At least the Germans were there when the raiding party arrived at Dieppe. Dieppe was a cock-up because (one of the inbred 'elite' with the military skill and acumen of an 18 year old troopie) Mountbatten commanded the operation. Had a proper military man been in charge it could well have been different...Originally Posted by Bob's World
Rule one on raids: they must be based on good intelligence ... unlike Son Tay (A raid in 1970).
Last edited by davidbfpo; 11-05-2011 at 03:46 PM. Reason: Add date of raid
Concur Ken, wholeheartedly, and at the end of the day, raiding boils down to a few other principles (which you no doubt know already, but I will share for the benefit of others):What you say is true. What you and I apparently cannot say at this time is whether or not that move was known -- satellites and UAVs are better and more prolific now but they then existed... -- and the 'Raid' allowed to proceed for other reasons. Not saying that was the case, just that whether it was or not is not known to us.
You may assume that it was an intel failure. Could well be, even likely correct. However, having worked in the belly of the beast for a day or two, I've learned to reserve judgement. Folks in the ME and Asia are not the only ones who can makes thing to be not always what they seem...
-On the matter of intel, if the intel is spotty or just plain weak, causing lots of guesses, one needs to think about it in a bit more detail and weigh the go/no-go factors some more. It doesn't mean you stop planning.
-Raids are not an all or nothing proposition with regard to the quality of intelligence, and "good intelligence" is on a sliding scale. Intel will never be perfect, and if there are gaps, the planners just need to refer to the bullet above and try to get it in the box as much as possible.
-If the intel appears to be good to the planners at the time, there is no reason to do more than formulate the plan, apply the resources, and execute. Allowing history to creep in does little but confuse matters and a basic question - did the planners believe they had actionable, multi-source intelligence at the time of execution, when the GO decision was made. A lot of what I have read about Son Tay indicates that they did believe they had all the intel they could summon. It was sketchy and had some gaps, for sure, but they went with what they had.
Son Tay wasn't an issue of bad intelligence, if my armchairing has any bearing. The intelligence just wasn't up-to-date to match conditions, and so they went with what they had. The fact that the prisoners were moved in July isn't even relevant.
Although "rescue" is a relative term, my battalion rescued the seven American POWs being held by the Iraqis in Samarra (remnants of the 507th and the downed Apache) in April 2003. The intel was for sure sketchy and garbled, as to be expected during the often chaotic rush to attack Tikrit. My battalion commander told us something after the invasion that will stick with me forever.
He said, very plainly, that he took action because he wouldn't have been able to live with himself if he had continued to bypass the town as he had planned, and ignored the informant's tip, only to find out later that dead Americans had been exhumed from the city. Pretty good guts to try if you ask me. The intel wasn't even good, if you ask me, but he trusted his subordinates to execute violently and with precision, and sent them on their way.
All he did was monitor the radio from his CP to be ready to offer other resources to the force going in. Imagine that...
Last edited by jcustis; 11-05-2011 at 04:41 PM.
It would be aerial in nature, but if Israel bombs a Iranian nuke program facility, that would essentially be a raid.
The Guts to try...
The erstwhile motto of the flawed Desert One Raid that was Operation Eagle Claw has bearing and merit. Some raids will not be total successes; most will be of some benefit unless total disasters. Even Dieppe doesn't fall to that level...
Fuchs:True and good catch, The repressed Brigand in me came out instead of the military planner.Why not?
There are indeed things other than plunder that need taking ...
jcustis:Amen to that! The search for metrics and perfection is IMO simply refined risk avoidance. We can do better.Intel will never be perfect, and if there are gaps, the planners just need to refer to the bullet above and try to get it in the box as much as possible...
-If the intel appears to be good to the planners at the time, there is no reason to do more than formulate the plan, apply the resources, and execute.Good man that....Pretty good guts to try if you ask me. The intel wasn't eve good, if you as me, but he trusted his subordinates to execute violently and with precision, and sent them on their way.
