Results 1 to 20 of 64

Thread: Leading scouting/counter-scouting theorists

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Council Member Ken White's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8,060

    Default Here's a link to 'Scouts Out.'

    Big slow 272 page .pdf

    LINK.

  2. #2
    Council Member Fuchs's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    3,189

    Default

    Thanks, but I knew that paper - saw it months ago.
    It's incredibly superficial in its historical part.
    The conclusion chapter is much better, but I don't agree with some points that are in my opinion key points.

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

    Default

    Have to concur about "Scouts Out." It had some interesting points here and there, but the historical sections were not up to standard and ignored what I believe are some of the unique aspects of American cavalry development.
    "On the plains and mountains of the American West, the United States Army had once learned everything there was to learn about hit-and-run tactics and guerrilla warfare."
    T.R. Fehrenbach This Kind of War

  4. #4
    Council Member Ken White's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8,060

    Default True, American Cavalry differed from European norms

    in many ways. Almost every way, in fact. We never went the Curassiers, Hussars or Lancers route.They were effectively Mounted Infantry -- not Dragoons -- Mounted Infantry, not the same thing at all.

    I recall reading that when Rudyard Kipling visited the US, he talked to a US Cavalry Trooper at Yellowstone, one who had been in the Household Cavalry in the British Army. The man said "Our horses aren't half trained and we almost never use the Saber or do Saber drill -- but we can shoot. I fire more ammunition here in one month than I fired in seven years with the Blues." That carried through to the present day and the Armored Cavalry Regiment that Fuchs fails to appreciate is the result.

    As one US Cavalry Colonel was heard to remark when asked why we Americans weren't better at sneak and peek reconnaissance; "We don't have the patience for it. We just go out looking for trouble and find it -- if you're going to do that, you have to have Armor and Tanks." True statement, that.

    The flip side is that we can and do perform sneak and peak reconnaissance -- we just do it in small batches and we don't talk about it.

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

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ken White View Post
    in many ways. Almost every way, in fact. We never went the Curassiers, Hussars or Lancers route.They were effectively Mounted Infantry -- not Dragoons -- Mounted Infantry, not the same thing at all.

    Now your talking! Damn this walking everywhere with a 150 pound kitchen sink on your back. This is America...we be riding,styling and high profiling

  6. #6
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Eustis
    Posts
    71

    Default Scout's Out

    (Warning: shameless plug)

    I just started reading Scout's Out, and therefore have not formed an opinion on the content, but the cover photo is SGT Burns, one of the tankers in my company in Tal Afar. For that alone, I presently approve.

    Tankersteve

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
  •