To: Pollster1; JRandomFreeper; PowderMonkey
Such fortifications done and done badly - which is a mistake that is too easy to do - would boomerang on you by actually providing cover for an attacking force. I agree with others here that being mobile and not bogged down in static fortifications is coherent strategy, yet there are circumstances where you would need to fortify. The trick is to make it flat out inconvenient and difficult as possible for hostiles to make an effective approach on your position. You have to create the circumstances to do so on
your terms - not the enemy's. You may want to find and consult a copy of the
"Combined Arms Obstacle Integration" manual for ideas of what I am talking about.
43 posted on
09/07/2013 3:54:12 PM PDT by
lapsus calami
(What's that stink? Code Pink ! ! And their buddy Murtha, too!)
To: lapsus calami
Want you want is an appropriate amount of cover, concealment, and terrain which will slow down and funnel attackers.
If I lived in the country I would also include barriers which would hinder tracked vehicles.
51 posted on
09/07/2013 4:30:40 PM PDT by
driftdiver
(I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson