NATION

PASSWORD

Infantry Discussion Thread part 11: Gallas Razor edition.

A place to put national factbooks, embassy exchanges, and other information regarding the nations of the world. [In character]

Advertisement

Remove ads

User avatar
Gallia-
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 25544
Founded: Oct 09, 2013
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Gallia- » Mon Feb 17, 2020 1:56 am

Arkandros wrote:
Questarian New Yorkshire wrote:?

I presume Purp means senior in the sense of O-6 and above, where you’d rarely see combat (if at all) outside of very specific billets.


Colonels and brigadiers are pretty explicitly frontline officers. They're very often no more than a couple kilometers from the main battle, if not literally shooting at the enemy. Strom Thurmond was part of the initial glider assault wave in Normandy, McNair died on the frontlines, COL Gavin led a counterattack against a Nazi infantry unit with a dozen paratroopers and hand grenades in close combat, and MG W.F. Dean knocked out a T-34 with a hand grenade (and at least one other T-34 was killed by a Bazooka team under his direction). It's hardly rare for O-6s and O-7s (or even O-8s) to see fighting, even in ground forces, and it's a general rule for naval forces, and most air forces since the O-6s and O-7s will lead major naval task forces and air units. O-6s in combat arms will definitely be shooting at the enemy. O-7s, sometimes, it depends on the day, and the unit. Even O-8s have been known to dabble in the art of the hand grenade, too.

A major general or newly promoted brigadier or something might spend most of his time away from the frontlines, but only because his job usually requires him to be a office bureaucrat at that point, since new assignments for general officers are usually in staffs of Corps or Theaters (or assistants to division staff officers, which means they run the ship while the S-3 is out), rather than field commands. Generals commanding brigades or something are generally occupying forward command posts with their main force while the staff plans the battle, though. An MG might occasionally creep up to the frontline, but since MGs today have greater geographic responsibility than previous generals it's more unlikely I guess (although not that rare, really, as Monty was known to creep around the frontlines at times). A colonel or brigadier is outright shooting guys from inside his tank or something when he isn't reporting movements of tanks through his RTO though.

The only time this changes is if the unit is some weird or niche thing that lives 500 miles away in a concrete bunker tending antenna farms, or are missileers, or a field hospital, or something that will equally never see combat. Any unit that is likely to actually see combat and is commanded by a O-6 or O-7, like a brigade, will generally also see its commanding officer in combat if only because having your eyes on the battle is useful, the commander is generally the most experienced and learned guy there, and what he says goes. He will usually have a radio operator following him so he can talk to his staff who are a couple kilometers behind him in a "BCOTM" or "C2V" or something and are processing the information the commander is giving them.

Sometimes an O-8 shows up if there is a major ground operation being planned, too. This happened with 4ID at least, but O-8s are probably the start of that part of an army where you can say that the majority of them will be behind the main battle area and unlikely to be shooting the enemy, if only because the geographic scope of the area they're commanding has too many battles to be physically present at. Even a modern division, covering as much as an old style corps (maybe 50-100 km) will usually have the resources for one main effort. An O-6 still gets a rifle, and an O-7 still leads from the front, even if his division is fighting multiple battles at once.

COL A. Tack Always wasn't puking in his face mask, directing a gunship battalion over the radio, and shooting LAWs at Bimpus so you could call him a cubicle creature tho. ):<

Triplebaconation wrote:I'm pretty sure FM 7-70 said to jack bikes when appropriate.


Not having patch kits or tools (nor knowledge of how to use it) would be annoying I suppose. At least in small towns in USA it's rather rare for bike riders to have very serious toolsets or patch kits on the bike itself from looking at the bikes on the racks here. Maybe they carry tubes or something in the handlebars or under seats, but I suspect they don't, and they carry them on their person or w/e.

I'm also concerned typical Wal-Mart bikes would just bend if you start slapping 200-300 lbs of soldier on it TBH.
Last edited by Gallia- on Mon Feb 17, 2020 2:21 am, edited 3 times in total.

User avatar
Purpelia
Post Czar
 
Posts: 34249
Founded: Oct 19, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Purpelia » Mon Feb 17, 2020 2:57 am

Questarian New Yorkshire wrote:imagine thinking that your brigade and division commanders wont be anywhere near a battle area LOL

what they will be doing? play lego in a giant underground concrete box 500 miles away?

Sitting in their HQ 10+km behind the battle processing information and issuing orders via radio/telephone whilst performing ancillary tasks such as planning the flow of supplies and information to the units so that they can fight. It's not their job to be in the front shooting at the enemy. At least not on purpose.

And if their HQ is overrun that by definition means that things have gone terribly horribly wrong. As in that the unit has been broken through, demolished and otherwise ruined. That or somebody on the front lines was very bad at their job. Either way at that point a handgun isn't going to be any more effective at repelling them than a sword would be.
Purpelia does not reflect my actual world views. In fact, the vast majority of Purpelian cannon is meant to shock and thus deliberately insane. I just like playing with the idea of a country of madmen utterly convinced that everyone else are the barbarians. So play along or not but don't ever think it's for real.



The above post contains hyperbole, metaphoric language, embellishment and exaggeration. It may also include badly translated figures of speech and misused idioms. Analyze accordingly.

