Military Space News  





. Ambush Mentality Drives New Military Technology

Third Generation tactics: "On the offense, the rule is not "close with and destroy" but "bypass and collapse." The goal is to penetrate deep into the enemy's rear, by stealth or by force (the Germans used a three-, not two-, element assault, and the largest element was the exploitation element), then roll up the enemy's forward units from the flank and rear while overrunning his artillery, headquarters and supply dumps. The same approach was used by the Panzer divisions (pictured) on the operational level, leading to vast encirclements of hundreds of thousands of Soviet troops on the Eastern Front in 1941."
by William S. Lind
UPI Commentator
Washington (UPI) April 20, 2007
I recently received the following query from Jim McDonnell of Baton Rouge, La.: "Could you please explain what's meant by the remark about U.S. forces being unable to fight battles of encirclement? Is it that there are too few of them in Afghanistan or are you saying that our forces are constitutionally incapable of that kind of operation? If the latter is the case, that would make a column all by itself."

It would and it does. The problem is not numbers but tactical repertoire, or lack thereof. That deficiency in turn is a product -- like so much else -- of the American armed forces' failure to transition from the Second Generation to the Third.

Second Generation tactics, like those of the First Generation, are linear. In the attack the object is to push a line forward, and in the defense it is to hold a line. As we saw in so many battles in and after World War I, the result is usually indecisive. One side or the other ends up holding the ground, but the loser retires in reasonably good order to fight again another day.

Usually, achieving a decision, which means taking the enemy unit permanently out of play, requires one of two things, or both in combination: ambush or encirclement. Modern, Third Generation tactics reflect an "ambush mentality," and also usually aim for encirclement. To that end, Third Generation tactics are sodomy tactics: the objective is to get in the other guy's rear.

On the defense, that is accomplished by inviting the enemy to attack, letting him penetrate, and then launching a counterattack designed to encircle him, not push him back out. This was the basis of the new, Third Generation German defensive tactics of 1917, and also the German Army's standard defense in World War II.

On the offense, the rule is not "close with and destroy" but "bypass and collapse." The goal is to penetrate deep into the enemy's rear, by stealth or by force (the Germans used a three-, not two-, element assault, and the largest element was the exploitation element), then roll up the enemy's forward units from the flank and rear while overrunning his artillery, headquarters and supply dumps. The same approach was used by the Panzer divisions on the operational level, leading to vast encirclements of hundreds of thousands of Soviet troops on the Eastern Front in 1941.

The U.S. military today knows little or nothing of this. It did attempt an operational encirclement of the Iraqi Republican Guard by 7th Corps in the First Gulf War, but that attempt failed because 7th Corps was too slow. On the tactical level, most American units have only one tactic: bump into the enemy and call for fire. The assumption is that America's vast firepower will then annihilate the opponent, but that seldom happens. Instead, he lives to fight again another day, like Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaida at Tora Bora in 2001.

While the central problem here is conceptual -- sheer ignorance of Third Generation tactics -- there is a physical aspect to it as well. On foot, American soldiers are loaded down with everything except the kitchen sink, and they will probably be required to carry that too as soon as it is digitized. To use tactics of encirclement, you need to be at least as mobile as your enemy and preferably more so. The kind of light infantry fighters we find ourselves up against in places such as Iraq and Afghanistan are just that, light. They can move much faster on their feet than can our overburdened infantry. The result is that they ambush us, then escape to do it again, over and over. Flip-flops in the alley beat boots on the ground.

As the students in my seminar at Quantico discovered early in the year, the decisive break, both in tactics and in organizational culture, is not between the Third and Fourth Generations but between the Second and Third. It is little short of criminal that the American military remains stuck in the Second Generation. The Third Generation was fully developed in the German Army by 1918, almost a century ago. It costs little or nothing to make the transition. To those who understand how the Pentagon works, that may be the crux of the problem.

(William S. Lind, who is expressing his own opinion, is director for the Center for Cultural Conservatism for the Free Congress Foundation.)

Source: United Press International

Email This Article

Related Links
News From Across The Stans

Iranian-Made Weapons Intercepted In Afghanistan
Washington (AFP) April 17, 2007
Coalition forces have intercepted Iranian-made mortars and explosives in Afghanistan destined for the Taliban, the top US military chief said Tuesday, suggesting an expanding Iranian challenge to US forces in the region.

.
Get Our Free Newsletters Via Email
  



  • Abe Sees More Assertive Japan Across Entire World
  • Russia Downbeat Ahead Of NATO Talks
  • Royal Navy's Shame
  • Chinese PM Seeks New Trust With Japan

  • The INF Treaty Part Two
  • Agni-III Challenge Facing Indian Military Doctrine
  • US Welcomes North Korean Pledge On Nuclear Shutdown
  • Pacific Nuclear Victims Awarded One Billion Dollars

  • Skyguard AMOUN Scores Direct Hit In Live Missile Firing Using Raytheon-Upgraded Launcher
  • India Dismisses Airline Complaints Over Missile Test
  • Thailand Embark On Local Missile Program
  • Lockheed Martin Demonstrates P44 Missile Performance And Agility

  • Russia Rejects US Offer On Missile Shield
  • US Releases Technical Details On Missile Shield In Central Europe
  • Czech MPs Visit US Radar Base Earmarked For Missile Shield
  • Oslo Clash On ABM

  • Australia Fears Jet Flight Guilt Could Hit Tourism
  • New FAA Oceanic Air Traffic System Designed By Lockheed Martin Fully Operational
  • Nondestructive Testing Keeps Bagram Aircraft Flying
  • NASA Seeks New Research Proposals

  • Air Force Official Testifies On UAV Executive Agent Issue
  • Boeing-Insitu ScanEagle UAV Logs 1000 Combat Flight Hours With Australian Army
  • Maiden Flight Killer Bee UAV
  • Global Hawk Lands An Industry First For A Goodrich Production Electric Braking System

  • Black Wednesday In Baghdad
  • Suicide Bomb Attacks Present Top Challenge In Iraq
  • US Wounded Rate Down Sharply
  • Bush Seeks Cover On Iraq

  • Battlefield Technology Key To Atlantic Strike V
  • Seabees Build Modular Protected Billeting For Warfighters
  • New Mission Control Room Ready For F-35 Flight Tests
  • Osprey Aircraft To Take Off In Iraq

  • The content herein, unless otherwise known to be public domain, are Copyright 1995-2006 - SpaceDaily.AFP and UPI Wire Stories are copyright Agence France-Presse and United Press International. ESA PortalReports are copyright European Space Agency. All NASA sourced material is public domain. Additionalcopyrights may apply in whole or part to other bona fide parties. Advertising does not imply endorsement,agreement or approval of any opinions, statements or information provided by SpaceDaily on any Web page published or hosted by SpaceDaily. Privacy Statement