Mechanization hurts COIN forces

[William F. Owen]

Armored infantry's "primary mission is to support the advance of the tank." He concluded that the M2 Bradley equipped mechanized infantry (as then organized in the US Army) met this requirement well.

That is doctrinally incorrect and illogical. Infantry are that component of the combined arms team that fights on foot. Protecting armour is not, and never should be their "primary mission."

Light infantry is "specialized for rapid air transportability, clandestine insertion, very rugged terrain, night operations, infiltrations, raids, and ambushes."

These are all things that any good infantry formation should be able to achieve. They are all issues merely associated with training, equipment and organisation. Again, fighting on foot is the key issue

Regular infantry, the force in between these forces, supporting tanks at the operational level, but supported by tanks at the tactical level.

I am fairly astounded by these pronouncements. Infantry are the most numerous, and most flexible element of the combined arms team. I am very much of the view that everyone exists to support the infantry as, only the infantry can deliver military capability in a spectrum of violence and across almost all terrain.

I agree with HDV that there may be three types, in some minds. However for that construct to be valid we have to do some pretty poor reasoning and this is not what the reality should reflect.