British Military Influences U.S. Tactics

Bruce Hirabayashi · Post by **Bruce Hirabayashi** » Wed Apr 09, 2003 10:01 pm

Interesting article from the International Herald Tribune on how British experience gained in urban fighting in Northern Ireland influenced the U.S. Military's tactics in Baghdad.

http://www.iht.com/articles/92540.html

It's interesting on at least two levels:

a) The urban tactics themselves
b) The fact that the U.S. Military managed to be influenced to adopt those tactics so quickly. E.g., as we all know, it usually it takes years to get any large organization to change it's thinking, then to actually implement that change. One possibility is that a school of thought supporting such urban tactics must have already existed in the U.S. Military, and the demonstration of the effectiveness of the British methods in Basra convinced the U.S. commanders to use that approach in Baghdad.

Bruce Hirabayashi
Atlanta Uechi-ryu Society

Don Rearic · Post by **Don Rearic** » Thu Apr 10, 2003 12:33 am

With one British soldier in Iraq for roughly every six Americans, has Britain's force of crack units made a significant difference in a war that the United States could have fought alone?

I think they have done an outstanding job.

Emphatically yes, according to officials and experts, who said Tuesday that British forces had been putting their own stamp on the campaign - largely thanks to their special abilities in urban warfare after decades of guerrilla warfare and pacification efforts in Northern Ireland that instilled tactics and sharpened reflexes useful in Iraq.

There is no doubt that the British have learned lots of valuable tactics and techniques from fighting in Ireland.

"The British occupation of Basra was the pilot project for the U.S. assault on Baghdad, using tank and armor thrusts to get control of a city without taking it apart house by house," according to an aide to the U.S. defense secretary, Donald Rumsfeld.

His comments amounted to a rare acknowledgment in Washington that U.S. allies - at least the British - can still be a military asset on a battlefield dominated by the U.S. forces' capabilities to harness technology behind devastating air and ground firepower.

A few weeks ago when it became certain there was going to be conflict, through the Hussein Regime's actions, it was spoken about...the taking of Baghdad. Something very interesting was spoken about. Saddam Hussein fancies himself a modern day Stalin. It fits, he's a butcher, more on task with this discussion, he designed Baghdad to be controlled, for the People to be controlled, by Armor. Very Soviet in thinking and execution, how to put down dissidents should that become a necessity. So I don't think it fair or accurate to think for a moment that this plan of using Armor was dreamed up quickly. And that is not taking anything away from the Brits who are incredibly skilled at Counterinsurgency - Counter-terrorist Operations.

In fact, back in the 60s, a young American Green Beret Officer was involved in an exchange program with the British SAS. That young Officer became the Father of U.S. Army Special Forces Operational Detachment Delta. Delta Force. Col. Charles Beckwith patterned Delta after the SAS and the SAS has been a major influence (and I do mean major) on GSG9 and GIGN as well. So, the Brits have alot to offer through practical experience.

And that experience is incredibly interested between The Gulf War with General Norman Schwarzkopf then and General Tommy Franks now. Gen. Schwarzkopf was a much more conventional General, he did not particularly like or appreciate Special Operations Forces. But they even impressed him at the end of the day. This war is a whole new ballgame with General Tommy Franks who does not hesitate to fully and properly utilize Special Operations Personnel to great effect on the enemy.

An incident last week in which U.S. troops killed Iraqi women and children in a car at a checkpoint, reportedly without warning shots or strong signals from soldiers standing in the road, has been laid to poor training for American soldiers in the quasi-peacekeeping mission in Iraq.

I think that is an extremely poor characterization of what happened. They did what they had to do in the face of an enemy that will do anything to cause casualties.

British forces are credited with a better set of nerves and techniques than Americans in trying to win the confidence of local civilians. The combat ethos of American troops, and their stern rules about "force protection" designed to protect their comrades from attacks by snipers and saboteurs, casts them, in the eyes of local civilians, as haughty conquerors.

It drifts to petty attaboys and backslapping at this point and it becomes clear that pride is overshadowing common sense in this article. It's pretty clear, especially from today's events, that U.S. Forces are not seen as "haughty conquerors." Even with the American Flag incident today with Saddam's (haughty) statue, the crowd cheered with the placing of the American Flag on the face of that statue.

Britain's reputation for tough underground warfare was confirmed at the outset of the Iraq campaign when one of their elite units, the Special Boat Service, slipped ashore the night before the Iraq assault started and infiltrated the Rumaila oil field in time to prevent the wells from being torched by Iraqi soldiers.

Yes indeed, goes back to General Franks as well, utilizing Special Operations in the most effective manner, including U.S. SEAL Teams, this also runs to the effective employment of Snipers by both British and American Forces. Special Operations Personnel deployed in that effect manner prevented the dreaded oil rig fires and demolition of bridges, etc.

For the same reason, the British Army has banned Rambo-style sunglasses of the sort favored by intimidating U.S. state troopers.

Please. Oakleys and Gargoyles save eyes.

We have been rethinking Military Operations in Urban(ized) Terrain, MOUT, for two decades. Mogadishu taught alot of horrible lessons as well, but since we don't have Clinton playing ball, this won't be another Mogadishu, even if a sillyassed Columbia University Professor wants one million of them happening in Iraq.

