|
|
|
Stare Master
Group: Community Supporter
Last Login: Yesterday @ 8:07 PM
Posts: 9,817,
Visits: 52,042
|
|
I'm going to disagree with you guys that want LRSD to be a part of SOCOM. As I understand LRS doctrine they are to provide tactical intelligence for the brigade/division/corps they are attached to. USASOC, for which SOCOM is the Army component, is transitioning from a stateside command charged with controlling forces to be transferred to a theater command to a warfighting command in its own right. Prior to Operation Enduring Freedom placing LRS units under SOCOM would make sense to me.
While that change has not occurred that does seem to be the direction it is moving in. At that point SOCOM will be engaged itself on more of a strategic level and I am not sure having the LRS units internal will fit in with the new direction.
SF was started to train insurgents inside enemy countries but quickly transitioned into the field of foreign internal defense early in Vietnam. As the commitment grew SF took on the long range surveillance mission through SOG. Strategic surveillance has been an SF mission for more than 35 years and more than adequately provides that capability for SOCOM when needed.
Only two defining forces have ever offered to die for you, Jesus Christ and the American GI. One died for your soul, the other for your freedom.
"History teaches that when you become indifferent and lose the will to fight someone who has the will to fight will take over." COLONEL BULL SIMONS
|
|
|
|
|
.jpg)
Regular Joe
 
Group: Past PNET Supporter
Last Login: 9/25/2005 4:57 PM
Posts: 140,
Visits: 2
|
|
509 Trooper-
It's more of a wish then anything! 
You also have some Command and Control issues. Such as LRS units are regularly attched to MI units for whichever unit they work for (Corps or Division).
I know we occasionaly had to play some stupid MI games, I could just imagine what it would be like to be in a LRS unit in say, Washington State, and answer primarily to an East Coast boss.
Looking to buy or sell a home? Know someone who is?
I can help!
(Anywhere in the country/world!)
Please visit my website! http://www.cbcalifornia.com/jeaton
|
|
|
|
|
Seasoned Vet
Group: Past PNET Supporter
Last Login: 10/25/2008 8:48 PM
Posts: 3,380,
Visits: 1,309
|
|
I agree Eyes, back in the 80's it made since to have LRS teams digging into hidesites waiting to do surveillance on the Red Horde in their T-72s as they crossed the Fulda gap and elsewhere. Now adays alot of the Guard LRS units do State Drug interdiction missions to stay sharp.
I do honestly believe that with the current W.O.T. you need LRRPS that are mobile and can quickly enegage small groups of enemy personnel before they do their damage. I would load them up with a S.A.W. and a M240 as heavy weapons and have them perform two or three day patrols/RON ambushes.
I guess we have to learn to adapt to this war and not use tactics that were designed for the "last" war. Also as I recall from a Desert Storm Lessons Learned briefing at the LRS conference in late 91 or early 92, many LRS teams were too quickly by-passed by the coalition forces, making their use somewhat problematic.
LRS doctrine has got to adapt to the enemy, terrain, and the tactics in the A-Stan/Iraq theaters.
Any comments?
[82nd][E7][E6][uswingm]
Stand in the door!
|
|
|
|
|
OIF Veteran
Group: Past PNET Supporter
Last Login: 11/16/2008 11:01 AM
Posts: 3,697,
Visits: 24,626
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by JMPMASTR
I agree Eyes, back in the 80's it made since to have LRS teams digging into hidesites waiting to do surveillance on the Red Horde in their T-72s as they crossed the Fulda gap and elsewhere. Now adays alot of the Guard LRS units do State Drug interdiction missions to stay sharp.
I do honestly believe that with the current W.O.T. you need LRRPS that are mobile and can quickly enegage small groups of enemy personnel before they do their damage. I would load them up with a S.A.W. and a M240 as heavy weapons and have them perform two or three day patrols/RON ambushes.
I guess we have to learn to adapt to this war and not use tactics that were designed for the "last" war. Also as I recall from a Desert Storm Lessons Learned briefing at the LRS conference in late 91 or early 92, many LRS teams were too quickly by-passed by the coalition forces, making their use somewhat problematic.
LRS doctrine has got to adapt to the enemy, terrain, and the tactics in the A-Stan/Iraq theaters.
Any comments?
[82nd][E7][E6][uswingm]
I also wonder considering our MTOE how the LRSC I'm going with to Iraq will be used in that counter-insurgency environment?
|
|
|
|
|
Seasoned Vet
Group: Past PNET Supporter
Last Login: 10/25/2008 8:48 PM
Posts: 3,380,
Visits: 1,309
|
|
Eyes, I think the "passive" surveillance mission of LRS is indeed changing back to a more "proactive" type of combat-reconnissance mission where targets are serviced as they are identified. If a LRS team observes several tangos emplacing a command detonated roadside mine it makes no sense to pass the info to higher and let the deed get done. It does make sense to attack the perps and try to engage any support elements and capture any weapons that are present. For this LRS teams need good comms, machineguns, and the ability to engage targets of opportunity. BTW I still have a favorite t-shirt w/LRS scroll![thup]
[82nd][E7][E6][uswingm]
Stand in the door!
|
|
|
|
|
Regular Joe
Group: Past PNET Supporter
Last Login: 9/25/2005 4:57 PM
Posts: 140,
Visits: 2
|
|
I have an old sweatshirt with our LRS scroll on it....too bad the "F"er shrunk...or did I get fat?
I think the LRS mission in a combat environment will evolve into more of a recon/ambush type mission then just a passive recon type mission.
Rios, were you in A-co in the early 90's?
Jim
Looking to buy or sell a home? Know someone who is?
I can help!
(Anywhere in the country/world!)
Please visit my website! http://www.cbcalifornia.com/jeaton
|
|
|
|
|
OIF Veteran
Group: Past PNET Supporter
Last Login: 11/16/2008 11:01 AM
Posts: 3,697,
Visits: 24,626
|
|
wm311, I was Charlie Co. 1st platoon in the late 80s. Left there as an E-5 fireteam leader. Now I'm an infantry LT in the NG.
|
|
|
|
| | |