U.S. Abrams v. British Challenger II

[TranterUK]

I shall try to get a copy and report back.

One of the finest 'war' books I have read is one of yours, 'Shots fired in anger' by JB George. Out of print I should think but get one if you can. A must for any weapon enthusiast, he really evaluates the various handguns, rifles mortars etc being used where he is in the pacific.

Also 'Fix Bayonets and other stories' (MCA Heritage Library) copy given to me by a Marine Lt. friend.

[delta13soultaker]

DULCE ET DECORUM EST was probably the first war poem I ever read. It's actually the prologue in a book...I think a novel by Harold Coyle.

The "seen the elephant" reference is still used by some people...some sayings are too good to die easy I guess.

I used to know a guy, a Sapper, out West when we worked in the mountains he would cut a staff from a straight sappling almost every day, decorating it with notches and 550 parachute cord or whatever was handy. After awhile they were laying or leaning everywhere and you almost couldn't help but pick one up and walk with it. Something about holding one of those staffs, shaved clean and the top adorned with long braided cord with no logical pattern....well it was satisfying in a primitive way. And new guys, coming with us, or strangers to us, would always ask in some way when they saw the first staff, "Sargeant, what is that?" He would always just say, "It's an elephant stick." The reply would always follow after a minute of thought, "There ain't no elephants around here." He would say, "Exactly."

[polishshooter]

Actually, to give one other advantage to the M4 Sherman the Brits came up with a rather ingenious portable gasoline stove that could be used to "brew up" on the move so they didn't even have to STOP for tea in War two...


...although pity the poor bog (or did the Brits refer to the bowgunner as an "alternate driver," I forget...) with that thing blazing between his legs with the Sherman rocking and rolling on to Berlin at 28 mph...


And "Combined Arms" PS? That went out with the death of the Blitzkrieg in '43....even though people were still spouting it until at least the 70s....

It's now an "integrated battlefield," with ALL assets complimenting each other, with not merely "cooperation"between services like back then, but actual one force, one mission. 'AirLand Battle" was truly that revolutionary in the 70s and 80s, even though it was not really used in battle until Desert Storm, and is even more so with the technology we have now...

Whereas the grunts used to "ask for" cooperation from the Navy, or the Flyboys, and depending on the "liaison" may or may not have gotten it, it is now integrated with all forces reporting to one commander, who may be of any service.

You may have a Marine in the F18 coming in hot flying under the control of the AF FAC supporting a Special Forces Team being extracted by an AF Spec Ops chopper that just put in a Seal Team to cover....all commanded by a NAVY officer on a DD offshore or in a JSTARS overhead...not merely "separate" forces temporarily "combined," as in WWII or even Vietnam custom, but truly "Integrated" into one team...it truly is revolutionary, and probably is the "zenith" of military command arts.

[TranterUK]

Originally Posted by polishshooter

You may have a Marine in the F18 coming in hot flying under the control of the AF FAC supporting a Special Forces Team being extracted by an AF Spec Ops chopper that just put in a Seal Team to cover....all commanded by a NAVY officer on a DD offshore or in a JSTARS overhead...not merely "separate" forces temporarily "combined," as in WWII or even Vietnam custom, but truly "Integrated" into one team...it truly is revolutionary, and probably is the "zenith" of military command arts.

Goodness me,
It all sound so complicated. It's a good thing it could not possibly go wrong!

[polishshooter]

Actually it's amazing it works as seamlessly as it does!

But it's taken DECADES to get this far though. Which is why too many people and politicians that see nothing but "waste" in military expenditures, need to also see the advances that have been made along the way too, taking advantage of capabilities across the whole spectrum, and eliminating a lot of duplication of effort.

It's taken so long to get beyond the stupid interservice rivalries of the past, even though granted a lot still exists, but unlike the 40s, 50s, and 60s, where a lot of heartburn was expended over say, the 1947 Key West 'Agreement' where Congress had to "referee" the "fight" between the USAF and the USA over control of "armed aircraft," which had devolved into almost open warfare between the services. The AF wanting complete control of ALL "COmbat Aircraft," while devoting about zilch to close air support and troop carrying helicopters so they could spend more resources on missiles and "sexy" air to aire fighters and strategic bombers, that even effected operations as late as Vietnam.

Now when you see for example the integration of Spec Ops, or the planning for "Iraqi Freedom," for example, compared with even the planning that happened for "Desert storm" 10 or 12 years earlier, we have much more than mere "cooperation" between services.

[Pistolenschutze]

Originally Posted by TranterUK

Goodness me,
It all sound so complicated. It's a good thing it could not possibly go wrong!

