Insurgent tactics - Assault on outpost

[Arctic1]

In a recent thread on insurgents in Iraq, some posters commented that their tactics "sucks".

Here is a video that shows what some of these groups are capable of, in terms of carrying out operations; planning, reconnaissance, dry runs and execution.

http://www.funker530.com/al-qaeda-wi...encampment-hd/

Do not underestimate these groups.

[Voodoo_Man]

Maybe not on this forum, but I've called their tactics shitty before.

This shows some minor improvements but still nothing compared to the capability of our warfighters.

[Arctic1]

The main advantage we have are combat enablers/force multipliers.

They continue to inflict casualties, regardless.

Are you saying that what is shown in this video has little value, and should not be of any concern because we are awesome?
That it tells us nothing of their capabilities, strengths and weaknesses?

[Voodoo_Man]

The main advantage we have are combat enablers/force multipliers.

They continue to inflict casualties, regardless.

Are you saying that what is shown in this video has little value, and should not be of any concern because we are awesome?
That it tells us nothing of their capabilities, strengths and weaknesses?

Tells me they don't aim and just shoot wildly into random places where they believe people to be.

Tells me they can drive to the X, which is some we stopped doing a long time ago - granted some units still do it.

I don't really care either way since these guys are attacking each other.

[Arctic1]

1. Engaging known, likely and hidden enemy positions is a common technique, and not indicative of a low/inferior level of training. Shooting into an enclosed space after a grenade is also a valid technique for that AO, as the blast produces a lot of dust. Walking in blind is a lot more dangerous. It has been done by NATO forces in at Afghanistan.

2. Their method of infiltration worked, as it gave them the element of surprise. I would bet that particular method was chosen after having observed alertness levels and sentry organisation at the objective. This is one technique, they are not a one trick pony. I have been on the receiving end of another technique, where they used a concealed avenue of approach to get in position, and even despite our sniper shooting one guy he observed getting in position first, they managed to open fire simultaneously and mass fires.

3. They are also engaging our guys down range, and can continue to be the enemy in the next conflict.

Dismissing this video, and continuing to regard the enemy as AK-wielding farmers is not advisable.

[Voodoo_Man]

1. Engaging known, likely and hidden enemy positions is a common technique, and not indicative of a low/inferior level of training. Shooting into an enclosed space after a grenade is also a valid technique for that AO, as the blast produces a lot of dust. Walking in blind is a lot more dangerous. It has been done by NATO forces in at Afghanistan.

2. Their method of infiltration worked, as it gave them the element of surprise. I would bet that particular method was chosen after having observed alertness levels and sentry organisation at the objective. This is one technique, they are not a one trick pony. I have been on the receiving end of another technique, where they used a concealed avenue of approach to get in position, and even despite our sniper shooting one guy he observed getting in position first, they managed to open fire simultaneously and mass fires.

3. They are also engaging our guys down range, and can continue to be the enemy in the next conflict.

Dismissing this video, and continuing to regard the enemy as AK-wielding farmers is not advisable.

You have your point of view, which is fine, I have mine.

I am not going to give credit to some goblins for watching a few youtube vids of marines doing stuff and attempting to emulate them.

I want to see them do this against a US base, bet they tried, go pro and all, since none of them survived there won't be any video being posted.

As long as they are killing each other I don't really care.

/unsubscribing due to pointlessness of context.

[Safetyhit]

In a recent thread on insurgents in Iraq, some posters commented that their tactics "sucks".

Here is a video that shows what some of these groups are capable of, in terms of carrying out operations; planning, reconnaissance, dry runs and execution.

http://www.funker530.com/al-qaeda-wi...encampment-hd/

Do not underestimate these groups.

You've always come off as a respectable fellow so I'll be nice and say I think you're being a it too kind. As essentially stated by Voodoo sometimes they get it right to an extent and they're certainly motivated in their own special sort of medieval way, but beyond that they're little more than sophisticated, cunning rats who always go down fast and hard when they aren't hiding in the weeds doing sneaky shit.

[Heavy Metal]

That whole thing was a sucker-punch. They rolled-up a for what was in all intents, an undefended target.

They didn't win so much as the other guys forfeited.

[Arctic1]

That whole thing was a sucker-punch. They rolled-up a for what was in all intents, an undefended target.

They didn't win so much as the other guys forfeited.

That's an interesting way of looking at it.

My take is that they chose their target and course of action based on reconnaissance and intel. Their intent was to inflict casualties, and perhaps scrounge some equipment and finances. They accomplished this with very few casualties.

[Heavy Metal]

That's an interesting way of looking at it.

My take is that they chose their target and course of action based on reconnaissance and intel. Their intent was to inflict casualties, and perhaps scrounge some equipment and finances. They accomplished this with very few casualties.

Like I said in another place, one guy with a PKM or a RPG could have fried them before they got deployed from that Toyota.

And if they had the high ground, why didn't they put a PKM or a couple of SVD's in the overwatch?