11b's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Olympia WA
    Posts
    531

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ODB View Post
    in between domestication and indoctrination. Between the wife and daughter and the fact all pets are females it's a constant battle that I try to incorporate foundation, education, and principles.
    Geez, sounds like wife’s clan. Even the lone boy dog squats to pee.
    Back to the matter at hand, yes we do agree 99% and the disagreement is minutia, but I feel the minutia is important. Drills are important, believe me, I am the guy that is bringing out the FM when we have wait time in the hurry up and wait cycle, but there utility is limited and they are far from the only or even the most important training. Confidence and independence matter far more then trained reflexisive response. That trained response only gives you a quick base to start from, it is what happens next that matters more.
    One more minutia, when I said the constant awareness statement was a cop out, I did not mean to infer that it is not important or done, but that it does not equal not thinking or needing to re-assess a situation when the situation drastically changes, i.e an ambush or any other enemy initiated contact.
    Reed
    P.S. ODB, I know that usually when I respond to your comments, it is disagreement, but that is because when I agree (most of the time) there is very little constructive for me to add.
    Quote Originally Posted by sapperfitz82 View Post
    This truly is the bike helmet generation.

  17. #77
    Council Member Stan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Estonia
    Posts
    3,817

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RTK View Post
    Depends on how you deal with stress and process information. Can you integrate the 5 aspects of weather, the 5 aspects of terrain, the 7 forms of contact, safe distance zones, backdrops, weapons effects, mitigation of collateral damage, then look at both the pros and cons of each in a split second while, at the same time, weighing the combat multipliers, organic and inorganic to your unit, and bring them all to bear properly in a reasonable amount of time in order to maximize your element's opportunities for success in closing with and destroying your enemy?

    Some see that as cerebral. Others see it as instinct after being well trained. Stress innoculation training, that is, to place Soldiers and Marines in those situations in a training environment that best replicate combat conditions.
    Quote Originally Posted by Voodoun View Post

    Nope, sure can't. Wouldn't have a clue how to start.
    This has been one of literally hundreds of points made thus far. You may refute and argue these issues right up to the point you are in-country for the first 30 days. On that date, even a PhD won't save your alpha.

    Diplomats around the globe are quasi centrally-managed because they tend to open their mouth, spout intellect and get the US Military into trouble, but are rarely around thereafter.

    Please do us one favor: Get off the hot brass on the forearm already. You've taken it so far out of context.
    If you want to blend in, take the bus

  18. #78
    Council Member ODB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    TN
    Posts
    278

    Default Thanks to this thread

    I am now getting knee deep into FM 33-1-1 and FM 3-05.30 (Psychological Operations). As if I didn't already have enough psycological issues.....
    ODB

    Exchange with an Iraqi soldier during FID:

    Why did you not clear your corner?

    Because we are on a base and it is secure.

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
  •