Deep Sea · Post by **Deep Sea** » Thu Apr 10, 2003 1:01 am

The Brits have done a fabulous job and I'm proud to have their military alongside ours anytime.

Didn't AZ get into the action as well??? What happened there?

A big complaint from the Amerikaners is that the Brits begged borrowed and stole whatever thay could from the A., including gas masks, food, etc.

Another is from some Marines who were put under Brittish control just before the start and didn't want that to be.

A big complaint from the Brits is that they are not getting all the supplies they need.

The latest was the mosquito netting sent to them -- Which the A. managed to get a large quantity of tham instead but the report continued that the A. were working closer in the swamps.

But that's the worst I've heard insofaras anything large-scale.

Maybe it's just as well we don't have to fight alongside the french or other similar nations.

Oakleys

The style that distinguishes the exact images tank commanders and wingnuts desire to project, right? Stylishly designed for the utmost in "battlefield-look prestiege." (I love genuine Oaklies, btw)

Don Rearic · Post by **Don Rearic** » Thu Apr 10, 2003 2:19 am

Actually, they have been great pioneers for Special Operations grade equipment. They make possibly the best boot that some of the Troops wear as well as protective sunglasses and goggles. The reason some folks like Delta use goggles and sunglasses is because sometimes the sunglasses don't restrict anything like the goggles do. But the goggles are made by them as well. Nice vents in there to keep them from fogging up too.

Don Rearic · Post by **Don Rearic** » Thu Apr 10, 2003 2:24 am

I don't think that fella is so much intimidated as grateful.

Deep Sea · Post by **Deep Sea** » Thu Apr 10, 2003 12:41 pm

I'd wager that gesture is at least 99 to 1 genuine!

Too bad I can't see the shades more clearly to be able to identify them.

Don Rearic · Post by **Don Rearic** » Thu Apr 10, 2003 1:44 pm

Allen,

Don't know what they are. I think what I want to say is...I just thought that the article was pointing out a non-issue. There is a difference between confidence and foolishness. If British Troopers of whatever Unit wish to take off their Kevlar helmets and place berets on their heads and not use protective eyewear, in the case of Oaks, they cut down glare as well, that's their business.

Personally, I think it is foolish in most cases. The difference between being blinded from flying rocks and dirt and having a few chunks of the aforementioned materials picked out of your face by a Medic or Corpsman can be a pair of excellent goggles or sunglasses. In a conflict like this, the hand grenades and rocket propelled grenades are flying everywhere in heavy engagements, I just don't think the alleged benefits outweight the potential dangers.

In other words, the article appears to be advocating a, "more balls than brains" approach.

Deep Sea · Post by **Deep Sea** » Thu Apr 10, 2003 7:58 pm

Don,

You and I saw two different views of the same picture. I saw what may have been exactly what the newsmedia wanted the viewers of that picture to see, while you saw the dangers that exist from the obvious exposure.

Who knows what sort of dangers may exist hidden underneath the loose garb.

Don Rearic · Post by **Don Rearic** » Thu Apr 10, 2003 8:04 pm

Allen,

Buddy, I was not even thinking tactically and just took it in the context I posted it in. I would consider anyone who approached me over there as a potential hostile, no matter the smiles or anything else.

RACastanet · Post by **RACastanet** » Thu Apr 10, 2003 8:08 pm

Don stated: 'Mogadishu taught alot of horrible lessons...'

The Marines learned first hand from Mogadishu the importance of close combat skills, be they hand to hand, bayonet etc. The first director (CO) of the MC Martial Arts Program was LtCol George Bristol, a veteran of Mogadishu (yes, there was a Marine presence).

I had the great fortune of being in the last class he led at Quantico last May and heard from him first hand the lessons learned from that encounter. He was personally injured during close combat and his voice has never completely recovered from a throat injury.

Created under Bristol's leadership, the Martial Arts Center of Excellence trains all Marines in combat proven techniques. They range from non lethal crowd control techniques to bayonet thrusts. It will be interesting to hear stories from the returning Marines about how the MACE training was utilized.

The British Marines and US Army (and others) have sent combatants to Quantico to add the USMC training to their skills.

Rich

Don Rearic · Post by **Don Rearic** » Thu Apr 10, 2003 8:51 pm

Rich,

Well, the people in Mogadishu learned hard lessons as well. They waited to act like a-holes when the Marines left because they knew the U.N. and our POTUS at the time were a sick joke when taken in tandem.

After the miserable debacle with no armor or substantial air cover, with the Rangers and Delta, the Marines went back in, as per my understanding and when they were fired on, they handled themselves very well indeed.

Even through this current conflict, the USMC has been a no B.S. Organization.

General Pace on Meet the Press last Sunday (or maybe the Sunday before that, can't remember) spoke matter of factly about terrorists in Sudan, Egypt, Syria and Iran coming to the aid of Hussein in Iraq.

"They are fighting better than the Iraqis but it won't effect the outcome of the campaign, we'll kill them."

You see this in snippets whenever they interview Marines. One Major that was interviewed two days ago simply said he wanted to finish up so he could go hunt down and kill some more terrorists.

I'm sure this will be offensive to some people. Understand that the terrorists are saying the same things among themselves.

It's life, death and war.