Of course it couldn't go wrong, Tranter. As we both know well, the military NEVER makes mistakes . . . especially the officers in intelligence and those with the rank of brigadier or higher.

[TranterUK]

I am no military expert, but it seems to this armchair General the key to success is 'flexibility'.

That's because no plan survives the first few moments because the weather, our own support services, men and equipment and most of all, the enemy will often not do what their supposed to when their supposed to!

[Pistolenschutze]

Originally Posted by TranterUK

I am no military expert, but it seems to this armchair General the key to success is 'flexibility'.

That's because no plan survives the first few moments because the weather, our own support services, men and equipment and most of all, the enemy will often not do what their supposed to when their supposed to!

Too true! It is virtually axiomatic that military plans almost never survive contact with the enemy . . . at least I was never involved in one that did! Plans are logical, unfortunately, humans rarely are.

[delta13soultaker]

Originally Posted by Pistolenschutze

Too true! It is virtually axiomatic that military plans almost never survive contact with the enemy . . . at least I was never involved in one that did! Plans are logical, unfortunately, humans rarely are.

It all comes down to this....The one thing you never thought of happening will occur at the worst moment when you are least able to deal with it.

Rarely in combat will you ever say about some bulls*** that is happening, "Gosh, this is exactly what I had hoped would not happen!"

Usually it's, "WTF!?? WTF!?? WTF!??"

If you thought of it...there would be control measures to deal with it before the risk became reality.


I wouldn't say it's always a matter of things NOT doing what its supposed to do. It happens, but for the most part gear and personnel do what they are paid to do. Timing will always be a problem but we have gotten extremely good at putting mass casualty producing efforts in motion at the right moment.

We will plan a 1,000 hours...and train a 100 hours....for a task that will take 10 minutes to execute. We use technology that will take a decade for civilian industries to figure out a profitable way to convert from a military role and sell. (That tactical internet we use now....one day those servers will be in everyones' cars....your car will see every car around it before you do....cops will be emailing your ticket to your dashboard.)


People love to say, "No plan ever survives contact etc etc etc". Yeah we know it's true. BUT if you want to experience disaster just go ahead and wing it with no plan at all!


Battles are not won by the best; Battles are lost by the worst.

[Pistolenschutze]

Well said and quite true, Delta. It is perhaps worthwhile to note as well that one of the greatest strengths of our military is the emphasis that is given to initiative and flexibility at every rank level, from general down to PFC. The militaries of the past that have relied on rigid, no-deviation-from-orders kind of thinking have always ultimately failed, even if they were initially successful. The German Wehrmacht and the Japanese Imperial Army of World War II were certainly a cases in point.

[delta13soultaker]

Originally Posted by Pistolenschutze

Well said and quite true, Delta. It is perhaps worthwhile to note as well that one of the greatest strengths of our military is the emphasis that is given to initiative and flexibility at every rank level, from general down to PFC. The militaries of the past that have relied on rigid, no-deviation-from-orders kind of thinking have always ultimately failed, even if they were initially successful. The German Wehrmacht and the Japanese Imperial Army of World War II were certainly a cases in point.

Yeah our Army is probably the only one who will give privates a top-secret clearance.

I remember being a private in the '90's, being told while learning to land nav at Ft. Benning, "In the Soviet Army you have to be a f***ing lieutenant to learn to read a map! Kill the officers, always kill the officers, Privates! Then you wiped out a whole platoon!" As a drill sergeant I repeat the same story....the former communist armies only trusted a lieutenant with a compass, so understand how valuable what you are about to learn is.

A staff sergeant in our Army has always had the authority of a captain in most other communist militaries.

Our entire doctrine revolves around initiative at the lowest level.

"If it don't work...it's wrong! If it does work...it's a technique!"

"There's forty ways to skin a bobcat, boys."

"I don't care how ya f*** this chicken! Just make sure you're holding the feet when it gets done!"

Everything from battle drill 1A at squad level to SPORTS at individual level back up to conducting a screen line at task force level or break-out at division level....is all based on decisions of the guy most directly responsible at that moment...whether he be responsible for just his rifle, his squad, 3 battalions, or 4 brigades. Anyone who is about to fight an American has just really known one thing...he has no actual idea what the s.o.b. is actually gonna do. Anyone who thought otherwise got humbled. That's why 1 US Mech Division sent Saddam running into a hole.

Anytime we've ever deviated from that core doctrine we paid dearly.

[Pistolenschutze]

Yup. Look, for example, what happened at 73 Easting during the First Gulf War. Captain H.R. McMaster, on his own initiative, attacked without waiting for heavier units to come up, and basically kicked Iraqi butt big time.