On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 14:37:54 +0000 (UTC), "Robert Lewis Md"
wrote:

>No hidden Agenda I just wanted to know how you would have done things
>differently and no slight was ever intended if you thought I was ignoring
>the private soldier it was not intended.
>
>You guys had the unfortunate experience of fighting a war with your orders
>dictated by Washington. What I was trying to ask was, which I never put
>across to correctly is would you have used Platoon sized groups to recce or
>would you have the bigger battalions, and do you think a hearts and minds
>approach would have been the better option.
>
>Regards
>Robert

Lee already mentioned it in his post. But take a look at
http://www.capmarine.com You will see a picture of a Marine holding
a baby and a black guy kind of in the background. The black guy is
Davis and the white guy is Sweirk, they were in my fire team in
weapons.

Our basic unit of manuever was a fireteam. 4 man and probably a
radio. But most patrols were reinforced squad as I remember. That
was 13 guys. We did in the 3rd Marines 125,000 patrols, ambushes,
company and battalion size operations of all types. To this day
nobody I have talked to remembers the actual mix, but most were 7 and
under I believe. That size by the way was typical of recon too.


>

>
>
>"a425couple" wrote in message
>news:0WlEb.594735$Fm2.545086@attbi_s04...
>>
>> "Robert Lewis Md" wrote in
>> > Good Morning all,...........and is Painful for you.
>> > ..... but if you had to do it all over again
>> > how would you change you tactics,
>>
>> You raise a host of separate questions.
>> Volumes have been & will be written about them.
>> Important lessons were learned.
>> Some will have to be relearned, some discarded.
>>
>> I will barely touch on a few, from my observation.
>>
>> -- Given that Politicos would not have such an involvement...
>>
>> The Johnson White House got quite involved in the
>> minutia. Most Presidents since have tried more to
>> stick to the bigger picture, and properly delegate
>> the details to the professionals appointed to properly
>> make them.
>> There is no exact perfect line. Each case and each
>> personality is unique. However I think it very unlikely
>> that in the future, once we are involved in combat,
>> the White House will demand that level of prior
>> approval of airstrikes, and ground maneuvers.
>>
>> My personal belief is that overall, Nixon, Reagan,
>> Bush, & Bush, have tended more to state the goals,
>> and delegate the details. No trend is always perfect.
>> By dealing in details, delays etc. can cause problems.
>> By delegating, subordinates can make mistakes.
>> (and in final end "the buck stops here.")
>>
>> > For e.g. would you use a more hearts and minds approach,
>>
>> --do you think that the 12 month rotation was such a good idea,
>> --now that troops had good combat experience.
>>
>> I believe I understand how the 12 month rotation came to be,
>> but it had a number of real bad consequences,
>> and is unlikely to be repeated.
>> Military units are made up of individuals working together.
>> They should train together as a unit, and work together
>> to accomplish their mission. Individuals are not simple
>> mass produced parts. Individual relationships do make
>> a difference.
>> The 12 month rotation tended to make surviving 12
>> months the main objective. (poorly stated but ?,
>> I am not sure how to explain better right now and
>> I will send this as is.)
>>
>> > Would you for e.g. have small groups of special forces calling in Intel
>> > Airstrikes Artillery left in the field.
>> >
>> > Many thanks
>> > Robert
>>
>>
>
>
>---
>Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
>Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
>Version: 6.0.548 / Virus Database: 341 - Release Date: 05/12/2003
>

"But now is the time for the younger men to lock in rough encounters,
time for me to yield to the pains of old age. But there was a day I shone among the champions."

Homer, The Illiad, 23.715-719 (800 BC). King Nestor of Pylos.