|
Zraver Reply
"Soviet recon doctrine was to blunder forward until your security element came under fire. While this insures your main force never gets surprised as long as the security element is alive it slows the the whole thing down and does nothing to tell you whats 3+KM away."
Zraver,
Are you certain that Soviet tactical and operational reconnaissance was collected by the security detachments of first echelon regiments and that this was done so by "blunder"?
"The US on the other hand invested heavily in the recon-counter recon fight. The advantage of information by the US from the mid-80's on..."
Why did we do so? Have you read after-action reports from brigades deployed to NTC, particularly from 1983-88? OPFOR recon/counter-recon missions routinely embarassed our manuever brigade collection and security resources.
Perhaps you're correct but I'd suggest that even a casual inspection of Soviet offensive doctrine would highlight the importance of operational and tactical reconnaissance and that it would make clear distinction between that mission and that performed by the security detachments of first echelon regiments.
__________________
"This aggression will not stand, man!" Jeff Lebowski
|