replica rolex watches

Posted by: replica rolex watches at August 22, 2008 08:06 PM

rolex replica watches

Posted by: rolex replica watches at August 22, 2008 07:59 PM

I know Bots are mainly used for Silk road gold. previously discussed. To advertise that picked up cheap silkroad gold for sale.

Posted by: Silk road gold at August 18, 2008 11:37 PM

I know Bots are mainly used for Silk road gold. previously discussed. To advertise that picked up cheap silkroad gold for sale.

Posted by: Silk road gold at August 18, 2008 11:34 PM

I know Bots are mainly used for Silk road gold. previously discussed. To advertise that picked up cheap silkroad gold for sale.

Posted by: Silk road gold at August 18, 2008 11:27 PM

I know Bots are mainly used for Silk road gold. previously discussed. To advertise that picked up cheap silkroad gold for sale.

Posted by: Silk road gold at August 18, 2008 11:26 PM

Thanks for reading and hopefully there will be a lot more Silkroad gold where that came from!

Posted by: Silkroad gold at August 18, 2008 11:25 PM

I'm sure that even if they can't instantly ban the bot, it will help them to know what to look out for Silkroad online gold.

Posted by: Silkroad online gold at August 18, 2008 11:24 PM

If you're wondering how to look out for bots, how to avoid them and what to do buy sro gold, you have come to the right place.

Posted by: buy sro gold at August 18, 2008 11:23 PM

One day, I read a article about Tibia Gold game. I was very dispirited and couldn't help to give up Tibia coins.

Posted by: Tibia Gold at August 18, 2008 11:04 PM

I was excited, originally it was such simple, and it also needs a little cheap mabinogi.

Posted by: cheap mabinogi at August 13, 2008 09:25 PM

In the hero2, I had already changed 4 regions. The hero online gold also has changed several times.

Posted by: hero online gold at August 13, 2008 09:24 PM

Remember we just met with each other by chance, we practiced the level and made last chaos gold together.

Posted by: last chaos gold at August 13, 2008 09:22 PM

Finally, I gained have sufficed the LOTRO Gold, had the family. We were in together finally.

Posted by: LOTRO Gold at August 13, 2008 09:16 PM

Master, I am really very think of you, what a pity that we as if already parted forever. Now, I buy Habbo gold for your come back.

Posted by: buy Habbo gold at August 13, 2008 09:14 PM

Initial contact this game, I did not very like. Since find good reason to release point, I also began to like it. Every day after work, I always go to play this game. Perhaps little girls will like me, in order to give went to all I like it. I dull playing a few weeks, very few speak to people and I have 26 levels and also I earn a little GuildWars Gold.

Posted by: GuildWars Gold at August 12, 2008 07:19 PM

So I decided to closed my own heart, I played lonely, I gave up to find, put aside feeling. I upgrade, take account and earn goonzu money a person. I live a little good; I think I have been really put aside.

Posted by: goonzu money at August 12, 2008 07:16 PM

Day by day has passed; I gradually fell in love with this girl. So I think I practiced a number with her to play. After a few days I told her that I want to have my own number. I have applied for a few days and again buy a little Gaia online gold. On the marriage of the moment, she suddenly shouted to divorce, I was depressed dead, I do not know what is happening, I have been asked how she is in the end, she said nothing and she only said she want to divorce. She is so vexatious to divorce; I had to frustration from under, and say friends that I am not playing. Later, she is not angry, I continue play this game.

Posted by: gaia online gold at August 12, 2008 07:13 PM

I am a faithful player of RF, in a few years ago, the old version of the RF out soon, after friends introduce, I take the heart out of curiosity and excitement into the feelings of the magic charm to the inside of the New World began my journey. At first I entered into the game, opening a map and figures in my heart. During the long period of upgrade and earn RF online gold, I know a lot of friends. Later, the president of RF hero, LATE entered me to this association.

