Never can be enough in my opinion. With most modern armies with all the time on their hands I assume this aspect is much better covered than it was in my day but then again I was in a pre-ROE era as opposed to today as with the case of the Aussie soldiers.
I suggest the test is the balance between the need and hopefully the burning desire to close with and kill the enemy and to comply with latest rules of war.
Those particular Aussie soldiers seemed to still have the necessary aggression. Not sure where it all went wrong, if indeed it did.
The more and better you train your basic infantry soldiers in this regard the less you need these lawyer types IMHO.
Bookmarks