GO!!! said:In my experience, any hesitance that Canadian troops might have to fire on the enemy would be more based in their fear of their own chain of command, and disciplinary action for a possible or percieved error, than a psychological aversion to taking human life.
Here, I have always felt that the infantry doesn't pay enough attention to other forms of weaponry. While conventional small arms are our bread and butter, I can remember being taught how to prepare explosives, and how to disarm same. I can recall being taught how to utilize other forms of weaponry than firearms, from knives to pointy sticks, to a rock. We don't put near enough focus on unarmed hand-to-hand, either. I can think of 3 occasions when I needed to employ fisticuffs on operational deployments. If I hadn't had extensive training civvie-side, I would have been at a disadvantage. Granted, you do touch on this same point here:Infantry soldiers must be masters of small arms. Like a fine craftsman, the tools of the trade must be mastered to a level of unconscious competence.
But, I think direct reference to the suki-yaki nose-toss would help to hammer home the point that we do still engage in kung-fu-in' it up, and don't receive enough training in how to do so properly. Jap-slappin' is one of the first things to be discarded, and one of the most important to the infantry for a number of reasons.Close quarter combat skills are vital for closing with and destroying the enemy. The infantry soldier must master the tactics, techniques, and procedures for combat at close range. These skills encompass non-lethal techniques and unarmed combat for Aspect Two, and force protection measures for Aspect One tasks.
Also, it breeds "that infectious optimism and that offensive eagerness which comes from physical well being". Physically fit individuals are more prone to take offensive action, and not to back down from a potentially dangerous situation.Furthermore, a high level of physical fitness mitigates the effects of combat stress and other injuries.
And not "man-management" or "supervision". There is still a disheartening tendency amongst certain groups to lump these phrases together as though they mean the same thing. It's fine for others to take this view, but it bears reminding ourselves that a leader is something altogether different than a manager or a supervisor.The final core competency is leadership.
That is why I loved this job so. And in my off-time I could be a drunkard, gambler, and perpetual 15-year old.Wavell had it right for his time when he stated that an Infantryman should possess the qualities of a successful poacher, catburgler and gunman.
personally, dude, I think we need to get the fact that we are hired killers for the Crown out there more often. We need to take every opportunity to remind the public that we are not flower-carriers, blanket-deliverers, soap-dispensers, or hug-givers. And if the message gets distorted by the weak and whiny, then it gives us more opportunity to set the record straight.Just an "admin point" but there seems to be enough people lurking in this site who are intent on the discredit of the forces and inaccurate portrayals of soldiers, that someone would cut and paste provocative terms like "close with and engage the population" and use them in an out of context manner. I understand the point, but when viewed by a layman, especially in the context of the infantry's official role "to close with and destroy the enemy" it could be used against us.
GO!!! said:someone would cut and paste provocative terms like "close with and engage the population" and use them in an out of context manner.
GO!!! said:Do you see a hesitance to kill in the infantry today? This is not the first time that this topic has arisen at your specific urging, and I am quite frankly baffled as to why. In "On Killing", LCol Grossman states that 94% of american infantrymen were willing to fire at the enemy in Vietnam, as a result of improved training techniques and social conditions. Given the most recent incident in Afghanistan in which a C6 gunner fired on a vehicle, is this an issue? In my experience, any hesitance that Canadian troops might have to fire on the enemy would be more based in their fear of their own chain of command, and disciplinary action for a possible or percieved error, than a psychological aversion to taking human life.
Thoughts?
paracowboy said:Here, I have always felt that the infantry doesn't pay enough attention to other forms of weaponry. While conventional small arms are our bread and butter, I can remember being taught how to prepare explosives, and how to disarm same. I can recall being taught how to utilize other forms of weaponry than firearms, from knives to pointy sticks, to a rock. We don't put near enough focus on unarmed hand-to-hand, either.
I like that and may use it.paracowboy said:Also, it breeds "that infectious optimism and that offensive eagerness which comes from physical well being". Physically fit individuals are more prone to take offensive action, and not to back down from a potentially dangerous situation.
feel free, I just that second made that up. ;Deyre said:I like that and may use it.
skoal all over the monitor, tea all over the keyboard, wife yelling. Thanks, butt-head.Infanteer said:As well, for Paracowboy's sake, add capability 9 into the Infantry tasks; "Must be capable of gelling hair and wearing big belt-buckles into the field."
It is always desirable to kill the enemy at a standoff distance, greatly reducing the risk to friendly troops. Given that the enemy will adapt to get below the ISTAR threshold, the application of sensor led standoff capabilities often becomes problematic. We must be prepared to 'fight below the ISTAR threshold' â “ to be robust enough to overcome the shock of surprise contact and engage in successful close combat. Moreover, given the precision required to discriminate the enemy from non-combatants, population engagement, followed by close combat, will be necessary more often than not.
If the infantry, as you discuss it, are to fight the snakes, then they will most likely be physically diffusing. An important part of moving the discussion along (and moving the idea into reality) would include discussing how the Infantry will be unique in exploiting this diffusion in order to degrade the enemies ability to act.
I just met him for the first time last week when I was in Ottawa for the boards. A couple of my SAW buddies from Quantico (Marine and Army) worked for him over there and had great things to say - a real warrior who outshone a large number of his US peers.pbi said:Here at CFC we recently had a fantastic presentation by MGen Natynczyk on his time in Iraq: he stressed that in order to be ready for modern conflict, very high quality at the lowest levels is paramount.
pbi said:can you offer your take on just how well we are really doing in the soldier training and preparation department? Are we on the mark? Keen to hear. VP.
We have to tighten up the lessons-learned feedback loop, so that lessons from theatre are rapidly integrated into training. We've got to stress the 'learned' part and internalize them so they are not simply 'lessons identified.'
The final piece, strongly related to the paper, is cultural training. Every soldier must have a deep understanding of the operational environment in order to successfully engage with the population. We don't spend enough time on this, and when time is our greatest resource shortfall, this frequently tends to be rushed.
ducimuscapt said:Given the fact that the infantry (army) is the last strong arm called upon in time of conflict I would rather see the role of the infantry be stated as
TO DESTROY THE ENEMY, COMBAT IN CLOSE QUATERS, ENGAGE WITH THE LOCAL POPULATION IN ORDER TO GATHER TIMELY/RELEVANT INTELLIGENCE.
My take on it,
En-lighting article, the thought process is sound, however translated into good old direction, would be nice to hear...Discussion phases are good, however, I really miss hearing clear concise orders, so I know where I am going and what I am supposed to do.
No the locals are an asset that can properly be used to advantaciously have insight into the current pulse. They are to be protected