Posted by: rf online gold at August 12, 2008 07:10 PM

You upgrade and earn rohan gold the side of the said chat with me. When you said that you are intend to find a girlfriend in real time. I was disappointing cry, and then I was down the online. I think my decision was a mistake, if I do not go beck, I will not met you, I will be able to evade. I think you acre about me; you know that I care about how you told me my wife. Every time I saw you called me wife, I was very happy. Perhaps you do not care, perhaps you as this is only a game.

Posted by: rohan gold at August 12, 2008 07:08 PM

I recognized her is an occasional, When I was just upgrade and earn rappelz gold. She also just through, and she is a new player, she saw me my number is high. So she asked me how to play. And I said I was a bad people, I asked if did you not heard in this game. She said she heard, but she did not believe. I smiled. So I took her to play, I told her how to play, how to upgrade.

Posted by: rappelz gold at August 12, 2008 07:04 PM

I gave up RO for a number of years, I am in the middle of the game more than N migration, and finally, I still come back. I applied a new number. Because it is the first I play online games. Here, I have to much emotional investment, Originally thought, N years, I forgot enough, I never thought I would once again echocardiography, I have been took to play this game again by my friend. She is the RO friend ago, and that she has married, now she had baby. Opening number, M4 has been a favorite role, although I was playing ID, because the blood and the Ragnarok zeny were less often, but I did not regret it.

Posted by: ragnarok zeny at August 12, 2008 07:02 PM

Goodbye, my love Maple Story, I really could not bear to leave. Today, in the Rainbow Support I find for a day, account is not back, and my mesos is also not back.

Posted by: mesos at August 12, 2008 06:59 PM

Our island adventure, hope for a better, as if the joy of childhood when the growth to continue in pursuit of that future ~ can step by step, the development of advanced, it, of our time, the motherland Time, the world's time, gradually the past, our childhood memory of ~~~ happy time! We have to remember that maplestory.io to purchase maple mesos, to facilitate our task to do!

Posted by: maple mesos at August 7, 2008 10:21 PM

I want to discuss my attainment shallowly about this game. Earned money, exercising rank and doing best quality equipment, these were very important part of this game. Let me say the gaia gold, I used the buy gaia gold usually, of course the cheap gaia gold is the lowest price in this game, because only you have the more money and best quality equipment, you can exercise rank easy.

Posted by: gaia gold at August 5, 2008 11:31 PM

That time I suggest you to buy gaia online gold. Because I think only you have more money, you can use it to buy the better equipments. Because of this better equipment, you can kill more and more golliwogs.

Posted by: gaia online gold at August 5, 2008 11:27 PM

No longer, I met a boy, he help me earn goonzu gold and teach me use them to change for goonzu money. We get a good relation each other, we became good friends, at the last days, we build team to kill enemy and buy goonzu gold. I forgot my boy friend. I think he forgot me, too. I hadn’t pull out in it when he came back to find me.

Posted by: goonzu gold at August 5, 2008 11:21 PM

Moreover, these may save your more time and more 2moon dil.

Posted by: 2moon dil at August 5, 2008 02:53 AM

But he must buy fiesta Gold enough for your wedding, otherwise I will not agree.

Posted by: buy fiesta Gold at August 5, 2008 02:51 AM

rolex replica watches - $98 swiss , we don't sale replica watches.The Art of E-commerce

Posted by: replica watches at August 3, 2008 11:15 PM

nice to meet you

Posted by: wowpowerleveling at April 15, 2008 02:06 AM

As a former combatant (Viet Nam) I can say that IED's are just another name for what we called booby traps. As a former canine handler in that war (Combat Tracking) I can attest to the fact that dogs know a hell of a lot more about performing jobs we wish them to do than we give credit. As a former civilian instructor training combat tracking to Marines in 05 and 06 I can tell you that there are ways to get the bad guys with canine, but the powers that be decided to go with an Air Force retiree (who never worked outside the wire) as a principle instructor. As a matter of fact our second class of seven had 28 finds during their first tour, so that's evidence that it does work. These weren't IED finds, but human finds...those who actually planted the bombs.