User avatar
Questarian New Yorkshire
Minister
 
Posts: 3158
Founded: Nov 08, 2018
Ex-Nation

Postby Questarian New Yorkshire » Mon Feb 17, 2020 3:02 am

Purpelia wrote:Sitting in their HQ 10+km behind the battle processing information and issuing orders via radio/telephone whilst performing ancillary tasks such as planning the flow of supplies and information to the units so that they can fight. It's not their job to be in the front shooting at the enemy. At least not on purpose.

And if their HQ is overrun that by definition means that things have gone terribly horribly wrong. As in that the unit has been broken through, demolished and otherwise ruined. That or somebody on the front lines was very bad at their job. Either way at that point a handgun isn't going to be any more effective at repelling them than a sword would be.
wow you really have never read any military history have you
REST IN PEACE RWDT & LWDT
I'm just a poor wayfaring stranger, traveling through this world below
There is no sickness, no toil, nor danger, in that bright land to which I go
I'm going there to see my Father, and all my loved ones who've gone on
I'm only going over Jordan, I'm only going over home

I know dark clouds will gather 'round me, I know my way is hard and steep
But beauteous fields arise before me, where God's redeemed, their vigils keep

User avatar
Gallia-
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 25544
Founded: Oct 09, 2013
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Gallia- » Mon Feb 17, 2020 3:28 am

Purpelia wrote:
Questarian New Yorkshire wrote:imagine thinking that your brigade and division commanders wont be anywhere near a battle area LOL

what they will be doing? play lego in a giant underground concrete box 500 miles away?

Sitting in their HQ 10+km behind the battle processing information and issuing orders via radio/telephone whilst performing ancillary tasks such as planning the flow of supplies and information to the units so that they can fight. It's not their job to be in the front shooting at the enemy. At least not on purpose.

And if their HQ is overrun that by definition means that things have gone terribly horribly wrong. As in that the unit has been broken through, demolished and otherwise ruined. That or somebody on the front lines was very bad at their job. Either way at that point a handgun isn't going to be any more effective at repelling them than a sword would be.


Colonels have rifles. So do major generals. A division commander isn't 10+ km "behind the battle", not that that is particularly far or anything, but I take your point and he isn't looking at maps. That's what his staff is doing, probably the assistant S-3 or S-2, because the actual S-2 is with the commander or in his own armored vehicle driving around. That is essentially frontline combat, even if it's part of the 2nd echelon battalion behind the main vanguard or something. A division is often fighting multiple battles at once, and the commander is usually following his main effort. He isn't sitting in "an HQ" unless he's a coward. He's sitting in an armored vehicle which is driving around with the rest of the vehicles, usually following his vanguard. Probably about half an hour to a couple hours out from the vanguard, which may be a main force battalion, or a recon squadron, or something.

A colonel, at least in a mechanized task force*, will very often lead his main effort. Directly from the front. In the main attack. Shooting the guns himself if he has to. As in he is, even if not the first vehicle, he is at least somewhere in the first dozen or three. For a mechanized battalion this is usually going to be an armored personnel carrier like an M2 or something, because main battle tanks don't really have the empty space to spare for radio operators and antennas needed to command an attack. This is not only normal it is generally a requirement to be considered a "good colonel". He has a rifle for a reason.

*2nd ACR is somewhat of an outlier here, since it is only superficially a mechanized TF. Being reconnaissance focused, Holder would have gone around his Northern troops and continued driving past the Iraqis because his job was to find a path that the division behind could follow him through. I suppose had the Iraqis actually fought then it wouldn't have just ended up driving through what was an essentially porous and unresponsive foe, but been stopped or something, then rest of the squadrons drove around it. Only the center squadron didn't encounter substantial quantities of tanks (Second and First Squadrons ran into the Tawakalna and 12th Armored Division respectively), rather a platoon of T-55s and a Shilka, which they promptly destroyed and captured the tiny village they were occupying.

User avatar
Purpelia
Post Czar
 
Posts: 34249
Founded: Oct 19, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Purpelia » Mon Feb 17, 2020 3:40 am

Battalion commanders sure. That I can see. I was talking about stuff beyond the battalion level. Like, a divisional commander is hardly going to be shooting at the enemy him self.
Purpelia does not reflect my actual world views. In fact, the vast majority of Purpelian cannon is meant to shock and thus deliberately insane. I just like playing with the idea of a country of madmen utterly convinced that everyone else are the barbarians. So play along or not but don't ever think it's for real.



The above post contains hyperbole, metaphoric language, embellishment and exaggeration. It may also include badly translated figures of speech and misused idioms. Analyze accordingly.

User avatar
Gallia-
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 25544
Founded: Oct 09, 2013
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Gallia- » Mon Feb 17, 2020 4:00 am

The point is you're not really a "senior officer" if you're driving a Bradley. Or commanding a carrier battlegroup. Or flying an F-16. Which are all things that O-6s and O-7s do fairly regularly.

A division commander will probably be close enough to be shot at, but he'll also be far enough away that he's unlikely to be shot at by anything besides a howitzer.

User avatar
Purpelia
Post Czar
 
Posts: 34249
Founded: Oct 19, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Purpelia » Mon Feb 17, 2020 8:23 am

Gallia- wrote:The point is you're not really a "senior officer" if you're driving a Bradley. Or commanding a carrier battlegroup. Or flying an F-16. Which are all things that O-6s and O-7s do fairly regularly.

A division commander will probably be close enough to be shot at, but he'll also be far enough away that he's unlikely to be shot at by anything besides a howitzer.

