in newspapers and tv news, its common to see army troops shown in close formation during patrols, why is this so? a single landmine or well set ambush can easily wipeout the entire patrol considering their proximity to each other, jusk asking, no offense meant...

example from manila times website:


NPA STRIKES in Rizal. An Army patrol sets out in pursuit of a band of New People’s Army rebels that attacked a remote barangay, Puray Macapicapic, in Rodriguez, Rizal, Tuesday. A three-year-old boy was killed and his mother wounded in the attack. Photo by Ruy Martinez

link:

http://www.manilatimes.net/

They know the danger.

In this photo, speed and ease of movement is not negated.

Nonetheless, they know when and where they need to change their movements to avoid being killed in an ambush or being torn apart by a landmine blast.

The Scout Rangers can answer you better because they seldom get ambushed or hit by landmines.

Nonetheless, it's their tactic, so probably you wont get anything much beyond this line.

Still wrong.

Right flank is not even covered.

And judging from the photo, the patrol is already in country - no chances should have been taken.

Pretty bad patrol discipline.

And flipzi, not all of your troops are Scout Rangers, they're relatively few.

Regular troops are not exempted from always practicing proper patrol tactics.

That photo aint the real scene in actual operations.

Probably, why all are focusing on the left flank is because the sexy lady who's part of the news crew is standing right there.

:dunno:

Dont get too serious on news photos like this.

:armyroleyes:

I think Ghostter is right, this pic might not even a photo op but actual footage of a patrol setting out.

Why not have these regular troops trained by Scout Rangers even the basics of patrol security and tactics.

Its a photo op for heaven's sake.

quoting cdf from medevac thread at phil marines forum:

this photo op manifests lack of training and technique so no excuses also!

even a photo op should show the degree of professionalism and training of your soldiers!

You can only conclude if someone's training is bad if the unit was wiped out or ended up dead unecessarily.

These guys are still walking they are not dead so I can only reckon that they have used their training so far. You do not even know them, you do not know what they went through that day, its a page off a diary. Its not fair to them.

So don't fV@ck!*g quote me about them, I do not concur about my other statements used for this topic. Use your own words to describe them, do not drag me to the game your playing.

Anyone should detest if an idiot uses his word or name for an idiotic agenda.

That's the bottomline, friends!

Compare these lightly-armed but experienced troops with these guys below.



Remember this one, CDF? :armywink:

Get these guys go after the Moslem bandits here and i bet these well-equipped guys will end up in bodybags.

:armyLol:

oh yeah I remember, this guy with camo paint and and stops in front of a window in broad daylight not using the shadows. That's someone's idea of good training and professionalism. Can't blame one time and occasional warriors. I bet they are issued with landmine proof boots, why train them on movement into minefields when we can issue them landmine proof boots

It protects your feet but its a gambit with your dick!

They should know how Col. Noel Buan and his men killed the ASG bandits.

These guys think that being geared that much and trained that much is enough for them to defeat the sturdy Moslem juramentados and the gutsy commies here.

:armyLol:

Hello!

What have you guys been reading all along? :armyLol:

BTW guys, it seems that we are trying to take a step back to where we have decided not to go to anymore.

This is a forum.

It's about learning from each other.

Flash and the rest of your peers, please try making your point in a more cordial manner. Okay?

We can all learn a lot if you know where to put things right! :thumb:

Flashbang, these are not photo op pics of US troops in a combat zone, what can you say?

and those are us marines

Oh this is the best picture for me, a professional hit, problem is, I can hit that distance with a 90RR and will not miss yards away from the target on the right. BWAHAHAHAHAHA! :specool:

actually there were TWO targets, that was a direct hit - the other target was also hit

Show it to everyone, else its all hot air. As far as this picture says he missed it. Your word does not count bro. The whole point about this subthread is judging what you see in the picture. We could care less whatever you say.

There's a need for the PA to further enhance its small unit tactics especially to regular troops.

I believe they have been fed enough about small unit tactics.

Sadly, in a real scenario, it seems like tactic isnt enough.

What they need is better weapons and gadgets and better war machines to count on when situations go bad.

like a backup cobra helicopter that will come to aid in about 5 minutes.