When an IED is detonated where do you think the human scent of the planter is located? It's located within a 360 degree circle due to the blast, and given a few minutes the dog will work out the scent path and do his job.

One problem seems to be that those in charge just can't bring themselves to use a piece of 'equipment' as antiquated as canine. If it doesn't have joy sticks, it doesn't work.

Another problem is, quite simply, that visual tracking doesn't work in urban warfare. I'll watch as a visual tracker follows a track across concrete...or for that matter across limestone base material. A combat tracking team is trained not only to track but to become a self sustaining fire team if the need arises, and the powers that be can't seem to grasp this concept as well. Their belief is that all canine operations should be routed thru the PM, but how man MP's have you seen out there tracking or working SSD canines?

"We have met the enemy and he is us."\

dlayne
25th ID Combat Tracker
1967

Posted by: david layne at March 8, 2008 06:42 PM

Gen.Votel is an idiot. Obviously, he never went outside the wire. Keep watching the war from the J-lens you jackass.

Posted by: Matt at November 26, 2007 11:02 PM

I would like to say that I know a lot about how these things are being detonated.The first step,is to completely ban radio transmission.We need to intercept,and destroy any transmission that does not meet our protocol.One satellite,or the shuttle..is capable of deciding friendly or foe..Its old school,but thats how the little fukkers are killing our kids.Every tower,and everything that looks like a radio tower,must come down.And what about foot patrols with bomb sniffing dogs?What about infrared that can tell if the soil has been turned?Right now we have technology that can be sensitized to actually see tnt,or c-4.Other trips are being engaged by laser...Duh..which can easily be seen by the right gear..I just dont get it...I say smoke the fukkers and be done with it.Iraq is now the latest state in the Union.

Posted by: tony at May 23, 2007 02:42 AM

I agree that foot patrols have a place,but must be used sparingly; I have long advocated the use of combat tracking teams using visual tracking to detect roadside iedsI have spent the last two years developing course work using tracking skills to detect ieds. Visual tracking is not the complete answere to the ied problem, howevere when used in combination with good intelligence, and technology it can be very effective.

Posted by: Ted Williams at October 30, 2006 09:47 PM

I have been to Iraq on Op Telic, where as the invading/Liberating Force we were seen by some as friends and by others as enemies. Now in Op Telic 8, we have come to the crossroads of this operation. The Iraqis/foreign insurgent forces no longer want us in their country/middle east, and are finding more technical ways in the form of IED’s to deter us from carrying out our duties.

We now have to make a decision on how to combat these types of attacks. I personally feel that foot patrols are the best way of combating this type of threat, this is mainly due to the way you can vary routes and observe suspicious packages, people and vehicles and like someone has said before, you also get the added bonus of interacting and assisting the people.

Mobile patrols are good for the wider area but have to be kept to a minimum, as the routes mobile patrols take are very predictable. As such allow the enemy plenty of time to prepare and execute attacks with ease.

As far as the concerns with snipers etc go, these threats have always been there and will remain so for as long as UK Troops and US Troops are in Iraq. I fear however we are now engaged, in a war we cannot win conventionally and we have to reassess what it is we hope to achieve in Iraq, and it is now down to the governments of the UK, US and Iraq to do their job, as we the Soldiers have done ours with the pride professionalism and expertise that those governments have only dreamt about since they have engaged us in this operation.

Posted by: BoB McC at May 19, 2006 03:16 PM

Make a change for the Yanks to do foot patrols, they have been reliant on Tech for far to long, get on the ground meet people face to face, look at the way the Brits do it.