Ergo he does not need weapons other than as a decorative object to make him look shiny.
Purpelia does not reflect my actual world views. In fact, the vast majority of Purpelian cannon is meant to shock and thus deliberately insane. I just like playing with the idea of a country of madmen utterly convinced that everyone else are the barbarians. So play along or not but don't ever think it's for real.



The above post contains hyperbole, metaphoric language, embellishment and exaggeration. It may also include badly translated figures of speech and misused idioms. Analyze accordingly.

User avatar
The Manticoran Empire
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 10506
Founded: Aug 21, 2015
Anarchy

Postby The Manticoran Empire » Mon Feb 17, 2020 5:45 pm

Gallia- wrote:The point is you're not really a "senior officer" if you're driving a Bradley. Or commanding a carrier battlegroup. Or flying an F-16. Which are all things that O-6s and O-7s do fairly regularly.

You clearly have no idea what "Senior Officer" means. A "Senior Officer" is, quite literally, the most senior officer in the area. So you can, in fact, be a senior officer driving a Bradley, flying an F-16, or commanding a Carrier Battle Group, provided you are the highest ranking officer there. If the highest ranking officer is a Sergeant Major, then the Sergeant Major is the Senior Officer (termed the NCOIC). Likewise, if the highest ranking officer is a First Lieutenant, then the First Lieutenant is the Senior Officer (termed the OIC). "Senior Officer" isn't something that requires you to be at a certain rank. It just requires everyone else to have a lower rank than you do.

This then brings us into you claim that O6s and O7s regularly drive Bradleys. They do not. They are CARRIED in Bradleys. The driver is never authorized higher than E-4. The TC is generally an E-5, though it can be an E-6.
O-6s and O-7s will typically only fly to maintain their qualifications. Otherwise, they are FAR too busy with administrative tasks. Furthermore, an O-6 is not going to command a Carrier Battle Group. At minimum that will be an O-7. There is quite a simple reason for that. The O-6 has enough work to do just running the carrier. The CBG commander has to run all the ships in the group and cannot split his or her time between running a ship AND running the group. In basically any military force in the world, Captain (O-3) is going to be the last rank of officer that has enough of a lack of administrative duties that they can partake in those tasks, such as driving Bradleys and flying F-16s. O-4s (Majors) are also likely to be able to fly F-16s but won't be able to drive Bradleys. O-5 (Lieutenant Colonel) and above no longer have the time. They are now in charge of battalions, brigades, destroyer squadrons, air groups, etc. They have too many administrative tasks to complete to waste time flying F-16s and dicking around in IFVs. As a rule of thumb, an officer has to split his or her time between Field and Administrative tasks. As an LT, most of their time can be spent in the field. As a Captain or a Major, they can spend relatively equal amounts of time between Field and Admin. At LTC and above, they have almost no free time to spend in the field. They have too many subordinate elements to manage.

A division commander will probably be close enough to be shot at, but he'll also be far enough away that he's unlikely to be shot at by anything besides a howitzer.

This is highly ignorant. In a modern battlefield, there are more than just howitzers to worry about. Light infantry and special forces can get within small arms range of Division and higher HQs. Furthermore, aircraft munitions and cruise missiles can also target headquarters areas and most likely will.

These days, a Division Headquarters can find itself dozens of miles behind the frontline, especially in a NATO army, since divisions serve more as an administrative nerve center than a tactical command and control node. Tactical control for a NATO style army is done at the Brigade level, allowing Division commanders to be basically as far behind the front line as their communications will allow. Corps commanders can be even further back. Theater commanders don't even have to be in the same time zone.

As an example, we can look at the US Central Command, which is responsible for US military forces in the Middle East. CENTCOMs HQ is in Tampa, Florida. Under CENTCOM are US Army Central and US Air Force Central Command, headquartered in South Carolina, US Marine Corps Central Command at MacDill Air Force Base, and US Navy Central Command at Naval Support Activity Bahrain. These formations serve to coordinate support elements and deployed combat elements but the only permanent elements assigned to these commands are support elements.

With modern communications, you don't need generals on the battlefield anymore. They don't have to be there in person to get an idea of what is going on. With terrain mapping GPS satellites, they can know the ground their commanders are fighting on without ever having to be there. With Blue Force Tracking, they can see where their units are. With surveillance drones, they can see where the enemy is. 21st Century Warfare isn't about Pattons and Rommels running from command post to command post, kicking captains in the ass to attack. It's about gathering, concentrating, analyzing, and disseminating information. 21st Century Warfare is Information Warfare, far more so than at any other time in history. As such, Division, Corps, and EAC commanders won't be on the frontlines. They will be in areas where they can have the best access to information. Brigade and Battalion commanders will surround themselves with as much information as they can in order to most effectively employ their troops.
For: Israel, Palestine, Kurdistan, American Nationalism, American citizens of Guam, American Samoa, Puerto Rico, Northern Mariana Islands, and US Virgin Islands receiving a congressional vote and being allowed to vote for president, military, veterans before refugees, guns, pro choice, LGBT marriage, plural marriage, US Constitution, World Peace, Global Unity.

Against: Communism, Socialism, Fascism, Liberalism, Theocracy, Corporatocracy.


By the Blood of our Fathers, By the Blood of our Sons, we fight, we die, we sacrifice for the Good of the Empire.

