|
Home | Forums | Gallery | Register | Video Directory | FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Games | Today's Posts | Search | Chat Room |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
For Nco's and Officers
Good Morning all,
I appreciate this may be and is Painful for you. I know you may have been asked this all ready, but if you had to do it all over again how would you change you tactics, Given that Politicos would not have such an involvement... 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. 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 |
Sponsored Links |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Re: For Nco's and Officers
Grab the motherfuckers by their balls and their "Hearts and Minds" will
follow meekly behind. Somebody ought grab Tony Blurr by his chickpea size nuts and drag his ass clear of the "European Union" bullshit before the bloody goddamn froggies and the Hun own England by default. -- "The bravest are surely those who have the clearest vision of what is before them, glory and danger alike, and notwithstanding go out to meet it."- Thucydides "Robert Lewis Md" news:brscnp$c6b$1@hercules.btinternet.com... > Good Morning all, > I appreciate this may be and is Painful for you. > > I know you may have been asked this all ready, but if you had to do it all > over again how would you change you tactics, Given that Politicos would not > have such an involvement... > 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. > 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 > > |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Re: For Nco's and Officers
Why is it ' Painful ? ' I do regret we never Invaded the
North. What does this have to do with my Tactics ? You have some hidden agenda here ? Yes, Not SF, but SOF types only where needed. The War was NOT just fought in Vietnam, I do assume you mean Vietnam since its awv. "Robert Lewis Md" > Good Morning all, > I appreciate this may be and is Painful for you. > > I know you may have been asked this all ready, but if you had to do it all > over again how would you change you tactics, Given that Politicos would not > have such an involvement... > 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. > 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 > > |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Re: For Nco's and Officers
"Robert Lewis Md" > 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 |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Re: For Nco's and Officers
> know you may have been asked this all ready, but if you had to do it all
>over again how would you change you tactics, The tanks would have rolled into Hanoi very early in the war and we'd later find Ho Chi Minh hiding in a tunnel. What? Oh! NCOs and Officers. Excuse me. - LMAO Greg |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Re: For Nco's and Officers
"Don T"
> Grab the motherfuckers by their balls and their "Hearts and Minds" will > follow meekly behind. Somebody ought grab Tony Blurr by his chickpea size > nuts and drag his ass clear of the "European Union" bullshit before the > bloody goddamn froggies and the Hun own England by default. > > -- Amen to that, Don! I can't understand why Dubya hasn't put pressure on Blurr to cut loose from the quagmire of the EU long before now. France and Germany nailed their colours to the mast when the Iraq crisis blew up. They are anti-American and have no stomach for a fight nor any intention of putting their people in harm's way - unless of course there's billions of dollars in reconstruction contracts on offer. They hate the fact the UK continually act independently of the EU - as in our much condemned participation in the Iraq war. They are intent on driving a wedge between the US and UK. To address this "problem" of member states doing their own thing, they recently announced they intend appointing a Foreign Affairs Minister whose decisions on foreign policy will be binding on ALL member states, thereby preventing us from acting alone and giving our support to the US in any future wars without their permission (which of course will never be forthcoming because (a) they only believe in appeasement and (b) they loath the U.S.). Blurr claims he won't buy into it, but he's famous for saying one thing and then signing away yet more of our independence. Lying comes easily to him. He just can't be trusted. If anyone has GW's ear, now would be a good time for him to intervene. Sandy |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Re: For Nco's and Officers
Massive irony occurred over the last few days. The "toe suckee" who was on
the phone with William Jefferson Blow-job having his toes "done" while Billy had his willy "done" was in London giving his best effort to seeing to it that the British retain their independence from the EU. Seems he thinks Welsh names are un-pronounceable though as he refers to one lady as "the lady with the eye-chart for a last name". HeH HeH HeH. -- "The bravest are surely those who have the clearest vision of what is before them, glory and danger alike, and notwithstanding go out to meet it."- Thucydides "Saigon Sal" news:brtdcu$449$1@newsg4.svr.pol.co.uk... > "Don T" > > Grab the motherfuckers by their balls and their "Hearts and Minds" will > > follow meekly behind. Somebody ought grab Tony Blurr by his chickpea size > > nuts and drag his ass clear of the "European Union" bullshit before the > > bloody goddamn froggies and the Hun own England by default. > > > > -- > > > Amen to that, Don! I can't understand why Dubya hasn't put pressure on > Blurr to cut loose from the quagmire of the EU long before now. France and > Germany nailed their colours to the mast when the Iraq crisis blew up. > They are anti-American and have no stomach for a fight nor any intention of > putting their people in harm's way - unless of course there's billions of > dollars in reconstruction contracts on offer. They hate the fact the UK > continually act independently of the EU - as in our much condemned > participation in the Iraq war. They are intent on driving a wedge between > the US and UK. To address this "problem" of member states doing their own > thing, they recently announced they intend appointing a Foreign Affairs > Minister whose decisions on foreign policy will be binding on ALL member > states, thereby preventing us from acting alone and giving our support to > the US in any future wars without their permission (which of course will > never be forthcoming because (a) they only believe in appeasement and (b) > they loath the U.S.). Blurr claims he won't buy into it, but he's famous > for saying one thing and then signing away yet more of our independence. > Lying comes easily to him. He just can't be trusted. If anyone has GW's > ear, now would be a good time for him to intervene. > > Sandy > > > |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Re: For Nco's and Officers
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 "a425couple" news:0WlEb.594735$Fm2.545086@attbi_s04... > > "Robert Lewis Md" > > 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 |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Re: For Nco's and Officers
On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 14:37:54 +0000 (UTC), "Robert Lewis Md"
>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 Robert: I think we could have done a LOT more of the hearts-and-minds stuff. The Marines had their CAP program which I think should have been a primary focus for all the armed forces there. The Army did some, but less than the Marines I think and not nearly enough. My unit "adopted" an orphanage and did a lot of good there, but while that was nice and lot of good was done, it was done with a small and less-than-representative part of the population. If we had put more of our people out among their people and less on huge bases, we'd have done better. The distance we kept from the locals hampered us more than helped us, creating an us/them mindset. In my opinion. Ho Chi Minh wanted his local guerrilas to be among the people as the fish move in the sea (or some silly thing). We could have done the same thing without stealing the peasant's crops and young people for porters, as the VC did. Lee |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Re: For Nco's and Officers
On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 14:37:54 +0000 (UTC), "Robert Lewis Md"
>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" >news:0WlEb.594735$Fm2.545086@attbi_s04... >> >> "Robert Lewis Md" >> > 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. |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Fannie Mae Ex-Officers Sued by U.S. | darrels joy | General Posts | 13 | 10-01-2008 07:55 AM |
Officers/sargent/ E4 or less | 39mto39g | Vietnam | 47 | 10-23-2005 10:11 AM |
Officers vs Non-officers | 39mto39g | Vietnam | 7 | 04-08-2004 07:21 AM |
To The Artillery Officers | Alligator Al | General | 42 | 09-20-2003 05:25 PM |
Real Marine NCO's | eMOM PAO | Marines | 0 | 06-25-2002 10:31 PM |
|