Posted by: Infantry Guy at February 2, 2006 06:31 AM

Hey I was stationed at EODMU 2 so I know all about IEDs. Ive seen a lot of people dying over there in Iraq. Id say the best way to beat the IEDs is to go out on foot. Look for any hostiles and take care of them. If we keep driving over them then were gonna keep dying. So lets keep our heads together and walk it out.

Posted by: mudpup at February 1, 2006 11:08 PM

The comparison to California is a false analogy. More than 80% of the casualties have been suffered in a 20-25% sized portion of Iraq, the so-called Sunni trangle, where the majority of the U.S. units are located.

Walking isn't that off-base and carries some other benefits as well especially in getting to know the locals. One of the most frustrating experiences were the semi-anon patrols we conducted from vehicles. On the occasions we went on foot the interaction with locals was excellent.

Foot patrols aren't all that crazy. IEDs will still be a problem, but dismounts have an easier time scanning their areas for out of place objects than traveling vehicles.

Posted by: none at February 1, 2006 07:37 AM

The brit solution to IEDs in Ireland was to have multiple small patrols orbiting on foot in the same area, with portable jammers to defeat the radio control and helis overhead. In rural areas the "Eagle VCP" - heli borne, drop in, check the traffic for a short period, move on by air to another location. The basic unit in Iraq now is the "Multiple" 3x4 man teams. 1 commanded by the Pln Comd the other by the Pln Sgt. Very flexible and 12 men means its still a lot of firepower.

The "mobility = Dominance" thing is an illusion if all you are doing is driving about. No interface with the locals, little feel for whats happening - if anything its counter-productive, just alienates those locals who might be on-side. Infantry boots on the ground. Thats what infantry are for !

Posted by: Brit Soldier at January 31, 2006 04:34 PM

i think air cav asy ou call it is a good idea coupled with foot patrols , regardless of the ied threat ..you must focus on the mission ..i would employ foot patrols and use air cav to set up snap vcp's .and snap patrols ..the enemy still has to have the bottle to plant these things ...he will not only have to look out for OP,s and foot patrols he will also have to be aware of random patrols inserted by helis ..if you have all this with maybe armour dominating terrain and a good QRF then you may start to reduce the ide threat , engage with the locals and generally dominate the ground

Posted by: jimbo at January 31, 2006 03:50 PM

IED answer: get eyes on territory before placing either vehicles or men on foot.

How?place 200 aerial observers, 1,000' up over city. (2) per platform, 100 platforms, equiped with nightscope, infrared, high optics...to watch all roads, rooftops,etc.

platform is a hot air balloon on tether. simple, cheap. draw fire? sure, but that is answerable. easy to kill? NO! hot air balloon can take very large number of small arms fire hits. observers vulnerable? replace typical basket with titanium tub as in A-10.

easy, cheap, effective...immediately available, can be replicated like cookie cutter anywhere...

men die because "leadership" will not use inititive and imagination to negate threats.

Posted by: campbell at January 30, 2006 09:56 PM

Like California, most of Iraq in uninhabited or nearly so. Californians love the coast, Iraqis love the river. Moreover, as the article itself makes clear, this proposal is really intended only a for a handful of cities. In this context, foot patrols could be a useful tool. No technology is ever obsolete. Mounted police and bike messengers are common in most major American cities.

Posted by: ohwilleke at January 30, 2006 01:24 PM

I remember an incident where one of my friends lost a leg. Someone called our hotline that we had setup, giving us a tip on a suspected VBIED. Went to investigate. Doctrine at the time was to put out road cones at intersections and roads. That way we knew who was hostile and who wasn't. Simple enough. Anyone who runs a roadcone get's a facefull of lead. So as they're out to set out the roadcones, BOOM. An IED goes off.

IED's are a part of the game now. We just have to start using our heads and being more cautious. Change things up a bit. Keep the enemy on his toes.

It's not gonna work all the time. It's called attricion. And foot patrols all the time isn't practical. Like someone else said, a city of 2.5 million or more, who's gonna walk that with 100lbs of gear and ammo in 130 degree heat? Get real.

