Devildoc
Verified Military
Call to recruit Army, Marine infantry as 'elite branch'
- Thread starter Devildoc
- Start date
Where do you send them when they fuck up?
The threat of getting booted from a SOF unit helps keep guys in check.
Do we make them Cav Scouts?
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2006
- Messages
- 1,230
Give them black berets too! Nonsense like this reminds me why I left the Army.
Marine Infantry is already an elite force. We could argue that point, I guess, but it's one reason why the original Raider battalions were disbanded. No need for an "elite within an elite."
I think if you ramp up an infantry unit’s selection process to be SOF-esque , you’re going to have a lot of empty slots. I think the thought is great, but when you check out the attrition rates from the other thread, it is a wake up call.
Army Infantry will be modernizing to the future battle fields. The argument could be made that our light divisions are as elite as any other light Infantry unit (not talking about Rangers here, that's a different animal all together). But it could be done, better screening and training at Sand Hill, more advanced training for 11B/C's going to light divisions vs heavy. They would need to come up with a asi or control group so branch doesn't send fat boys to light units, etc.
Can they produce a Ranger division or multiple Ranger divisions? Fuck no, but they could definitely shape our light divisions up to more traditional commando style light Infantry.
Airborne school use to include a shit ton of patrolling and light infantryman skills in the course (WW2 era). I see no reason why the same could not be repeated, send the unsuccessfuls down to heavy divisions, etc.
Just thinking out loud.
Can they produce a Ranger division or multiple Ranger divisions? Fuck no, but they could definitely shape our light divisions up to more traditional commando style light Infantry.
Airborne school use to include a shit ton of patrolling and light infantryman skills in the course (WW2 era). I see no reason why the same could not be repeated, send the unsuccessfuls down to heavy divisions, etc.
Just thinking out loud.
Which country are we being compared to when trying to create this elite infantry force? IMO our Army and Marine infantry are elite. if we need to go into a country, kill everyone, and leave, we’re pretty damn successful. Occupation is another animal in itself and not really what we’re designed for, but we’ve always managed to adapt and overcome.
Well, the issue is not as much as "are we good at what we currently do" as it is the changing dynamic and how our light divisions will have to adjust. More so the need for a more scalpel like approach vs sledgehammer. Intergrading more tech, fires and maneuver in close proximity to urban populations. I'm not saying we are not good at it, just that we will have to become better and adapt.
A lot of this is coming from the Ukrainian /Russian conflict. Russia is much better than anyone thought and SIGINT, Intergraded UAV and indirect fires, as well as electronic warfare. To be honest, I feel for the younger generations, as it's going to be a motherfucker if Russia starts to export their developing capabilities.
Brass tacks, our Infantry is going to need to become, smaller, smarter, faster, more lethal with direct and indirect fires, close proximity maneuvers and develop and master tech capabilities.
I suspect SIGINT, electronic warfare, and armed and unarmed UAV integration is more where the General is pushing for a more SOF like/capable Infantry vs a more Ranger like Infantry with regards to selection, training and equipment.
However, I'm just making a semi-educated guess.
Devildoc
Verified Military
I believe the foundational gist of the article isn't necessarily to compare infantry to SOF, but rather treat them like SOF with regard to targeted recruitment, selection, training, bonuses, etc. The author also brought up the Navy nuke sub programs where they do the same thing: one a sailor is in, the rest of his career is pretty much set in that field. The author talks about the history of infantry was as a filler, where people go because they weren't 'good enough' (my words) for other branches, and that it is the wrong mindset.
I totally agree when it comes to our evolving forces, but I think a smaller infantry would only hurt us, especially with a conflict relating to China/Taiwan/South China Sea over the horizon. We’re out gunned when it comes to ground troops, but I think that having the technological edge will only take us so far. At the end of the day (in my personal opinion) we will still need numbers when it comes to conventional conflicts with super powers (and as a deterrent).
I fully agree with regards to our heavy divisions, plus that shit up, because that will be what we need in that context.
Light doesn't fit well in that model, at least not as well as they do in smaller proxy stuff that is being projected in Europe.
I don't have the time to paint the picture with links and video's right now, of why I'm saying what I'm saying, and why many high ranking officers are making comments like "we need more lethal/agile SOF like Infantry".
But I'll get after it tonight or tomorrow, it's pretty damn scary shit and will give context to my prior commitments.
I understand, in principle, where the general is coming from; but, as @Box points out, it fails to take in integration with the distro, medics, quartermasters, logistics, signal, etc guys who help these units run.
Anything we do to improve our base infantry is going to require improving our combat support guys/gals.
It seems to me the best solution is either;
A. The expansion of Ranger Regiment and Force Recon, to allow for a broader base of "elite" infantry using already established organizations
or
B. Improvements and refocusing at the baseline level of troops in infantry and combat support skills, with more focus on keeping those skills in practice outside of basic/AIT/"yearly" refresher training
Anything we do to improve our base infantry is going to require improving our combat support guys/gals.
