ARmy Rumour SErvice

**One_of_the_strange** · 19-08-2004, 22:26

I came across the link below, which is a report to the US Congress from a retired Colonel. Clearly some are starting to look at the current trends towards lighter forces, network enabled warfare and pointing out the flaws. As FRES is the same idea it is clearly relevant to us.

http://www.sftt.org/PDF/article08172004a.pdf

Some good quotes:

"I will begin by examining two of the fundamental assumptions that are distorting Army transformation. The first of these distortions arises from the belief that information can substitute for armored protection, firepower and off-road mobility."

"As experience in Iraq demonstrates, another flawed assumption is the belief that strategic speed (deployment) is worth sacrificing protection and firepower."

**londoner** · 20-08-2004, 03:26

Thia quote seems to be particularly relevant to British forces, too...

Large quantities of light infantry with nothing more than the weapons they can carry after they dismount to attack from either up-armored HMMWVs or Strykers will sustain heavy losses.

And I'm very glad to see he's recognised this:-

Our friends in Egypt and Jordan along with our British and Italian Allies watched in disbelief through the summer and fall of 2003 as our strategy of indecision on the ground in Iraq produced inaction against known pockets of resistance on the one hand and, on the other, humiliated, killed or incarcerated thousands of Iraqi Arabs without trial, the vast majority of which were not the enemy. The result was: we nurtured the insurgency.

**jonwilly** · 20-08-2004, 08:20

Strange one says
' strategic speed (deployment) is worth sacrificing protection and firepower.'

Rapid deployment gets the politicos and senior military off the hook and 'sacrificing protection and firepower' gets Tommy in the sh1t.
jon
Is it true no one in the UK Labour Parlimentry members has ever served in Her Majestys forces ?

**Disco** · 20-08-2004, 09:56

The Labour party have adopted the manouverist approach to modern shoulder sloping.

**PartTimePongo** · 20-08-2004, 11:10

Large quantities of light infantry with nothing more than the weapons they can carry after they dismount to attack from either up-armored HMMWVs or Strykers will sustain heavy losses.

Arnhem

"He who fails to learn from history is doomed to repeat it"

**X-Inf** · 20-08-2004, 11:14

This is a well argued paper in which the gentleman has demonstrated not only an understanding of what has happened, why it has happened and where the future seems to be taking the US forces, but he is aware of the strength of feeling held by the US's allies.

Being such a well balanced report giving sensible recommendations which look like they may work against the proposals which he claims will not work, how much weight do you think the US Guvment will place on it?

Discuss

**Plastic Yank** · 20-08-2004, 11:33

He will be quietly and unceremoniously sacked!

**X-Inf** · 20-08-2004, 11:54

Like your avatar PY. Ninety Twa and no deid yet!

**Plastic Yank** · 20-08-2004, 12:48

Aw rite! betrayed by Tories, Fcked by Labour, I'm voting Arrse next time round!

watch out X-Inf, PP's bodyguard are in their sights!

yours aye

**X-Inf** · 20-08-2004, 13:41

Originally Posted by Plastic Yank

Aw rite! betrayed by Tories, Fcked by Labour, I'm voting Arrse next time round!

watch out X-Inf, PP's bodyguard are in their sights!

yours aye

We are all in their sights unfortunately.

BTW You may be Cock o' the North but we are all being turned over by the Cnuts o' the South.

Watch & Shoot