I said lets talk stacks, but I should say lets talk about the US military's form of room clearing.
Is it dynamic?
Not as taught.
So what is it properly called.
Deliberate room clearing.
Its slow. Methodical. Civilian casualty averse.
But its not dynamic. Its not designed to prevent US casualties. It designed to dot the i's and cross the t's for the lawyers. But I look forward to hearing what others have to say on this subject. My contention is that stacks against a properly equipped and motivated enemy will get our people killed. It is a hold over from the bad old days of the 70's when everyone was practicing to rescue hostages. It originated in civilian law enforcement and that's where it should stay. I don't have the answer to a better way but (yes I'm repeating myself) it will get our people killed if we keep doing it the way we are.
But that's my opinion. What's yours.
UPDATE. Historical Comparison.
My blog so its my world. Let's compare the situations in two different battlefields. Hue City and Fallujah.
Both battles highlighted extensive house to house fighting. Brutal combat at close ranges. Both had (at least for a while in the case of Hue City) extreme prohibitions on the amount of firepower that could be applied to enemy fortifications. Long story short, two different battles, somewhat similar tactics used by enemy forces yet the casualty figures (according to Wikipedia...yeah I know) are still somewhat similar (no disrespect to those that were injured or to the families of those who lost there lives...just looking at tactics, I request your patience with me on this).
How similar were the battles...both featured enemy snipers, machine gun positions, suicide bombers, enemy combatants surrendering and then attacking, and even enemy combatants playing dead and then attacking.
Yet the vaunted stack did not lessen our casualty count and I contend raised it.
the russians had good tactics in WWII, throw a grenade, then go in with your machine gun and spray the room, clean out real good, but that doesnt help with civilians in the room. I would say even law enforcement doesnt use these tactics unless they have to, if they cant negotiate their way out of it.
ReplyDeletehistorically inaccurate. what battle are you talking about? Stalingrad? Moscow?
ReplyDeletesavage street fighting but guess what...civilians were gone and if they were stupid enough to stay behind then damn! you must be tired of living. same thing with Fallujah. talk about telegraphing a punch. the citizenry was given warnings that an offensive was coming and warned to leave the city. not only did most of them leave, but so did a bunch of bad guys and all that was left was a bunch of hardcore terrorist. yet the rules of engagement still held and a lot of people got hurt unnecessarily
Back in the day, even up to 2001, the army had a different more primitive was of CQB. it was mostly grenade enter room. it has come along way and has been pretty well perfected. i have trained with SEALS, SF, SWAT ect and in the end it all boils down to the stack, yea there can be different variations but guess what the stack works and works well. you talk about before one gun man can take down a stack. if done right it will be damn hard, and in the end guess what thats our job and part of it is danger.
ReplyDeletei would like to hear your solution to the issue of stacks. you think they are ineffective and crap. i would like to hear your perfect solution to clearing a house with enemy in it and possible civilians
Yes military way can be slow and methodical but can be dynamic too. good cqb is fluid like water, adapting with the enviorment. this is me and my guys doing a live fire shoot house http://youtu.be/1zqvcDpdrS8
In the UK we still put a grenade in first when we are unlikely to meet civvies. And we don't put a whole fire team into a room in one move. That video seems a lot more likely to attract casualties than how I've been taught.
ReplyDeleteI want to post on this but my wife just gave birth to my second child and I just don't have the time to give you my well written statment. What I would say is that in a block one enviroment a dynamic violence of action (ie: rockets, tank rounds, satchel charge) followed by a well train fireteam stack works very well
ReplyDeleteI get what you guys are saying but you're not reading me. what i'm saying is that in every example that i've ever performed and i have performed this, you're faced with all types of fatal funnels and even in the post written by our mysterious critic who likes posting videos of his guys doing this, there are numerous instances of guys that are vulnerable. additionally i have yet to see a realistic training scenario where your entry man is downed.
ReplyDeleteits always success and supposedly overwhelming firepower. for all you guys that have been there and done that i wonder how you can be so sold on this. it doesn't take a super trooper to see that this tactic at the very least needs tweaking.
you can talk about a one block war but how many times have you been involved in that? everything is three block. everything has civilians milling with combatants.
the thought that you can have a clean battlefield is just a mystery to me. i just have never seen or even heard of it.
oh and guess what cowboy. never trained with SEALs but i've trained with Rangers, Airborne (82nd), and Royal Marines.
this tactic is far from perfect and will get people killed. it might have a high speed flavor but thats about it.