It seems to me the best solution is either;
A. The expansion of Ranger Regiment and Force Recon, to allow for a broader base of "elite" infantry using already established organizations
or
B. Improvements and refocusing at the baseline level of troops in infantry and combat support skills, with more focus on keeping those skills in practice outside of basic/AIT/"yearly" refresher training
Brill
SOF Support
I thought that’s what the 173rd was for?
Army Will Add 2 Months to Infantry Course to Make Grunts More Lethal
Mattis Wants Ground Combat Units to Be More Lethal in the Close Fight
The Integrated Joint Force: A Lethal Solution for Ensuring Military Preeminence | RealClearDefense
If you google "Russian hybrid warfare and Us Army" and you will find a few pdf's from the Army war college and Fort Benning with regards to how we and NATO are reshaping to fit the current threat, etc.
There are also several YouTube videos as well as small articles of high ranking officers, studying and commenting on how we need to change, adapt, etc. I've been somewhat keeping up with it, hints my comments.
One of the most interesting and terrifying revelations, is how Russia is using ECM's to block communications and technology, while using SIGINT to triangulate positions, specific units, using UAV to confirm location, tracking and in many cases using mass indirect fires to destroy units. And they are pretty damn good at it, like really fucking good.
Our Infantry has never faced those types of tactics before, and honestly, without some revamping and a whole hell of a lot of integration, probably wouldn't come out so well.
Anyway, some interesting stuff floating around with regards to this stuff specifically. Worth the time to read, watch, debate, IMHO. Better than the normal politics bullshit we've been discussing as of late.
$.02
Mattis Wants Ground Combat Units to Be More Lethal in the Close Fight
The Integrated Joint Force: A Lethal Solution for Ensuring Military Preeminence | RealClearDefense
If you google "Russian hybrid warfare and Us Army" and you will find a few pdf's from the Army war college and Fort Benning with regards to how we and NATO are reshaping to fit the current threat, etc.
There are also several YouTube videos as well as small articles of high ranking officers, studying and commenting on how we need to change, adapt, etc. I've been somewhat keeping up with it, hints my comments.
One of the most interesting and terrifying revelations, is how Russia is using ECM's to block communications and technology, while using SIGINT to triangulate positions, specific units, using UAV to confirm location, tracking and in many cases using mass indirect fires to destroy units. And they are pretty damn good at it, like really fucking good.
Our Infantry has never faced those types of tactics before, and honestly, without some revamping and a whole hell of a lot of integration, probably wouldn't come out so well.
Anyway, some interesting stuff floating around with regards to this stuff specifically. Worth the time to read, watch, debate, IMHO. Better than the normal politics bullshit we've been discussing as of late.
$.02
Brill
SOF Support
Yes, but almost a reorganizing of units all together (IE. SIGINT, EW, UAV, at the company level)
Yeah, a lot needs to change at all levels.
Roll back to WWII...Airborne units and the 10th Mtn. were "elite" in the grand scheme of things. Training was tough and you could find yourself with a new home if you didn't measure up. There wasn't a formal selection program per se, everyone was a volunteer (especially in the ABN units), and they utilized their unique skill sets while also performing as line infantry when needed. Go back to that general model and I understand, otherwise...great position paper, bro.
I read the article, and now I'm sorry I did. This idea is dumb as hell, and is completely unworkable.
This is the "Green New Deal" of the military. It gives all the blue cord huggers something to cheer about and gets the authors' name back in the headlines but it's stupid and unworkable. "Oh, we'll just find 100,000+ men and women who have all these skills even though we're missing our recruiting numbers, and we'll pay them with money we don't have, give them training they don't need, and try to give them jobs that SOF and the services won't let them do." This is the same line of reasoning that gave the black beret to the entire force. That did absolutely nothing to increase moral, lethality, or esprit. This won't either.
General purpose Infantry are an "essential" part of our military. They are not an "elite" part.
Gee, if only we had an elite infantry element in the military already...
This is the "Green New Deal" of the military. It gives all the blue cord huggers something to cheer about and gets the authors' name back in the headlines but it's stupid and unworkable. "Oh, we'll just find 100,000+ men and women who have all these skills even though we're missing our recruiting numbers, and we'll pay them with money we don't have, give them training they don't need, and try to give them jobs that SOF and the services won't let them do."
This is the same line of reasoning that gave the black beret to the entire force. That did absolutely nothing to increase moral, lethality, or esprit. This won't either.General purpose Infantry are an "essential" part of our military. They are not an "elite" part.
Gee, if only we had an elite infantry element in the military already...
Brill
SOF Support
You rang Sir?
Similar threads
- Deleted member 15200
- Military
