Results 1 to 20 of 48

Thread: Enhanced MAGTF Operations- USMC's Small Unit Future

Threaded View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #10
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    81

    Default Pls read completely thru

    Quote Originally Posted by Tukhachevskii View Post
    I find it interesting that a lot of the conceptual thinking behind concepts like DO was tried in one form or another by Orde Wingate and his operations in Burma especially with regards to semi-independant operations behind enemy lines relying on air-dropped supllies while briage sized sub-units (deploying as "columns" with strong scout groups) relied on mules (AFIAK an option being reconsidered in some cirlces) and locally made/acquired bamboo boats for riverine operations. Fire support was also mortar and pack howitzer based. Of course, the air component, supplied graciously by the USAF under the innovative thinking of the its commanders (whose names escape me currently) by No.1 Air Commando, also offers interesting lessons learnt if only from an USAF perspective.

    http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc...f&AD=ADA397999

    http://cadair.aber.ac.uk/dspace/bits...imonThesis.pdf

    There are many examples of various units using similar tactics in relatively modern warfare. The HQMC/MCWL often sites the Norwegians use of distributed Line Units against the Soviets & Nazis as the most comparable example.

    But as similar as these examples appear on the surface none are near as comprehensive or developed as DO.

    It would be like comparing the landing of Gallipoli or any other previous landing to what the Marines spent 10yrs in the 1930s developing.

    Something which at the time Military "Experts" of the day said was impossible to conduct in modern warfare. They not only proved them wrong, but also proved that when performed as they designed its nearly impossible to defend against.

    Its the level of refinement & attention to detail paid to insisting that DO remain both Comprehensive & Fluid, shifting fr/Aggregated to Dis-Aggregated or vice/versa & back according to: the enemy, the terrain, the flow of battle, etc. that makes DO Light Years beyond any previous example.

    One of the Major differences that made the USMC's Amph-Asslt Doctrine more advanced & successful than any before was the recognition/development of mastering of the fluid flow of "controlled chaos" in the shift from 'Landing' to 'Build Up' to 'Breakout'.

    Today its still the most complex of Military Maneuvers for that reason.

    Its the same w/DO & any of the other examples, the designed recognition of the fluid flow fr/ one form to another, its Comprehensive nature by design & a few other subtle differences in DO... is like comparing Algebra to Advanced Calculus.
    Last edited by COMMAR; 02-12-2010 at 01:25 AM.

Similar Threads

  1. Intro to the Tactics and Technique of Small Wars
    By SWJED in forum Training & Education
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 08-30-2006, 12:35 AM
  2. Disarming the Local Population
    By CSC2005 in forum Doctrine & TTPs
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 08-08-2006, 01:10 PM
  3. Book Review: Airpower in Small Wars
    By SWJED in forum Training & Education
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-07-2006, 06:14 PM
  4. Dealing With Uncertainty: The Future Requires Flexibility
    By SWJED in forum Futurists & Theorists
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-29-2005, 12:28 AM
  5. Training for Small Wars
    By SWJED in forum RFIs & Members' Projects
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-02-2005, 06:50 PM

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
  •