Someone said that since its not the hardware that determines the outcome in war, but its the training of the individual soldier.
I agree with him. But the upgrade in equipments a welcome plus though. :fire:

Well that only applies to modern Armed forces to us its a different ball game we have the most battle harden Armed Force but low on equipment and trainning on modern warfare basic and COIN lang tayo and for any country thats like declaring openess to attack to anyone who wish :patrioticpinoy: :salute:

imagine our marine with a M1 garand facing a US marine with an M16A2 facing each other off at a lonely beach 100 meters apart.

Who would likely be left standing ?

Now switch armaments, with our marine with an M16A2 and the US marine with an M1.

Now who would likely be eating sand ?

Superior arms multiplies the effectivity of the grunt. Not to mention its effect on the will to fight of the foot soldier.

I think the maximum effective range of an M1 rifle is greater than that of an M16, plus the fact that the M1 fires a heavier round (.30 cal = 7.63mm?) while an M16's round is lighter (.223 cal = 5.56mm), hence, the M1 has more stopping power than that of an M16.

The only drawback of an M1 is it is heavier and has limited ammo (8 round clips).

In a real scenario? How do you know about real scenarios? Have you been in one?
:headbang:

Bad tactics/bad leadership killed more Filipino soldiers than lack of better weapons and war machines.

Anyone dispute this?

:demon:

IMHO, we should first define the parameters, when can we say bad tactic/bad leadership? There's a lot of unknown factors that happen in combat that we may not understand as it is very easy for us who are in the comfort of our homes or offices to give opinions, unlike those who are in combat who makes decision while under fire.

Take the case of the Marine Recon Platoon of Lt. Romualdo Dimayuga, who was credited for the neutralization of Khadaffy Janjalani. They crawled towards the position of the Abu Sayaff near day break, a firefight then ensued. Then came another group of Abu Sayaff from a different direction that opened fire on the platoon, killing 4 marines.

Can we say this is a case of bad tactic because of the 4 casualties? Poor leadership of Lt. Dimayuga as they didn't cover all avenues of approach?

Another case study is that of the late SSgt. Raul Suacillo of the Special Forces, he spotted Abu Sulaiman urinating, pointing an M14 rifle, he asked the Abu Sayaff leader to surrender, instead, Sulaiman ran and warned his comrades, prompting Suacillo to shot and kill him. A firefight then ensued, no casulties on the Special Forces team.

Can we say that shooting Sulaiman is a good decision on the part of Suaciallo?

Most likely if he indeed failed to secure his flanks and rear. Not, if they were simply overwhelmed by the enemy's superior numbers and firepower. Or if only they have had 'modern, advanced, hi-tech weaponry'. ...

A successful op so not part of the bad tactics vs lack of modern equipment debate since this was apparently a well executed operation tactically. You can't call an M14 a modern weapon either so its not a factor.

Another example of a debacle caused by bad tactics/bad leadership:

The deaths of several officers and EPs of Force Recon class in Basilan a few months ago.

I think Gen. Sabban would have to agree with me. :devilwink:

Sir,

The heart of the matter is that IF THEY ONLY HAVE BETTER WEAPONS AND THE AVAILABILITY OF AIR ASSETS TO PROVIDE THE NEEDED FIREPOWER AND COVER, THEY CAN PERFORM A LOT BETTER.

Just like how Tormentor say it.

We all must not forget the Tipo-Tipo ambush and the volumes of sad stories due to lack of firepower and the lack of air support and slow reinforcement.

We know it happened because of accounts from friends in the organization and the media.

By the way, Tormentor was right when he said it's all because of bad leadership because the leadership isnt doing much enough to improve the capability and winning chances of the foot soldiers.

Look at all the encounters. The rebels simply escape. That alone is a shameful performance.

Then again we are not here to add burden to their tired hearts. We just want to help them by encouraging or reminding those who run the leadership to do more in order to prevent the loss of lives of our foot soldiers.

That, I would agree with you...very bad tactics and leadership indeed by one person. :headbang:

I understand everyone's frustration...and I am very much in the same frequency as everyone else. But, for crying out loud do not give an example about a scenario that you haven't been into. You can put your comments and critique and I will be happy to debate and prove you wrong or right in a courteous forum manner but once you tell me that you know because you've been there then it's different. You have to prove me first that you were in that situation before you can make any credible statements.

Sir,

With due respect, may I simply say that realizing that something is wrong doesnt necessary mean i have to do the wrong things first.

The obvious result tells it all that something is wrong.

Sadly, after decades of fighting and the resultant destruction and expensive operations the military, as it seems, is still not doing it right.

Rebels after having been engaged by the military still simply escape, leaving a poor kill ratio considering the trainings and equipment our soldiers have.

This is why our frustrations have put us into criticizing them just to remind them that the results that the people wanted to see are still not being realized.

By the way, we are talking of small unit tactics here. In my research, the best elite forces, like the SAS, SEALS, Delta, rely not just on tactics but technology.

They use the best communications equipment availabale, the best guns, the best DELIVERY VEHICLES, and even the AVAILABILITY OF AIR SUPPORT and all just to "make their expertise on tactics work for them".

I believe our own military should study that carefully......so we can gain the same result, while for us here, the obvious result that we can now be really proud of.

Maybe its not a purely military solution. Maybe other sector of the society needs to be involved in order to succeed.

No doubt, technology could help, however, the operators must note rely exclusively on technology. We may have GPS, but nothing beats old school map reading. You can put all the scopes in your rifle, but the basic of marksmanship remains the same. You can use any equipment you want but the tactic of envelopment would still be there.

I think the military knows their capabilities, their strength, weakness and the need for improvement. For me its very simple, there are no communist threat in Manila, the Abu Sayaff problem is contained in Basilan, the MILF is only in Central Mindanao. I could go to work without a major security threat, I could sleep well at night, and I'm very thankful to our soldiers for keeping me safe and secure. :ssalute:

Just like what I said, I understand everyone's frustration. My only problem with you is that you always talk about scenarios, telling everyone what and what not to do, where you haven't been in. You can always air out your opinion, wise or otherwise. The results you are talking about is just a miniscule spec of a bigger picture. You dig into an incident trying to look for loopholes in the Organization where you are not a member and just probably trying to make everyone believe that you are better learned or knowledgeable than those who are actually spilliing blood in the field. What is your motive in doing these? Are you actually helping or making it worse? Or are you just being a jerk. It is very obvious that I am trying to protect and defend the Organization that you always love to ridicule, I am defending them because they haven't done you wrong.

Why do you think that the Rebels are still out there, after killing thousands of them and they are still there?. Why do you think others join? Answer that and you will probably be enlightened.


BTW...try going deep in the jungle and use GPS, Comms, etc...let me know if you are able to use it.

You seem to be fond of kill ratios, are looking at human lives as mere statistics? Have you ever thought that for every person killed there is a family grieving? Someone lost a son, a brother/sister, a husband/wife or a father/mother is that something that we can be proud of? For what? Is there a sense in Filipinos killing each other just because of differences in beliefs? You can have all the modern equipments you want, kill everything that moves and breathes in the countryside, have a 100:1 kill ratio but I guarantee you, it's not the end of the problem.

Fellows,

My only motive is to REMIND the military that the RESULT of their efforts is still not bringing about the expected product of all the support of the government and the efforts of the rest like the LGUs and people who tried their best to keep your enemy "contained" or kept at bay in the frontier of thenon-military aspect of the war.

I may sound like a jerk already but if it is the only way that will keep the military out of being TOO COMPLACENT of their poor achievements out of their tactics and strategies, then let it be. Pardon me, Sirs and fellows.

I am not telling what the military must do but merely suggesting based on the COMPARISON from other SUCCESSFUL military organization around the globe and accounts from the people within and the well publicized reports and stories.

Bottomline is, if the AFP had been successful and their performance or result of their operations reasonably acceptable, THEN WE WONT BE CRITICIZING THE ORGANIZATION THAT WE THE PUBLIC DEPEND ON FOR THE NATION'S SECURITY.