Posted by: david at January 30, 2006 02:50 AM

i believe the general was probably talking about a way to reduce cost of operation in dollar terms as in destroyed vehicles vs. troops!

foot patrol regardless of their quantity and arment will be much more prone to a greater extent and variety of IEDs which no longer need to penetrate armour. furthermore it will mean more targets for hit and run tactics by snipers whose current arsenal cannot penetrate armour.

Posted by: can d at January 29, 2006 08:07 PM

The idea we can completely divest ourselves from the road system is fallacious. You /cannot/ hold a city by zipping around on helis and never having boots on the ground...didn't we learn this in Mogadishu? Forfeiting even vehicle patrols enables the opponent to have even more time to prepare areas for whatever. Mortar strikes would precipitate a helicopter strike, which is more vulnerable than say, a column of Humvees.

If you go for helis they'll just IED the civilian population; turning the people against the government and the insurgents. More instability. Besides, IIRC choppers are more maintainence intensive than ground vehicles. It'd also be more difficult to sneak around.

There are less choppers than Hummers. You could only be in so many less places compared to Humvees, giving up interaction with the population and reducing the amount of points you can be, and increasing vulnerability at those particular points.

Since they're unlikely to run out of 152mm shells the premature trigger solution seems to work best. In rural areas dismounted patrols are not an option if you have large areas of road to cover. You'd be too slow to cover everything or your troops would be fatigued and vulnerable to conventional sniper attack. A mix of both is the only way to go, and I'm sure the people on the ground are already playing it that way.

Posted by: Charles at January 29, 2006 06:46 PM

the key to beating ieds is prevention once its out there all we can do is blow it up. we have to get off of the roads our light infantry has just about had there legs taken out from under them. im in bravo company 2/130IN 48th bct. ive served under tenth mountain and 3rd id and the 2nd mef. and on the roads is a defensive game. its our territory they know this. thats why we are attacked there cuz that is our home. we have to get out of the standard mindset that we are in and get offensive this is far from over we have to take there territory: yards, fields, businesses. And i know its is a sensitive subject but we need to be allowed to search mosques. our most dangerous and powerful enemies arent doing things themselves. they are hiding out in little searched areas. we really need to police iraq not attack it protect it these small cells arent so much unlike american gangs. there isnt really too many willing to stand and fight even when captured and faced with life in prison. they arent very confrontational. ive been there the last nine months and let me say 3rd id and the marines in oif1 did a great job. i really apreciate it. we cant let it go to waste. taking bagdad was merely getting a foothold. now we need to get the rest and if we shorten the number of troops there i hope its support cuz the people there really need us out there. 9 months over 100 insurgents captured, no one killed, (friendly or other) and dozens of explosives found and taken off the streets. my chain of command was able to achieve this because they are police at home. we can do much more with intel than a body. plus it gives the people a positive attitude towards us that we can protect them while aggressively searching and locating these people and caches.

Posted by: jtownvip at January 29, 2006 06:23 PM

As to whether the troops should be on foot or in a Humvee is area specific and unit specific. Speaking from experience, foot patrols are preferred, for the most part. The face to face interaction when on foot patrol is vital and the intel gained is tremendous. So much can be gathered from a persons body language and through repeated visits to locals, the troops establish a repore of trust. There is a bond that is created; you can tell if someone is nervous, or if the family is uncharacteristically missing at dinner time. This is what worked for me when patrolling the city of Hit, Al Anbar. But i feel that a few mechanized patrols thrown in would give an extreme advantage. For one, air support can not react during bad weather (sand storms). Send a foot patrol out first to sweep a large area (2-3 blocks wide) and then send the vehicles out. Let them work off of each other. As another posting mentioned, try to always vary your routes and tactics. This is a simple life saving rule that is vastly overlooked most of the time. Usually due to time factors, which should not be the proirity - mission accomplishment is priority

Posted by: Kyle at January 29, 2006 04:49 PM

Good Afternoon SCOM/Vet,

I think I take execption with your tactic of using some form of "Air Mobile" operation to deat with IED's.

I see two problems right off the bat. First before a force can react something would have had to have happened, like an IED going off. The goal is to prevent the inicident in the first place.

Second if the raid is to be procative you have to be working on reliable intell. In Iraq to get that you have to have connections on the ground. The risk here of course is the bad guys knowing what happening and you find yourself ambushed in a Hot LZ. Been their done that, it's no fun.

Again reqular foot patrols with GI's spending days on the street and in the neighborhoods, not returing to the Green Zone when a patrol is over but sharing the risks with the locals. Getting to know the locals and building some trust and showing them that America doesn't want to make Iraq the 51st. State.

This is the model of how General Mc Arthur pacified Japan at the end of WWII and it still seems to be the best way to stableize a former enemy.

The American soldier when cut some slack from the Chain of Command can do some pretty remarkable things, but the Chain has to trust it's soldiers. It's clear that out Chain of Command has little trust and faith in the troops under their command.

ALLONS,
Byron Skinner

Posted by: Byron Skinner at January 29, 2006 03:25 PM

First off, if the the threat of IED's was nonexistant, foot patrols would be a great idea for the purpose of maintaining or building public image in Iraq. Allowing soldiers to interact with the populace would breed trust and recognition.
However, the threat of IED's makes this inconcievable at first thought. But what we must realize is that whether in vehicle or on foot, there is no way to prevent an IED explosion, there are many ways around the US anti-IED tactics, that insurgents have adopted.
The only sure way of preventing an IED from exploding is through intelligence. Like any other crime, IEDs must be reported to local authorities who in turn must alert US forces to there location so that they may be dealt with quickly and safely.
The main problem with this concept is that the local populace has neither the will nor means of reporting suspicious activity.
We can give them both of these with one change. To adress the first, their will; watching humvees get attacked by IEDs does not give the victims of the IED a "face" they are simply Americans driving around in cars. However foot patrols, allow interaction and recognition with American soldiers, two key aspects of gaining favor. Also, these foot patrols would provide the means for locals to report suspicious activity They simply tell an American on patrol. However this simple interaction is impossible if we are in our Humvees.
So the choice comes, we can adress the IED issue by throwing money and technology at it, the normal American way, or we can work on our public relations and hopefully prevent most IEDs from even getting close to US convoys.

Posted by: Steve R at January 29, 2006 09:32 AM

Dismounting soldiers as a solution to removing the IED threat? Sheer lunacy. IEDs are targeting Coalition troops...either mounted or dismounted. Rather than dismounting, consider alternatives. Here is how you mitigate the IED threat:

1.) Two words: Air Calvary. Air Cav can quickly insert on-call Quick Response Forces 24-7 (Soldiers or Marines). Air Cav provides maximum firepower, maximum force flexibility and complete urban battlefield dominance. This would eliminate the need for the currently large motorized force that the IEDs are targeting. Having been there on the ground, there is NO better answer than a team of fast-roping troops safely deploying from 100 ft off the ground. Considering that most of our troops/vehicles are being targeted while en route, this is the only immediate answer. What about helo-vulnerable RPG or sniper attacks one might ask? Have you seen these people shoot? They may accidentally connect every once in a while, but that probability is much lower than the success of a juiced 500 lb IED buried in a major thoroughfare.

2.) When mounted troops must respond or when convoys must roll, enforce and employ route diversity. NEVER utilize the same route twice if possible.

3.) Increase inter-theater airlift. This will reduce the need for over-the-road convoys and convoy security details.

Calculated risk vs. calculated gamble: The risk is the process of making an educated decision with a higher possibility of a predicatable outcome. The gamble is the process of making an un-educated decision and not remotely knowing the possible outcome. Riding in an armored vehicle is a risk...walking the streets is a gamble. Do not gamble with our Soldiers and Marines. They deserve more respect than that.

Posted by: SOCOM VET at January 28, 2006 11:16 PM

As an explosive ordnance disposal (EOD) technician who spent 220 days with the 1-128th Infantry Battalion in Iraq, and who has had 2 IED's blast my armored vehicle, and who has had one detonate only 40 feet away from me when I was dismounted, and who has done over 80 post blast investigations analyzing the effects and carnage of IED's, it is obvious that those coming up with this idea haven't a clue what it's really like on the ground and what these IED's can really do. The General mentions the success of IED's against our vehicle fleet and says the only obvious choice is to dismount. With all due respect to the General, he is wrong one hundred percent. If the IED's are too successful against our armored vehicles, they are only more effective against simple body armor. I have seen so many lives saved by armored HMMWV's that I can't begin to count them. On the other hand, it has never been a pretty site doing a post blast investigation where there were dismounted troops.

Posted by: Matt at January 28, 2006 07:44 PM

Seems more like the "we must decrease vehicle losses by using vehicles less" kind of thinking.

Dismounts can't cover as much area so you'll still need vehicles to control the highways and transit areas between bases and cities. As the majority of IED attacks are likely to take place in the rural roads between major cities, going on foot isn't going to prevent too many IED attacks on vehicles. In cities, instead of concealed IEDs the enemy may opt for car bombs.

Posted by: Charles at January 28, 2006 06:16 PM

>Dismounted patrols, especially in urban environments, make perfect sense. Allow the >troops the ability to meet the populace and interact with the locals. It's the best way to >develop actionable intelligence.

That sounds like the aim of the concept. It would probably would work in an environment where crime rates are high with small fire arms used at the most, but this is not going to be good for an environment where deadly IEDs and RPGs are likely to strike.

Posted by: pedestrian at January 28, 2006 08:00 AM

Sounds more like a solution to save on wrecked vehicles, rather than wrecked soldiers.

Posted by: Cornelius at January 28, 2006 01:29 AM

Routine is what the problem is; all officers and senior NCO’s seem to have this idea that missing your H hour time is a dreadful thing. Maybe it’s the Ranger school, J.R.T.C. mentality, but hey, these “Insurgents” are smarter than you want to realize. Operating with the Iraqi Army side by side is a big plus, but there are many who feel that the IA is corrupt and dirty. In which that may be true, but how can you establish loyalty and esprit de corp., when it is shoved down our throats, and you can not even trust the people you are trying to help take over there own Areas of Operation. Boots on the ground, you get sniped, moving fast in hummers you get blasted, with all the issues with complaints, and the complaints with issues. We have to focus on the individual soldiers lane, and allow combat troops to be able to be combat troops. We are starting to train our own combat troop to be politicians down in JRTC. We have ENOUGH officers for all that crap, lets focus on PVT Joe in squeezing the trigger when he thinks he sees the “Trigger Man”.

Posted by: Art at January 27, 2006 09:03 PM

I just returned from Iraq we did a mix of foot patrols and mounted and yes we got IEDed RPGed mortered and sniped there is not a really good answer to the problem. when dealing w/ EFP`s I would rather be dis-mounted when getting sniped I would rather be mounted. an aggressive stance at all times is mandatory!!!getting out and talking w/ the locals relly helped out .they would always tell us about an IED if they knew about it

Posted by: michael eastham at January 27, 2006 08:34 PM

Dismounted patrols, especially in urban environments, make perfect sense. Allow the troops the ability to meet the populace and interact with the locals. It's the best way to develop actionable intelligence.

Posted by: Michael Short at January 27, 2006 07:40 PM

More foot patrols would probably have a beneficial value, but not as a counter-IED measure.