All he did was monitor the radio from his CP to be ready to offer other resources to the force going in...I can, seen a few of those -- and I thank the Gods and Stars that there are more like him out there, more than the alter egos...Imagine that...
Those are the folks that keep me sane...
The lack of equivalent term would then seem to have something to do with the fact that as a synthetic language German offers more options for descriptive single terms than does English. But as mentioned, none of the cited terms imply the withdrawal aspect of a raid. The contemporary term is descended from the Scots term for ‘road,’ so ingress and egress are wrapped up in the etymology. [LINK to the relevant OED article for anyone interested.]
The Pancho Villa Expedition, maybe? But given the duration I guess you get into the issue of whether you should differentiate a strategic raid from a punitive expedition. I was actually lead to this forum by my effort to interpret 17th and 18th century military journals associated with European punitive expeditions against American Indian groups (the Sullivan Expedition against the Haudenosaunee is perhaps the most widely known, and still widely discussed by the descends of both sides). These would involve multi-week incursions to destroy structures and crops. It was clear to both sides that the expedition was not capable of any long term occupation of the territory, but whether the occupation was brief enough to qualify as a raid I could not say. And it may not really matter to anyone but the most pedantic, of course.I don't think such a case exists.
In the 17th and 18th century Eastern Woodlands warfare often took the form of a type of raid referred to in English as “cutting off.” In one of his books Wayne E. Lee has a good summary of cutting off (he and I disagree on a couple of the details in his summary, but it is very well done regardless). One example which impresses me greatly because I have seen the terrain (and anyone on the forum who has been to Mount Yonah almost surely has, as well) is the c. 1720 Creek raid on the eastern Cherokee settlement shown below. While the settlement’s men were away to trade a Creek war sacked the community and made off with those women and children not killed before a response was mounted from the settlement at the western end of the valley. There is documentation of the killing of three traders residing between the towns which I would assume was the work of scouts (is “perimeter support” the correct term?). The same documentation makes clear that the attack took place under cover of darkness, but am I wrong that in lieu of rainfall the attack would have been audible at that proximity?
Last edited by ganulv; 11-05-2011 at 06:26 PM.
If you don’t read the newspaper, you are uninformed; if you do read the newspaper, you are misinformed. – Mark Twain (attributed)
You Gotta Be Airborne
To do Raids rightlink to the history of US Paratroopers and Philippine Guerrillas and successful Raids.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raid_at_Los_Ba%C3%B1os
No, it would I suggest be a strike
You can qualify that with: air- or missile- or rocket- or nuclear-
I say it would be an "Air Raid" that is the term that was used from WW2 all the way up till the term "strike" became popular in the 1960's.
Yes... the term strike seems to be more used for the precision bombing of a target than the term raid in modern usage.
Just curious, but are you aware whether there is an Afrikaans term which translates as ‘raid’? Given the language’s close relationship to German I would be surprised if there were; given the region’s military history I would be surprised if there were not.
If you don’t read the newspaper, you are uninformed; if you do read the newspaper, you are misinformed. – Mark Twain (attributed)
It's strooptog in Afrikaans and inval in Dutch. Have heard both used in Afrikaans.
Actually if I remember correctly English is closer to German and Afrikaans is closer to Dutch/Hollands
Last edited by JMA; 11-08-2011 at 05:56 PM.
That doesn't matter much.
You can read half of Dutch texts (enough to understand what it's about and what's the general meaning) once you know German and English.
The Netherlands are geographically and linguistically half-way in between imo.
Don't tell a Dutchman, though. Some of them have 'small neighbour issues'.
A side question about the side note—what did you think about the 2005 film about the Cabanatuan Raid?
If you don’t read the newspaper, you are uninformed; if you do read the newspaper, you are misinformed. – Mark Twain (attributed)
I think that Dutch also lacks a word that is exactly synonymous to raid, in a military context.
Goose Green was initially intended (by Thompson) to be a raid, and then became an attack to defeat and occupy.