The non-military part is ALREADY being workjed on. You see, there's cellphone sites in the rural areas... but these are being bombed. The military cant protect them. The rebels simply slipped away or gone before the military gets to the rescue. The same setup exists. The cellcite gets bombed because no troops are around, then the military reacts and send troops by land, .. but the rebels are gone even before the military gets to leave the camp.

Whom shall we applaud for the good planning, in the sense of military strategy? The military or the rebels?

There are road construction but the builders are being harrassed with extortion. There are folks including those former rebels that have been trying to do business but the rebels are distarcting them with extortion and goes that go with it .

Maybe you've forgotten that this is a SECURITY issue and not merely a social issue. The social issue is not the biggest factor in this war. Even if you focus on the non-military aspect there'll be those who will try their best to ruin those efforts just to keep their interests protected.

That's why the military aspect plays an important role.

Sadly, as it seems now, after realizing years back that it is not simply a military approach alone, the military is not trying to put the blame on the non-military aspect of the war and put it as if the military is doing very well.

Let's hope it's not the case.

And as for the subject, the Tipo-Tipo incident with all the APCs and the deadly mix of highly-TRAINED troops, they were almost wipre-out by an enemy considered inferior to their training and equipage.

PLEASE DONT FORGET WHAT THOSE SOLDIERS HAD PRAYED TO COME.

Sir, can we now say that the operations done by the troops from the modern militaries are using unreliable modern tools?

In today's wars, like how the NPA, ASG and MILF are trying to work around your so-called perfect tactics and NUMERICAL ADVANTAGE, technology can help a lot.

Unless of course, you cannot accept the fact that the military with their current tactic and strategy are not performing to the public's expectations, .... which results to the FRUSTRATIONS.

Sirs...If I can interject here.... Technology is and have always been "Nice to have" items..

I believe that the technolgy is not perfect and is not the only thing in the military strategy.

The foot soldiers' efforts play a big role in it still.

Nonetheless, technology will work at its best when EMPLOYED correctly and with prudence.

The govt in the 2000 campaign against the MILF could not have won if the full might of the Air Force was not put into GOOD USE.

A Scout Ranger team was even saved by an MG520 when they were pinned down.

The US won the Gulf War and the Afgan fast and easy with the use of technolgy that COMPLEMENTED the bravery and skills of the fot soldiers.

But im only speaking based on my analysis of th well publicized facts. I maybe wrong as well as those facts.

The thing is, technolgy will work for the soldeirs, as long as they realize the benefit of using it and they know how to properly apply that extra power.

Then again it's my analysis.

Why do i care if the AFP dont have it anyway?

I wont be there dying in the battles with the cunning and very skilled jungle warriors of the NPA and MILF.

So, my suggestion is based on how a guerilla warrior might try to circumvent the advantages of the military.

The heart of the matter is, the military is not measuring up to the expectations of the people.

If they hold on to this, .... expect hearing more of the news telling "100 NPA rebels attack a CITY HALL, ... 2 NPA dead 2 Army dead,...the rest ESCAPED..........(and the military is now pursuing rats and cockroaches as fall guys)".

Or worse, "NPA AMBUSHED ARMY,... 9 soldiers dead, .. military in pursuit". In pursuit? Yeah right. Of rats and cockroaches, maybe.

Or "AFP humanitarian convoy ambushed, 10 soldiers dead, 6 civilians dead,.... no report on rebel casualty.... military is hot pursuit." Then again, kung sa engagement nga eh nakakatakas ang rebelde,...sa pursuit pa kaya? We arent born yesterday, folks.

That is what we are trying to beat, fellows. :dunno:

And how about the 2010 deadline?

The keyword is "Information". Every tactics and strategy relies on this. Business too.

There is no such thing as good ang bad tactics.

Exactly! :thumb: also when we post our comments and ideas, we better know the reliability of the information and how much information we know. We maybe arguing our case but we're only seeing 10% of the whole picture.

Information.....hard,truth,1st hand source information,the one that always works well.money for information.No techie can beat that tactic.Like i said technology is good but if we siply dont have it We Improvise.The way of the world in times of war & peace...There wont be any specialized unit that can operate without the recom,& money granted info...Brothers you all know thats the truth :rifle: