Posted on 09/11/2003 1:56:57 PM PDT by PatrioticCowboy
Why is that?
The Marines conducted intense foot patrolling and ambushes. In addition, the Marines didn't do "smash and grab" raids against households. They were more discreet and catered to the authority of the tribal elders and the heads of individual households. The Army has recently begun adopting Marine tactics.
That's the nice guy part. The badass part is what keeps people friendly. When a Marine convoy took an RPG, their doctrine was to dismount infantry and begin an immediate counterattack that would almost invariably lead to overtime work for the 72 Virgins. The Army, otoh, would tend to speed up to try to get out of Dodge. Bad doctrine: that merely encouraged the local goons to try different ambush tactics.
Both services report that the average jihadi stages "miss and run" attacks, poorly coordinated assaults led by teams of gomers with Kalashnikovs and RPG's. These people are not the Viet Cong, folks. In point of fact, these clowns couldn't wipe the sandals of an NVA Regular.
Be Seeing You,
Chris
I read a briefing given by a Marine General in which he said that he explained to the local authorities that you don't shoot at troops and that if he ever got shot at he would fire back. I'm trying to imagine exactly how that got operationalized- probably nowhere near as laid back as his explanation.
The Army tactic made sense when you were trying to get somewhere fast like Baghdad. But it sounds like the Marines have the correct tactic for now.
Wish the Army would learn from the Marines and special forces and do what works. And get your HQ out of the boonies and stop giving AQ predictable convoys to shoot at.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.