'Overval' (and the German uberfall) could be used to describe both, and therein lays its shortcoming. It is too generalised. As mentioned up thread, it does not necessarily entail the egress (or even ingress) bit. So 'overval' would be a sufficient but not necessary condition for ‘raid’.
'Inval' (in-fall) specifically entails the ingress bit, yet is further removed from entailing the egress bit. Operation Barbarossa was an 'inval'.
'Strooptocht' (excuse me for using the correct spelling) and 'rooftocht' are not suitable for either of the Goose Green cases. They are more suitable descriptions for the kind of adventures mentioned up thread regarding North American Indian tribes (a 'stroper' is a poacher), and perhaps Viking-style raids. They imply some form of plundering. So again, a strooptocht can be a raid, but not all raids are strooptochten. I also wonder if 'raid' implies some notion of speed or immediacy, more so than a strooptocht.
Strike versus raid. That's an interesting one. I suppose it saddles us with the same ingress / egress issues. The German V1s and V2s on London would be strikes, whereas the bombers over Germany would be raids by virtue of their necessity to get themselves into the witch's cauldron.
Nothing that results in human progress is achieved with unanimous consent. (Christopher Columbus)
All great truth passes through three stages: first it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
(Arthur Schopenhauer)
ONWARD
Here's what doctrine says...
FM 1-02, Operational Terms and Graphics:
raid – (DOD, NATO) An operation, usually small scale, involving a swift penetration of hostile territory to secure information, confuse the enemy, or to destroy installations. It ends with a planned withdrawal upon completion of the assigned mission. See FM 3-0.
FM 3-90, Tactics
A raid is a form of attack, usually small scale, involving a swift entry into hostile territory to secure information, confuse the enemy, or destroy installations. It ends with a planned withdrawal from the objective area on mission completion (FM 3-0). A raid can also be used to support operations designed to rescue and recover individuals and equipment in danger of capture. (page 5-38)
FM 3-0, Operations
A raid is an operation to temporarily seize an area in order to secure information, confuse an adversary, capture personnel or equipment, or to destroy a capability. It ends with a planned withdrawal upon completion of the assigned mission (JP 3-0). Units routinely conduct raids as part of tactical
operations but sometimes as separate joint operations. The latter is characterized as a limited intervention. (FM 3-90 contains doctrine on tactical-level raids.) (page 2-6)
JP 3-0, Joint Operations
Raids are operations to temporarily seize an area, usually through forcible
entry, in order to secure information, confuse an adversary, capture personnel or equipment, or destroy an objective or capability (e.g., Operation URGENT FURY, Grenada 1983, to protect US citizens and restore the lawful government). Raids end with a planned withdrawal upon completion of the assigned mission. (Page V-27 to V-28)
AAP-6, NATO Glossary of Terms and Definitions
An operation, usually small scale, involving a swift penetration of hostile territory to secure information, confuse the enemy, or destroy his installations. It ends with a planned withdrawal upon completion of the assigned mission. (Page 2-R-3)
Example is better than precept.
Hi RTK,
Link to US Army Big Picture Series Titled: Strike Command......Looks like Raid planning according to doctrine.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tgh7p...eature=related
That may be the correct spelling in Dutch but in Afrikaans it is strooptog.'Strooptocht' (excuse me for using the correct spelling
Haven't seen it.
I'm not a movie fan and I particularly dislike 'war movies.' No matter how hard they try, they can't get it right. The movie genre by its nature has to compress time and thus events and I always get annoyed at the off the wall 'messages' many try to promulgate.
Did read the book, tho' -- several of them in fact.
Having worked around a courtroom I pretty much can’t watch procedurals and the time compression thing is at the root of that. Also, having grown up in a household run by a nurse I can’t stand medical dramas. But that’s because I know nurses and docs cry less than almost all non-medical professionals, not more.
If you don’t read the newspaper, you are uninformed; if you do read the newspaper, you are misinformed. – Mark Twain (attributed)
Pfft, invent your own thread, guys!
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks