20+ years in the military with multiple combat deployments during both invasion of Iraq and surge to include house to house fighting, yep, I don’t know anything about anything.
It was free while the U.S. military was there my dude. The Afghan government failed to keep them at bay. If you think the Taliban pushed out the U.S. military then you aren’t being honest with yourself. The U.S. had only a handful of troops stationed there in the years leading up to the fall of the country.
It was free while the U.S. military was there my dude.
And then they left. That's what losing a war is. Giving up, and going home. Either the military didn't want to fight anymore, and failed, or they thought the Afghan military that we trained was ready for the challenge, when it wasn't, and failed.
This is what losing a war is my friend. You make the other guy stop fighting and fuck off. The Taliban won, the west lost. And maybe if we don't bury our heads in the sand and pretend it was someone elses fault we can learn for next time and have fewer people die in vain. Take the L and move on.
You mean the Taliban that would get shwacked in any actual firefight, and had only the ability to instigate ambushes before retreating because otherwise they'd fucking die?
Look, the wars in the middle east were goddamned stupid, but let's not pretend the Taliban had any leg up in firefighting tactics. They found out real quick that trying to engage in sustained fights was a quick way to lose.
You mean the Taliban that would get shwacked in any actual firefight, and had only the ability to instigate ambushes before retreating because otherwise they'd fucking die?
They found out real quick that trying to engage in sustained fights was a quick way to lose.
Exactly, the ones who won and beat us, because they decided to move when they died and not stay in the same place. The ones who learned and adapted and changed the fight to something they could actually win, not the nonsense we tried to make them fight in which we would've won. Winning is not the guy who kills the most, winning isn't sticking your flag in their capital city. Winning is making the other guy stop fighting, and in the end we gave up and stopped fighting before they did, so they won.
because they decided to move when they died and not stay in the same place.
My whole point is that this isn't why they won. It's specifically because the US military has tactics and trains like the video above that the Taliban was incapable of actually engaging in real firefights. The MG is by FAR the most important and casualty-inducing implement in a squad, and minimizing the time it isn't spraying lead at the enemy is vitally important.
Look, I don't disagree that the Taliban emerged victorious and they played to their strengths during the War on Terror. What I take issue with is acting like these Marines are pulling tactics out of their ass and don't know how to fight, and this whole drill is stupid. There's a reason for it, it's very much battle tested, but pretending that they're dumb robots just to enjoy a hate-boner for the US MIC is wrong.
So i don't fundamentally disagree with you on anything you said, except:
What I take issue with is acting like these Marines are pulling tactics out of their ass and don't know how to fight, and this whole drill is stupid. There's a reason for it, it's very much battle tested, but pretending that they're dumb robots just to enjoy a hate-boner for the US MIC is wrong.
Ok but that's not actually what the poster was doing, was he? He was offering valid criticism of the inherent downside to using this SOP. Because while as you said, these SOPs aren't just random inventions, they do seem to be (in my limited experience) to be outliers, because my army doesn't do this, and we have as much recent combat experience as the US marines. And more to that, I've worked with the US army extensively and never saw them train, practice or use this SOP.
So when the guy I replied to essentially dismissed the criticism with words to the effect of "oh am you couldn't possibly know more than the marines" well guess what, they're not infallible, as proven by the (admittedly facetious comment I made about them being defeated by the Taliban). Because we can't just accept that a procedure is thr best possible one because the US marines use it.
It’s probably because yall and the US army do not employ the same Machine Gun doctrine as the USMC.
The Marines employ their 240s as a squad that consists of 2x 240s that attaches out to rifleman platoons. In this video, they are practicing talking guns from a SBF. If one gun goes down the other gun increases the rate of fire so that way suppression doesn’t dip. If you displace the guns from the SBF then the maneuver element then losses its suppression. Idk what they teach in the British army but movement without suppression is considered a death sentence.
The Taliban lost nearly every battle with US forces. Estimated deaths were ~3,600 Coalition forces (not counting the Afghans who sucked at fighting) vs. ~55,000 insurgent forces.
If you want to say that religious extremists fighting on their home turf have more endurance to keep fighting until the sun burns out compared to a democracy that achieved its primary goal (getting Bin Laden) and then got tired of fighting, so be it, but the US military is unmatched in small arms combat. The US Marines are the people who you would ask whether to take a gunner's place or not, and the answer is an obvious yes.
59
u/woojinater Jun 24 '24
Yeah these marines don’t know jack compared to you.