User avatar
The Manticoran Empire
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 10506
Founded: Aug 21, 2015
Anarchy

Postby The Manticoran Empire » Mon Feb 17, 2020 5:46 pm

Also, does anyone have any idea how large US modular support brigades can get? The best I can find is between 3,000 and 5,000 men.
For: Israel, Palestine, Kurdistan, American Nationalism, American citizens of Guam, American Samoa, Puerto Rico, Northern Mariana Islands, and US Virgin Islands receiving a congressional vote and being allowed to vote for president, military, veterans before refugees, guns, pro choice, LGBT marriage, plural marriage, US Constitution, World Peace, Global Unity.

Against: Communism, Socialism, Fascism, Liberalism, Theocracy, Corporatocracy.


By the Blood of our Fathers, By the Blood of our Sons, we fight, we die, we sacrifice for the Good of the Empire.

User avatar
Triplebaconation
Senator
 
Posts: 3940
Founded: Feb 22, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Triplebaconation » Mon Feb 17, 2020 5:54 pm

The Manticoran Empire wrote:
Gallia- wrote:The point is you're not really a "senior officer" if you're driving a Bradley. Or commanding a carrier battlegroup. Or flying an F-16. Which are all things that O-6s and O-7s do fairly regularly.

You clearly have no idea what "Senior Officer" means. A "Senior Officer" is, quite literally, the most senior officer in the area. So you can, in fact, be a senior officer driving a Bradley, flying an F-16, or commanding a Carrier Battle Group, provided you are the highest ranking officer there. If the highest ranking officer is a Sergeant Major, then the Sergeant Major is the Senior Officer (termed the NCOIC). Likewise, if the highest ranking officer is a First Lieutenant, then the First Lieutenant is the Senior Officer (termed the OIC). "Senior Officer" isn't something that requires you to be at a certain rank. It just requires everyone else to have a lower rank than you do.


This is "the" senior officer.

"A" senior officer in most militaries is just what is known as a field officer in the US and UK. Higher than a captain but lower than a general.

Colloquially senior officer is just used for everything above captain.
Last edited by Triplebaconation on Mon Feb 17, 2020 5:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Proverbs 23:9.

Things are a bit larger than you appear to think, my friend.

User avatar
The Manticoran Empire
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 10506
Founded: Aug 21, 2015
Anarchy

Postby The Manticoran Empire » Mon Feb 17, 2020 6:04 pm

Triplebaconation wrote:
The Manticoran Empire wrote:You clearly have no idea what "Senior Officer" means. A "Senior Officer" is, quite literally, the most senior officer in the area. So you can, in fact, be a senior officer driving a Bradley, flying an F-16, or commanding a Carrier Battle Group, provided you are the highest ranking officer there. If the highest ranking officer is a Sergeant Major, then the Sergeant Major is the Senior Officer (termed the NCOIC). Likewise, if the highest ranking officer is a First Lieutenant, then the First Lieutenant is the Senior Officer (termed the OIC). "Senior Officer" isn't something that requires you to be at a certain rank. It just requires everyone else to have a lower rank than you do.


This is "the" senior officer.

"A" senior officer in most militaries is just what is known as a field officer in the US and UK. Higher than a captain but lower than a general.

Colloquially senior officer is just used for everything above captain.

Field Grade officers, then.
For: Israel, Palestine, Kurdistan, American Nationalism, American citizens of Guam, American Samoa, Puerto Rico, Northern Mariana Islands, and US Virgin Islands receiving a congressional vote and being allowed to vote for president, military, veterans before refugees, guns, pro choice, LGBT marriage, plural marriage, US Constitution, World Peace, Global Unity.

Against: Communism, Socialism, Fascism, Liberalism, Theocracy, Corporatocracy.


By the Blood of our Fathers, By the Blood of our Sons, we fight, we die, we sacrifice for the Good of the Empire.

User avatar
Gallia-
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 25544
Founded: Oct 09, 2013
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Gallia- » Mon Feb 17, 2020 8:48 pm

Purpelia wrote:
Gallia- wrote:The point is you're not really a "senior officer" if you're driving a Bradley. Or commanding a carrier battlegroup. Or flying an F-16. Which are all things that O-6s and O-7s do fairly regularly.

A division commander will probably be close enough to be shot at, but he'll also be far enough away that he's unlikely to be shot at by anything besides a howitzer.

Ergo he does not need weapons other than as a decorative object to make him look shiny.


He doesn't need a weapon at all unless he's moving in a vehicle which is likely to be attacked or otherwise stopped at some point. Then he carries a rifle like everyone else. Generally the guy who doesn't even carry a sidearm is not doing so because he's either very old and frail as he's a General or LTG or something in command of a corps/division, or because it's simply a hassle to carry that thing around the office.

No one is going to carry a sword outside of the birthday ball where they cut a big cake or something.

Japanese guys charging with swords is mostly the equivalent of the fresh lieutenant thinking it's going to be a cool story to tell his homies about how he stabbed a dude in Afghanistan once. They just learned bad in China and it carried through the '40s, where Japanese troops could rout the ineffective and poorly motivated Chinese warlord gangsters with bayonet/sword charges. The other times it was a deliberate spectacle, like carrying a flag or something, because everyone was supposed to charge the machine guns and die anyway. To some extent it was recognized as a waste of resources, but the typical alternative would be starvation, or internment for the rest of the war, so it was really nothing to lose. To the others [i.e. Nomohan], it was quickly abandoned because it was rather quickly realized that Caucasian troops were almost as tough as the Japanese and unlikely to surrender with strong bayonet attacks.