As noted previously, the increased perception of "presence" would be very valuable indeed. But it would also bear a cost in blood, as in most cases the troops would be MORE vulnerable, not less.

I've got to wonder if there's not more to this "foot patrol strategy" than the Atlantic article lets on. It's presented pretty much as a "our vehicles get bombed so the only alternative is to walk" situation, but there could have been a lot more said in those interviews than was written. I mean, the closing "we lose" quote certainly doesn't seem to communicate an even-handed look at the issue. Maybe that's just me.

Posted by: Murdoc at January 27, 2006 04:52 PM

I fail to see how foot patrols work.

The example you give:

"About about five years into the war British General Amherst, generals wern't to bright and quick to learn then either, learned that if you send scouts our on your flanks to engage the ambushers before the main body of troops pass through, you solve this problem."

You see the words "engage the ambushers"? That means...*prematurely trigger before the main body*. In Iraq terms, this means they set off a IED. We don't have "main body" forces. IEDs don't go off in FOB Anaconda.

This applies in /conventional warfare/, but not in the occupation paradigm.

Switching to foot patrols means they can switch from huge 152mm IEDs to lightweight IEDs designed to shred foot soldiers. It's back to 82mm mortar rounds strung along the roadside. They're easier to place and cheaper to make.

Posted by: Charles at January 27, 2006 04:05 PM

All hope is lost.

YEAH SEND OUT SOLDIERS ON FOOT PATROLS.

Not only will they be blown into tiny pieces and seriously wounded by shrapnel, they will be vulnerable to small arms and sniper fire as well. Not to mention poisoned by chemical weapons.

Awesome strategy!!

Im glad our IED taskforce is so sharp!

Lets just sabotage our entire army. Why not, who cares. We need population control anyways on the planet pretty soon, mine as well start now with our own soldiers.[/sarcasm]

This is the stupidest ideas I have heard in a long time. A better idea is not having vehicle patrols on routes you dont absolutely 100% control.

Posted by: jtw at January 27, 2006 03:13 PM

Good Morning Folks,

Well the arm chair Generals are starting to relearn a lesson that has been learned over and over agoin at least since the Seven Years that begain in 1754. The IED of that period was ambushing by the "Native Americans" along the side of a trail or road as troops marched in formation.

About about five years into the war British General Amherst, generals wern't to bright and quick to learn then either, learned that if you send scouts our on your flanks to engage the ambushers before the main body of troops pass through, you solve this problem.

In Iraq the American have decided to take a low profile from strongly and activly patroling. When the locals know that the Americans will be there 24/7 they tend to build a little trust and intell. flows and the bad guys have to find another neighborhood to operate in. When an event does happen the most violent of responses makes the best impression.

When Americans go in and "arrest the bad guys" and take them off in cuffs the locals know they will be back and will not be shy about extracting some payback. When they go out in body bags the problem is solved for good.

A dead Terroristis is an Exterrorist.

ALLONS,
Byron Skinner

Posted by: Byron Skinner at January 27, 2006 02:47 PM

AM: an excellent call!

On a serious note, I think increased foot patrols would be of considerable PR value to the US military. Right now, the US Army, which blazes around in APCs and armoured Humvees, seems indifferent and distant to the Iraqi people. It also promotes the widely held view that the Americans rely on firepower and technology without engaging the populace.

I gather the Royal Army tends to do more foot patrols than their American counterparts: I'm convinced this makes them much more approachable and respected by the populace which, in turn, makes them more effective at their job.

Posted by: Hugh Norton at January 27, 2006 12:48 PM

I think the 10 marines killed in Fallujah were at a promotion or medal award ceremony - not on foot patrol. Apparently howitzer shells triggered by pressure plate blew up at this gathering. The Marine Corps initialy reported they were on a foot patrol but later corected the story.

Posted by: Tim at January 27, 2006 11:00 AM

One word. Segway.

Posted by: am at January 27, 2006 10:54 AM