PDA

View Full Version : The 100 and Worst Airborne



3077India
05-12-07, 10:18 PM
Today, we finished a rotation at Fort Polk JRTC. The Rotational Training Unit was the 3rd Btn 101st Airborne. This was my 3rd rotation as a roleplayer, but my first where I wasn't confined to a village. I got to travel all over the training area (aka The Box). This rotation was an eye-opener. During the rotation we, the Roleplayers, came to refer to the 101st by a new name: The 100 and Worst.

The problems these soldiers faced were of their own making. Using soldiers (military in general) to deal with civilians (ie public relations) only compounds existing problems. Soldiers are not public relations minded, that isn't what they are trained for (I know, DUH) and yet that is what our government is expecting from them. After their performance during this rotation (mind you, everything was only simulated), I nolonger wonder why the Iraqis hate us so much.

Don't misunderstand me, I don't wish any harm to our servicemen and women, I only want them to be safe and mind what they do. I'm not anti-military, but just the opposite. They should have the complete support of all Americans; it is the politicians who don't derve our support for putting them in harms' way and not doing enough for them. Some bleeding-heart liberals (code for anti-military) have taken to attacking our servicemen and women here at home. Seems like Vietnam all over again.

Please do what you can to encourage people to show their support for our sons and daughters serving in our Armed Forces. I strongly believe that this kind of service to one's country is the greatest service one can give.

10thzodiac
05-12-07, 11:13 PM
AMEN !

"They should have the complete support of all Americans; it is the politicians who don't deserve our support for putting them in harms' way and not doing enough for them." http://www.leatherneck.com/forums/images/icons/icon14.gif

SF

10th

Echo_Four_Bravo
05-13-07, 12:17 AM
We always called them the hundred and worst. Glad to see some things never die- but I'm not happy about the problems they had in training. I'll leave the political debate to others though.

3077India
05-13-07, 01:02 AM
We always called them the hundred and worst. Glad to see some things never die- but I'm not happy about the problems they had in training. I'll leave the political debate to others though.I wasn't aware of the existing history of that name; though it is amusing. Likewise, their problems during training does give cause for great concern. At this point I can only hope and pray they return home safely to those who love them. Many of them are going back for their 3RD TOUR over their. They deserve as much support as we can give them. I wish I could say we, as a nation, have not failed them, but I fear we have; when they return home and are left to deal with the trauma of their service, then we put the knife in by calling them baby killers (reminiscent of Vietnam) and giving them substandard service through the VA. For all their troubles and the destruction of their sensibilities do they derve this? H*LL NO! When we listen to the stories of those who come home, it becomes guite clear that the words, "You have the thanks of a grateful nation," are pretty hollow and the realization sets in that Iraq has become America's Vietnam of the 21st century.

SkilletsUSMC
05-13-07, 04:51 AM
When I roll played we Handed 3/1 its own ass too and they are squared away. I hate to back up the doggies but role playing just aint the same.

Sgt Leprechaun
05-13-07, 01:10 PM
Very true. However, it's been my experience in working with the 'regular' army that they are NOT encouraged to think (despite propaganda to the contrary) nor is initiative, creativity, or even a tad bit of noncomformity, encouraged. Those who show such things, or who have that 'bent', after their first tour in the 'regular' army, tend to gravitate towards SF, Delta, etc....

Or leave.

Those that can thrive in that enviroment get promoted, and the trend perpetuates itself. Thus, no changes are made/allowed.

3077India
05-13-07, 09:28 PM
There is a saying that appears to be applicable to what u r saying -- SCREW UP, MOVE UP. :p

Zulu 36
05-13-07, 10:43 PM
When I roll played we Handed 3/1 its own ass too and they are squared away. I hate to back up the doggies but role playing just aint the same.
This is very true as you well know Skillets. Role players, on both sides, are not under the same pressures as in real combat. Even with explosions and marking cartridges, the fear factors, skill factors, and to a degree, the fog of war, are not present. Still, role play training well done, only real combat can be more real.

In role play, the full application of firepower cannot be applied and thus the "good guys" do not reap the benefits of additional enemy casualties and resultant damaged enemy morale. An "enemy" role player will fight to the finish in training, knowing the umpire waves him back to life. Death in real battle is final. Often fear drives the enemy from their position before firepower does.

Some training events are scripted and generally have a known ending. Other are more free play (as they should be). When well skilled civilians, soldiers or Marines are cast as OpFor, one must ask if the potential enemy is this skilled too? Yet, I think it is better to train against highly skilled OpFor and then fight a mediocre real enemy. Mediocre training leads to bad ju-ju against a skilled enemy. Skilled training never goes to waste.

However, even a skilled enemy will suffer from fear and morale problems. Most of those in Iraq and the 'Stan know their skills are sh*t compared to Marines (in particular). They also know their firepower is p*ss weak as compared to any American unit. Hence the preference to ambush via IED or snipers. It is a force multiplier for them and safer.

Not all of them really want to test the 72 virgins theory if they can avoid it. I think the majority willing to give it a try have already found out the truth of paradise. Sure, there are still suicide bombers, but how many of those are truly willing, or witting, for that matter.

How many terrorist units caught in a fixed place actually stand and fight to the last man? How many of those are actually killed fleeing the scene versus those killed standing and fighting in place? I'd bet more are killed trying to beat feet.

I am not counting those caught unawares in what used to be a "safe" house and a couple of 2,000lb JDAMs drop in first. They didn't have any chance to choose fight or flight. Such is warfare U.S. style. The "F*ck with the bull, get the horn" theory in action.

An interesting book is "Battle Studies" by Charles-Jean-Jacques-Joseph Ardant du Picq. It was written in the late 1860's by a French infantry colonel. He was KIA in 1870 against the Prussians. Many of his observations are as applicable today as then.

"Battle Studies" was mostly written as an internal French Army document. The version made public after Ardant du Picq's death included other notes and letters he had written. He compares ancient battle to modern battle (modern to 1869, but a knowledgble reader finds it is not far out of date in 2007).

You find many of the same observations expounded upon by more recent students of battle, such as Dyer, Keegan, Grossman, and some others. Except Ardant du Picq wrote them down first.

It's available through Amazon.com.