Old-time.

This is coolbert:

A lot of authorities have commented that the U.S. military ground forces currently fighting in Iraq are reverting to old-time weapons.

Weapons that were considered to be NOT useful in modern combat. Passe' and outdated.

This is a most surprising turn of events. The Pentagon and other military thinkers around the world are supposed to be able to predict, with some accuracy, the course of military development in the areas of weapons, tactics, strategy, etc. This IS crucial. You want to be able to develop weapons, tactics, strategy that will be useful and effective in the NEXT war.

Iraq seems to be bucking the trend in a lot of cases.

I have mentioned some of this in previous blogs. Such as:

* The slat armor used to defeat the shaped charge round.

* The renewed use of the 7.62 mm NATO round as fired by the M-14 rifle [also the same caliber round fired by the M240 machine gun] as being the caliber of choice for the infantryman. With use of the M14 rifle of course as well to troops beyond those of the sniper teams.

* The reissuance of the old-time .45 caliber autoloading pistol M1911.

* The redeployment of moth-balled M113 armored personnel carriers [APC's].

* And further suggestions that U.S. ground forces need to think of going back to usage of the recoilless rifle of say the 106 mm caliber, as was found on the ONTOS Marine vehicle.

What else is there?? And what else WILL there be?

This trend seems to be due to the nature of the fourth generation warfare [4GW] facing U.S. ground forces. Such warfare, when the enemy decides, normally by their own choosing, to stand and fight, will be urban warfare. Urban warfare that negates to a great extent the very effective American arsenal so effective in conventional warfare.

U.S. ground forces will have to employ basically what they can carry and deploy in the often very congested urban setting found in the teeming "Third World city". Artillery, tanks, helicopter gunships, and Air Force close air support [CAS] are either too ponderous for effective use or are not time responsive enough.

It also seems that type of construction often found in the "Third World city" is of stone or cinder block construction. Resistant to small caliber weaponry or even the HEAT type of anti-tank weapon carried by the common soldier. Weaponry effective on the CONVENTIONAL battlefield are found wanting in the urban environment.

One suggestion to defeat the construction of buildings of the stone orcinderblock type is to resort toa recoilless rifle firing a spalling round. Called high explosive plastic [HEP] by the U.S. and high explosive squash head [HESH] by the British. Also referred to as the "dinner plate" round. Such a round can DEFEAT CONCRETE WALLS UP TO EIGHT FEET THICK!! Causes peeling off of concrete on the INSIDE OF THE WALL. The peeled off pieces circulate around the room at high velocity, turning enemy fighters located within into "hamburger"!!

[perhaps the Stryker assault gun will fill a void currently present. Or the Buford gun reconsidered. If the recoilless rifle is brought out of mothballs, that too may be part of the solution. U.S. ground forces will need something effective that they either carry with them or accompanies them WHERE EVER THEY GO!!]

I don't think anyone would have ever anticipated that this course of events would follow when U.S. ground forces invaded Iraq. The "experts" probably would not have said what has transpired would have occurred. This probably is a shock to most of the futurists in the Pentagon.

Consider the origin [etymology] of the English word war:

"war - - late O.E. "to confuse, perplex". Cognates suggest the original sense was 'to bring into confusion.'"

Well, this is true, is it not??!!

coolbert.