The Malaya thing was just because you can't see very far in jungles, the soldiers were lazy and had shackled their rifles to their handlebars instead of across their chests, and the Japanese didn't have many SMGs issued to its troops.

The Manticoran Empire wrote:This then brings us into you claim that O6s and O7s regularly drive Bradleys. They do not. They are CARRIED in Bradleys.


A tank commander drives a tank in the same way a captain sails a ship.

The Manticoran Empire wrote:Light infantry and special forces can get within small arms range of Division and higher HQs.


Attacking a battalion or brigade CP is an entirely plausible scenario for light infantry and commandos.

Attacking a division's or corps's HQ would be quite a feat.

The Manticoran Empire wrote:At LTC and above, they have almost no free time to spend in the field.


LTCs are pretty obviously field officers. You aren't giving a rape/sexual assault awareness presentation in the middle of a deliberate defense against a motor rifle regiment. Ditto a COL isn't going to be filing transfer orders when his brigade is attacking a pair of BTGs. Nor would you really want a LTC to be punished for doing his job: defeating the enemy, as opposed to posing for photojournalist shoots. Generally when your battalion or brigade is attacking, you're driving around in the main effort's zone, talking to your staff at your TOC, and observing the attack. More aggressive LTCs and COLs might take part in the attack itself. Their carrier has a Bushmaster and TOW, or it has a .50 cal, or they have a rifle, so why not use it?

Sure, they have to plan things like drawing equipment from war reserve stocks and the actual attack itself, but that isn't being done as the battle happens. Once the battle is joined the COL or LTC is going to out there, in his carrier, watching the battle develop, and making things happen as they need to. If he can't do this, then it's because the army in question is no longer effective, either having been degraded in its ability to fight because of poor perceptions vs. reality (does NTC even simulate sending nude requests in combat to troops' phones that are filtered back by ELINT/REC technical-intelligence troops to artillery batteries?) or because of bad historical experiences teaching it the wrong things.

It wasn't always that way.

The only reason they haven't done so in Desert Storm or Iraq is generally because these militaries fold at the first sign of resistance and are easily handled by small formations. This is somewhat atypical though. A more reasonable opponent is the US Army's OPFOR at the NTC, which doesn't tend to fold like a house of cards, but rather fights like a reasonably tough opponent. The reason it's been dismissed in previous years in Afghanistan is because the US Army probably wants to lose that war, so instead of killing insurgents or something, it tended to hyper-focus on taking photos of smiling LTCs and COLs with illiterate Pashtun village elders. Great for photo shoots and "winning hearts and minds", but it's not as effective as actual body count like the Soviets did, and it's worse than the carrot-and-stick strategy which the British did and won with (albeit after losing the first war).

The Manticoran Empire wrote:words


lol
Last edited by Gallia- on Mon Feb 17, 2020 9:29 pm, edited 4 times in total.

User avatar
Kazarogkai
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 8071
Founded: Jan 27, 2012
Moralistic Democracy

Postby Kazarogkai » Tue Feb 18, 2020 11:18 am

Gallia- wrote:
The only reason they haven't done so in Desert Storm or Iraq is generally because these militaries fold at the first sign of resistance and are easily handled by small formations. This is somewhat atypical though. A more reasonable opponent is the US Army's OPFOR at the NTC, which doesn't tend to fold like a house of cards, but rather fights like a reasonably tough opponent. The reason it's been dismissed in previous years in Afghanistan is because the US Army probably wants to lose that war, so instead of killing insurgents or something, it tended to hyper-focus on taking photos of smiling LTCs and COLs with illiterate Pashtun village elders. Great for photo shoots and "winning hearts and minds", but it's not as effective as actual body count like the Soviets did, and it's worse than the carrot-and-stick strategy which the British did and won with (albeit after losing the first war).


The British didn't really win the second war in the sense that they thoroughly conquered the afghans. At best they rendered it a satellite dissolved of foreign affairs outside the British themselves, not that it mattered much since they were an isolated landlocked backwater, but otherwise Afghanistan remained almost entirely independent in it's day to day affairs. The British were unable to properly occupy and control the ground like a proper imperial power instead having to settle for a largely hegemonic relationship. That and they lost the first and third wars so there is that.
Centrist
Reactionary
Bigot
Conservationist
Communitarian
Georgist
Distributist
Corporatist
Nationalist
Teetotaler
Ancient weaponry
Politics
History in general
books
military
Fighting
Survivalism
Nature
Anthropology
hippys
drugs
criminals
liberals
philosophes(not counting Hobbes)
states rights
anarchist
people who annoy me
robots
1000 12 + 10
1100 18 + 15
1200 24 + 20
1300 24
1400 36 + 10
1500 54 + 20
1600 72 + 30
1700 108 + 40
1800 144 + 50
1900 288 + 60
2000 576 + 80

User avatar
Gallia-
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 25544
Founded: Oct 09, 2013
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Gallia- » Tue Feb 18, 2020 4:47 pm

Kazarogkai wrote:At best they rendered it a satellite dissolved of foreign affairs outside the British themselves


Which is exactly what the British wanted? If the Pashtuns want to fuck boys and play lacrosse with donkey corpses then let 'em.

User avatar
Manokan Republic
Minister
 
Posts: 2504
Founded: Dec 15, 2017
Ex-Nation

Postby Manokan Republic » Wed Feb 19, 2020 6:32 am

The Manticoran Empire wrote:
Manokan Republic wrote:The injury rate for mountain biking, even among professionals, is exceedingly high. Most of these occur in specific areas designed for mountain biking, with flat surfaces that are ideal for biking and not, rough terrain. If even one soldier gets injured, it will stop the entire team, who will have to wait for the other person to catch up or have to leave behind troops to help them out and so on. If accessible by some other means or, if a helicopter can medevac the guy out for example, why not just use a helicopter in the first place to get the troops in close? Bikes are terrible over uneven surfaces, and the difficulty of maneuvering over them is not easy to deal with, especially since, if you've ever biked for more than a week in a row, you know you will pretty much being getting a flat. I got flats all the time and it became a regular thing to have to fix it, as do most people I talk to about it. This also slows you down, and bare in mind every single person needs it. For an initial part of an assault in specific areas it can be useful, but not all the time all over the place.

No. You are quite wrong in that statement. Mountain biking is not exceedingly dangerous and flats are easy to fix. In any event, injuries to ANY formation will halt that formation as they ensure the casualty is treated and evacuated. No one here is suggesting that bikes should replace other forms of transport. They are, however, quite right in stating that bikes do have a potential place in modern warfare, particularly among airborne and light infantry units. Many environments are not conducive to the use of trucks or helicopters.

Put in language you can understand, bikes don't need fuel, don't take up much space, and are quiet. Light infantry and airborne units are already vulnerable to hostile forces and allowing them to move rapidly without much noise is, in my opinion, a plus.

That's my point, they will receive injuries or get flats and have to stop frequently, and it is difficult to bike over anything other than flat terrain bike paths. Sand, mud, dirt, snow, are all things exceedingly difficult to bike over, let alone lots of rocks, over rough terrain and so on. Mountain biking over terrain designed for mountain biking is already very difficult, and it will be more difficult over real terrain.

Having also biked with a backpack and lots of weigh before, I also know how difficult this can be. I suppose if you've never done it before it can be hard to explain but, most people are not expert bikers, and most people don't bike over rough terrain. The best way to explain it is, look at any mountain biking trail, and then look at the terrain next to it. If you can't go over the terrain next to it, you can't realistically move through a forest or other area in a location people don't frequent.

A benefit of a bike is that, in most cases, it is light enough that you can carry it over terrain that is too rough to ride. You apparently think that, by equipping a unit with bikes, they are ONLY allowed to move by bicycle, which is rather nonsensical. Furthermore, this really doesn't make it any less viable to equip light infantry forces with bicycles.

No, carrying a heavy bike with you as you go on foot will slow you down even more, and so it will be a deficit. If you are stopping and getting off your bike half or more of the time, then there isn't much point to having a bike. This is kind of my point. Yes you can work around the weaknesses of a bike, and in so doing give up any kind of real advantage as you end up on foot a large portion of the time carrying a cumbersome 50+ pound mountain bike with you on top of all your other gear.


Just take a look at this picture for example. If one wanted to go over those rocks, they'd have quite a bit of trouble, so unless you have a perfectly made trail for you already, it's going to be rough moving through anywhere not particularly well suited for bikes. Sand, snow, mud and other common things like are also bad for bikes, so if you find a flat area, it's often times, not that great for biking. Let alone for hours and hours, days and days and days worth of it. You are better with a push cart to carry all your heavy stuff since if it gets stuck or falls over or something, of which it has a low center of gravity and doesn't need to be constantly moving to stay upright, you can just abandon it as you are not riding on it yourself.

You are, once again, missing the point. Bicycles aren't being suggested as a complete replacement for motor vehicles nor as something to be supplied to everyone. Rather, it is being suggested to equip troops who ALREADY ARE NOT ISSUED MOTOR VEHICLES with bicycles to provide them an increase in speed over simply walking. Terrain that is basically impassable to bikes is often impassable to encumbered infantrymen, as well. With that understood, there isn't really any terrain that light infantry in full kit can walk over that can't be biked over and if there is, they can carry their bikes over that terrain.

This is so far from the truth it's almost ridiculous. There is tons of terrain bikes can't easily go over that people can easily walk over, such as mud, sand, snow, rocks, and even hills. A human can just step over rocks or wade through water, where as something like this would be insanely difficult to do for a bike. Just take this picture of a rocky field for example, a bike would likely crash driving over something like that for any length of time, where as a person can just, step over the rocks. Humans can easily swim in water or pass rivers which would be exceedingly difficult for a bike, anything such as swamps, marsh flatlands, forested areas with lots of rivers and creeks and so on would be difficult for bikes. I mean, again it's difficult to explain if you just can't imagine it in your head. Bicycles can't go over rocky terrain, swampland or marshes, places with dense vegetation (such as forests or jungles), or lots of steep hills, and have trouble over snowy and sandy areas. Decidedly infantry can go a lot of places bikes cannot reasonably be expected to go. And if you are jumping off your bike every few seconds or minutes, yes this will actually slow you down rather than speed you up and add a lot of weight to carry with you.

