What is presence patrolling?

[Bullmoose Bailey]

In the question of Patrol efficacy: do you think they can replace intel collection & security measures in and around outposts? I've felt minefields, early warning systems, wire and other obstacles might also have a place in security. If so does all this apply in certain AOs & not others as might be expected?

The presence patrol is so enshrined in the western mentality that you might say I'm conducting a presence patrol incident to a Ford Motor Company psy-ops campaign just by driving in public.

"Showing the flag" is a consistent part of the method behind such patrols. Don't forget every patrol is a reconnaisance patrol & as the US soldier is the "Ultimate Weapon" every patrol is a kind of victory parade in the spirit of TR's Great White Fleet Voyage...

[jcustis]

as the US soldier is the "Ultimate Weapon" every patrol is a kind of victory parade in the spirit of TR's Great White Fleet Voyage...

I'm not sure I savvy your meaning with this, but if you're leaning towards presence patrols as a means of showing who's boss, I suppose that could work. More often than not, at least in Afghanistan, I think we'd be more likely to simply breed resentment or one sort or another.

[MikeF]

In every endeavor, whether it's establishing a patrol base, conducting a raid, or patrolling, the commander is trying to conduct operations to shape his environment.

Prior to execution, one must ask:

1. What am I trying to accomplish? (Purpose)
2. What do I want my boys to do? (Intent)
3. What are the likely costs and results of x action? (Intended consequences)
4. What am I missing? (Unintended consequences)

To this end, one should neither establish a patrol base just to check off some list of "things I should be doing in COIN" nor send squads out on patrol to "show a presence."

Purpose and Intent are everything in orders. Patrols can be intelligence driven to answer CCIR. For example, 1. Go hang out at at the barber shop, pool hall, gym to see what the latest intel is on x group. 2. Go talk to y farmer to see how the crops are doing. 3. Go talk to z schoolteacher to find out if she got the books ordered and how exams are coming. The worst thing a commander can do (IMO), is to send soldiers out on missions with no purpose or intent.

PhilR brings up an excellent point on night operations. In some denied areas, where host nation runs the area by day and shadow gov'ts run it at night, conducting security actions (raids, ambushes, movement to contact) during the night is the best way to take back control of an area.

Mike

[Bill Moore]

Prior to execution, one must ask:

1. What am I trying to accomplish? (Purpose)
2. What do I want my boys to do? (Intent)
3. What are the likely costs and results of x action? (Intended consequences)
4. What am I missing? (Unintended consequences)

It was this type of excessive conventional thinking that got us in the mess we're in (firebase mentality, while everything outside the base falls apart).

Yes, we still should the standard 5 paragraph patrol order with associated contingencies, but in general presence patrols, if run correctly, will turn into discovery patrols, which in turn result in FRAGOs on the fly if you have capable leadership at the tactical level and a supporting chain of command that empowers their subordinates to act independently. This mentality that a patrol can only have one purpose sounds too much like drive by COIN, and I hope we're not teaching our counterparts this approach, because it results in a culture of inactivity (thus allowing the enemy freedom of movement) and they only respond to 9/11 calls. You just can't dumb the real world down to fit our ideal doctrinal response. This is equivalent to saying police officers should simply sit in their police stations all day unless they have a specific task and target?

[slapout9]

but in general presence patrols, if run correctly, will turn into discovery patrols, which in turn result in FRAGOs on the fly if you have capable leadership at the tactical level and a supporting chain of command that empowers their subordinates to act independently.

Along time ago I had a training officer who while patrolling a beat/district he would continuously ask me what has changed since yesterday. After some frustration I eventually figured out what he meant and I was able to answer his questions because something has most definitely changed since your last patrol, some you can see.....many you can't see but you can learn to ask the people about what is going on. There is no such thing as a routine patrol, there are only things that changed you don't know about.

[MikeF]

It was this type of excessive conventional thinking that got us in the mess we're in (firebase mentality, while everything outside the base falls apart).

Yes, we still should the standard 5 paragraph patrol order with associated contingencies, but in general presence patrols, if run correctly, will turn into discovery patrols, which in turn result in FRAGOs on the fly if you have capable leadership at the tactical level and a supporting chain of command that empowers their subordinates to act independently. This mentality that a patrol can only have one purpose sounds too much like drive by COIN, and I hope we're not teaching our counterparts this approach, because it results in a culture of inactivity (thus allowing the enemy freedom of movement) and they only respond to 9/11 calls. You just can't dumb the real world down to fit our ideal doctrinal response. This is equivalent to saying police officers should simply sit in their police stations all day unless they have a specific task and target?

Bill,

I think your last post may be the first time that I've ever been accused of being conventional.

Please expound on the specific reasoning of your point.

If I send a patrol to see a school teacher to garner information about the schools, and they run into another dude to give info on something else, then that's an added bonus.

My hypothesis was that they should not drive around for the sake of driving.

I don't understand how that reasoning is extraneous.


And please look to my earlier comment- don't put a firebase into an area unless you can justify a reason for it.
Mike

[Bill Moore]

If I send a patrol to see a school teacher to garner information about the schools, and they run into another dude to give info on something else, then that's an added bonus.

My hypothesis was that they should not drive around for the sake of driving.

The part I put in bold is exactly the result of indoctrinated thinking or a conventional approach. The way you're stating it, any patrol you send out will have to go a "specific location" to do a specific task, which probably means they have a specific route. If someone runs out of the house and talks to them, then that is a bonus. It may be a bonus, but it sure as heck isn't a presence patrol.

If you tell your guys to drive or conduct a foot patrol around sector E, or neighborhood Y, to show presence, engage the populace to get a sense for what is going on (it will greatly inform your pinpointed operations later), with the over all intent to provide the perception to the public that state forces in are the area and available, and to keep the enemy guessing (denying space by creating greater risk), then you're conducting a presence patrol, the bonus is you really get to learn the lay of the land. As one young Marine posted on the SWJ many months ago, you would ideally saturate an area with several small patrols (you want contact with the enemy so you can kill them, after the initial chest bumping you'll own the ground). That requires that conventional leaders think unconventionally and train their subordinates down to the squad level to act independently and then let them act independently (much along the lines of what Hackworth proposed and did).

Conventional minded leaders simply can't handle relinquishing control, and unfortunately that mentality has seeped into our special operations community to some degree also. If you want to be agile, then you have to flatten the organization. If you want to deny space to the enemy, then you have keep a presence out there (not drive to a school, talk to a teacher and drive back).

[RTK]

We called "presence patrols" more appropriately "trolling for RPGs." It seemed more akin to chumming when you're fishing for sharks.

As stated earlier in this thread, task and purpose are the keys and halmarks to a well planned and, consequently, well executed patrol. Providing area security tied to a specific piece of infrastructure seemed to foot the bill much better. And the boys don't feel like they're out there just to pad a briefing stat at the next BUB.