I certainly hope the army has figured out how to train PLs and other mid level NCOs how to engage in combined armed maneuvers. It was shit in my day, particularly call for fire, obviously because we were focused on COIN.
Your comments re: safety are well taken. On the other hand, much can be simulated virtually, which is safer, though not realistic, but war isn’t realistic until you actually go to war.
The general problem stems from the first Hackworth quote: soldiers and those supporting them can get lazy quick. Stop the laziness across the board. The amount of sitting around is just stupid. And we all know the only way to remedy that: trim the size of the force, reduce waste, retain the best. I’d rather have a 21st century military a fraction of what it was at its height in the 20th century if it’s more tech proficient and professionally trained.
It's been a few years for me as well, but our "Conventional" training, (LSCO hadn't been invented yet), was the same as our COIN training but without IEDs. No digging in, not mine training, nothing. Modern CFF training is really outdated too.
Obviously a lot of these critiques have been remedied by the Army since then, but the biggest one, the "safetyism," has not. Safety is still stressed, but to the point where it /does/ detract from the training.
Okay not a lot, but the "combat power" one certainly has. I remembered thinking that when I read About Face and saw that. There are other problems with situtational exercise training, but we dont do /that/ anymore.
Ahhhh yeah that's true. Unfortunately this is partially because hill/mountain terrain's importance isn't considered as heavily in recent years as that of urban terrain, thus there is still emphasis on useless assaults, but you're generally correct
Yeah that is true. He dated that particular anecdote from post Korea I believe.
The reason we still teach reverse-slope defenses is /because/ of the experience in Korea, so that says something about the extent to which that war influenced doctrine. Nowadays, try and hold a hill like that and your grid square will just get deleted.
I certainly hope the army has figured out how to train PLs and other mid level NCOs how to engage in combined armed maneuvers. It was shit in my day, particularly call for fire, obviously because we were focused on COIN.
Your comments re: safety are well taken. On the other hand, much can be simulated virtually, which is safer, though not realistic, but war isn’t realistic until you actually go to war.
The general problem stems from the first Hackworth quote: soldiers and those supporting them can get lazy quick. Stop the laziness across the board. The amount of sitting around is just stupid. And we all know the only way to remedy that: trim the size of the force, reduce waste, retain the best. I’d rather have a 21st century military a fraction of what it was at its height in the 20th century if it’s more tech proficient and professionally trained.
It's been a few years for me as well, but our "Conventional" training, (LSCO hadn't been invented yet), was the same as our COIN training but without IEDs. No digging in, not mine training, nothing. Modern CFF training is really outdated too.
Well, none of this will matter once we are famous and we are in charge of the DOD in the coming future.
Obviously a lot of these critiques have been remedied by the Army since then, but the biggest one, the "safetyism," has not. Safety is still stressed, but to the point where it /does/ detract from the training.
Have any of the ones in this essay really been remedied?
Okay not a lot, but the "combat power" one certainly has. I remembered thinking that when I read About Face and saw that. There are other problems with situtational exercise training, but we dont do /that/ anymore.
Ahhhh yeah that's true. Unfortunately this is partially because hill/mountain terrain's importance isn't considered as heavily in recent years as that of urban terrain, thus there is still emphasis on useless assaults, but you're generally correct
Yeah that is true. He dated that particular anecdote from post Korea I believe.
The reason we still teach reverse-slope defenses is /because/ of the experience in Korea, so that says something about the extent to which that war influenced doctrine. Nowadays, try and hold a hill like that and your grid square will just get deleted.