Quote:
Originally Posted by mudshark
As if nobody in major Ops never even heard of Stalingrad! Yeah I know "some" polititians have the reins...But, You DON"T stick armored units in an urban environment unless totally supported by foot troops. Now this brings up the question ,what are you trying to achieve,first what is the objective? My gathering is that we are trying to show the populace that we are in charge. Hardly. Maybe we are in charge of the basketball court that the troops setup in the perimeter,nothing more really.
Second how are you going to achieve your objective? So far its been by roadside check points and armored forrays. As we already see here its not working. The armored vehicles we have deployed for the mission are just targets to be taken whenever the insurgents want. The answer to this dilema is not a technilogical one. A different method to keep peace is truly needed.
It just burns me up to see are troops used as police and not the mission they are trained for...
The Stryker,great for armored mobile warfare,modern,somewhat armored,designed to get a force where it is needed real fast,reliable,man it even looks awesome,but it is not a police cruiser.
|
Sorry, but you're way off track in most of your post. The Stryker is ideal for the COIN environment, and it is NOT designed specifically for mobile armored warfare. Next, by design, the Stryker force is an infantry-centric organization, and not an armored force, so you're wrong there as well. Next, care to talk about Jenin 2002, Baghdad April 2003, Fallujah November 2004? Armored forces can operate extremely well in an urban environment, even without dismounted forces in close proximity, when you don't have an AT missile threat.