The issue is that in the incredibly specific terrain bicycles would be useful in, you typically can use motorized vehicles instead. The reason why most special forces and other infantry units don't use bicycles is that infantry can go in a lot more places than bicycles can. Virtually no military on earth has large formations of bicycle infantry, let alone to be used in the normal circumstances infantry are expected to be use in, and there is the obvious reason for that. Airborne infantry often times deploy with light vehicles that are far better, and can maneuver over almost exactly the same terrain bikes can. A horse or camel is better in virtually any circumstance a bike can be used as well, given their better maneuverability, and so they are often used instead. We do see modern cavalry units even to this day, especially among urban forces or those in the desert with camels, but not bicycles. It's because they're just too difficult to use. Motorcycles or ATV's despite needing fuel would be useful in the same distances bicycles would be useful in, or under 50 miles, and so there is no real need to use a bicycle. It's only useful in very specific niche terrain, and given the inconsistency of terrain, and the fact predictable paths are vulnerable to ambushes, mines etc., there is only a few cases where it makes sense to use them. The delay in stopping and starting, in getting them off of vehicles or going around obstacles, clearing a path for them etc. makes them both difficult to use in heated combat situations and offer no real advantage outside of very flat terrain.
Last edited by Manokan Republic on Wed Feb 19, 2020 6:37 am, edited 4 times in total.


User avatar
Questarian New Yorkshire
Minister
 
Posts: 3158
Founded: Nov 08, 2018
Ex-Nation

Postby Questarian New Yorkshire » Wed Feb 19, 2020 6:50 am

Kazarogkai wrote:
Gallia- wrote:
The only reason they haven't done so in Desert Storm or Iraq is generally because these militaries fold at the first sign of resistance and are easily handled by small formations. This is somewhat atypical though. A more reasonable opponent is the US Army's OPFOR at the NTC, which doesn't tend to fold like a house of cards, but rather fights like a reasonably tough opponent. The reason it's been dismissed in previous years in Afghanistan is because the US Army probably wants to lose that war, so instead of killing insurgents or something, it tended to hyper-focus on taking photos of smiling LTCs and COLs with illiterate Pashtun village elders. Great for photo shoots and "winning hearts and minds", but it's not as effective as actual body count like the Soviets did, and it's worse than the carrot-and-stick strategy which the British did and won with (albeit after losing the first war).


The British didn't really win the second war in the sense that they thoroughly conquered the afghans. At best they rendered it a satellite dissolved of foreign affairs outside the British themselves, not that it mattered much since they were an isolated landlocked backwater, but otherwise Afghanistan remained almost entirely independent in it's day to day affairs. The British were unable to properly occupy and control the ground like a proper imperial power instead having to settle for a largely hegemonic relationship. That and they lost the first and third wars so there is that.
Britain wanted to control Afghanistan's foreign policy so it could not become a Russian puppet, ie so that Russia could not gain access to India. That was completely successful as a foreign policy objective to protect British imperial interest, so yes it was highly successful activity of a proper imperial power. What it was not was colonial; Britain did not occupy Afghanistan and try to put British industrialists in charge of Afghanistan and settle British people in Afghanistan, and turn Afghanistan into New South Yorkshire and make the people there British, as the United States is attempting to turn Afghanistan into a US satellite and make the people there love Coca Cola and gay sex, which it is totally failing to do.

With regards the Third Afghan War, it was a resounding British victory. The Afghans lost every battle and in the following negotiations, they lost the considerable subsidy that Britain was giving them. Britain was able to stop paying the rulers of Afghanistan free money and it lost nothing in return as Russia was in total turmoil and the USSR was not interested in Afghanistan until after the British Empire's collapse.

Britain barely interfered with the 'daily affairs' of its imperial protectorates. It placed laws and bureaucracies and police on top of existing structures and made sure that British goods flowed one way and colonial extracts the other, then placed military communications infrastructure and bases in the right places and that was it. The British Empire was a project to guarantee markets for British goods and to prevent other countries from threatening British security, as it had been threatened in the Napoleonic wars.

But, for the record, 'settling' for another country being our hegemony is usually considered a catastrophic defeat in geostrategic terms, not a victory.
Last edited by Questarian New Yorkshire on Wed Feb 19, 2020 6:52 am, edited 1 time in total.
REST IN PEACE RWDT & LWDT
I'm just a poor wayfaring stranger, traveling through this world below
There is no sickness, no toil, nor danger, in that bright land to which I go
I'm going there to see my Father, and all my loved ones who've gone on
I'm only going over Jordan, I'm only going over home

I know dark clouds will gather 'round me, I know my way is hard and steep
But beauteous fields arise before me, where God's redeemed, their vigils keep

User avatar
Sevvania
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6893
Founded: Nov 12, 2010
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Sevvania » Wed Feb 19, 2020 3:40 pm

Manokan Republic wrote:The injury rate for mountain biking, even among professionals, is exceedingly high.

The Manticoran Empire wrote:No. You are quite wrong in that statement. Mountain biking is not exceedingly dangerous

Manokan Republic wrote:That's my point



Manokan Republic wrote:this will actually slow you down rather than speed you up and add a lot of weight to carry with you.

The US Army found that bicycles could average 6 mph through terrain where infantrymen averaged 3, and cover 52 - 60 miles a day while infanteers average 30. They traversed 1,900 miles in 40 days (resting six of those days) in 1897.

You were wanting to give them wagons, though, so if the bike is too heavy for you to move it past some rocks, just abandon it like you suggested doing with the cart.
Last edited by Sevvania on Wed Feb 19, 2020 4:12 pm, edited 2 times in total.
"Humble thyself and hold thy tongue."

Current Era: 1945
NationStates Stat Card - Sevvania
OFFICIAL FACTBOOK - Sevvania
4/1/13 - Never Forget


User avatar
Sevvania
Negotiator
 
Posts: 6893
Founded: Nov 12, 2010
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Sevvania » Wed Feb 19, 2020 8:41 pm

Gallia- wrote:im actually thinking of just having dudes sit in a radio flyer with snowshoes on the end and flapping their arms until they push enough air around them to take off

Have you considered towing the Radio Flyer behind an elephant, as illustrated by Triplebaconation
Image
"Humble thyself and hold thy tongue."

Current Era: 1945
NationStates Stat Card - Sevvania
OFFICIAL FACTBOOK - Sevvania
4/1/13 - Never Forget


User avatar
Austrasien
Minister
 
Posts: 3183
Founded: Apr 07, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Austrasien » Thu Feb 20, 2020 4:08 pm

Gallia- wrote:no the snowshoe thing is based on a recurring dream ive had while passing out drunk for the past week or so


Your dreams are wrong do you even understand oneironautics?

In my recurring flight dreams I just sort of think about levitating and it happens. Which makes sense.
The leafposter formerly known as The Kievan People

The weak crumble, are slaughtered and are erased from history while the strong survive. The strong are respected and in the end, peace is made with the strong.

User avatar
Husseinarti
Senator
 
Posts: 4962
Founded: Mar 20, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Husseinarti » Thu Feb 20, 2020 5:41 pm

The Manticoran Empire wrote:You clearly have no idea what "Senior Officer" means. A "Senior Officer" is, quite literally, the most senior officer in the area. So you can, in fact, be a senior officer driving a Bradley, flying an F-16, or commanding a Carrier Battle Group, provided you are the highest ranking officer there. If the highest ranking officer is a Sergeant Major, then the Sergeant Major is the Senior Officer (termed the NCOIC). Likewise, if the highest ranking officer is a First Lieutenant, then the First Lieutenant is the Senior Officer (termed the OIC). "Senior Officer" isn't something that requires you to be at a certain rank. It just requires everyone else to have a lower rank than you do.


Calm the fuck down with the shitty attempt at pedantry.

"Senior officer" is a term used for "Field officer" or "Field grade" if you are an American. Guess what fucking ranks those cover.

MAJ
LTC
COL

The Manticoran Empire wrote:This then brings us into you claim that O6s and O7s regularly drive Bradleys. They do not. They are CARRIED in Bradleys. The driver is never authorized higher than E-4.


Again quit with your fucking pedantry. You fucking know what he meant by "driving a Bradley". You fucking know, you aren't retarded.

Image
Image

wau wat ranks r these guys

looks like

maj
ltc
col

b-butocifers r supposed 2 be admin y he HAVE TRACK

These officers are billeted to a track with wheels as a secondary option. This shows the track is their primary home.
O-6s and O-7s will typically only fly to maintain their qualifications.


This is why they fly combat missions, right?

The driver is never authorized higher than E-4.

In basically any military force in the world, Captain (O-3) is going to be the last rank of officer that has enough of a lack of administrative duties that they can partake in those tasks, such as driving Bradleys


You aren't making any sense whats really going on.

O-5 (Lieutenant Colonel) and above no longer have the time. They are now in charge of battalions, brigades, destroyer squadrons, air groups, etc. They have too many administrative tasks to complete to waste time flying F-16s and dicking around in IFVs.


this is why they have their own tracks and fly combat missions right????????????????????????????????????

Theater commanders don't even have to be in the same time zone.


This has been a thing since like ww2 lol calm down

you probably violently masturbate to words like "sensor fusion" and shit like that
Bash the fash, neopup the neo-cons, crotale the commies, and super entendard socialists

User avatar
Gallia-
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 25544
Founded: Oct 09, 2013
Inoffensive Centrist Democracy

Postby Gallia- » Thu Feb 20, 2020 5:45 pm

if i were a col i would be in the field all the time just rolling on dudes and assaulting defensive positions with my smoke generator platoon leading the way hooah

big 25mm vs puny bimpu

shoot at dudes from the roof hatch with my sidearm while yelling yee haw

then i would drown myself and my failing cutting scores with alcoholism at the bar every weekend

Austrasien wrote:
Gallia- wrote:no the snowshoe thing is based on a recurring dream ive had while passing out drunk for the past week or so


Your dreams are wrong do you even understand oneironautics?

In my recurring flight dreams I just sort of think about levitating and it happens. Which makes sense.


yeah i bet in ur dreams ur made of 1mm perforated spanish titanium and u can fly cos aerogels are less dense than air

which also makes sense

snowshoes are grid fins for your arms :b:
Last edited by Gallia- on Thu Feb 20, 2020 5:48 pm, edited 3 times in total.

User avatar
Husseinarti
Senator
 
Posts: 4962
Founded: Mar 20, 2015
Ex-Nation

Postby Husseinarti » Thu Feb 20, 2020 5:48 pm

Gallia- wrote:if i were a col i would be in the field all the time just rolling on dudes and assaulting defensive positions with my smoke generator platoon leading the way hooah

big 25mm vs puny bimpu

shoot at dudes from the roof hatch with my sidearm while yelling yee haw

then i would drown myself and my failing cutting scores with alcoholism at the bar every weekend


who are u the commander guy from world in conflict

because he shot at people with an m16 iirc
Bash the fash, neopup the neo-cons, crotale the commies, and super entendard socialists

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to Factbooks and National Information

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Aeyariss

Advertisement

Remove ads