Suppressive Fire For the Irregular War-Fighter

Well-executed suppressive fire is, arguably, THE critical task in an effective contact. The maneuver element cannot move to, or exit, their covered approach route until/unless enemy weapons can be destroyed, or effectively disabled. EFFECTIVE SUPPRESSIVE FIRE IS A PRE-REQUISITE FOR ASSAULT, OR ANY OTHER MANUEVER!!!

The reality is, conventional military forces are not historically trained in direct-fire suppression, using their personal small arms. Whether at the fire-team/stick level, or the platoon or company echelons, this is unfortunate, because well-trained riflemen, using semi-automatic, aimed fire can actually suppress the enemy more effectively than automatic weapons such as crew-served machine guns (John Poole cites a couple of different studies illustrating this in The Last 100 Yards).

In order to counter this, for the irregular war-fighter, we have to first define exactly what “suppressive fire” is. In my mind, based on my personal experiences, a belt-fed M240 hosing down the objective is decidedly NOT suppressive fire. Between the limitations of reality, with non-combatants possibly on the objective, or down-range from the objective, to the fact that, too often, the gun crew hosing down the objective is doing more property damage than personnel damage, it’s just not very effective. This becomes more important, both to the irregular war-fighter, and the conventional force small-unit leader, when you consider the political implications of blindly firing into an objective that may have significant numbers of non-combatants present. I define suppressive fire quite simply, as “suppressive fire is fire that keeps the enemy more concerned with not being shot than he is with shooting at you.” In other words, suppressive fire is protection…cover. To me, that means well-directed fire, aimed at the enemy, rather than the objective. As I like to point out during classes, “the best cover on the battlefield is accurate, outgoing fire.”

Tactically speaking, to be most effective, at a minimum, half your element should be providing accurate, precision suppressive fire. Ideally, it should be more like 2/3 to 3/4 of the element firing, as the maneuver element moves. In his classic work “Infantry Attacks,” Erwin Rommel (arguably, one of the finest tactical thinkers in the history of warfare, and certainly in the last century) describes a number of attacks he led as a young lieutenant in World War One. His assault element was always notably smaller than his suppression element, and the disparity grew as his experience increased. The key however, was that his suppressive fire elements always had their fires directed at SPECIFIC enemy positions on the target. Control and direction of organic fires is certainly one of the most critical key leader tasks, if not THE most critical. You need to know how to direct your subordinates’ fires, as well as where to direct those fires.

Because conventional doctrine focuses on the use of indirect-fire and crew-served weapons for suppression (and don’t misunderstand, I’m a BIG fan of mortars. I absolutely love wreaking havoc and discontent with a 60mm mortar in the “knee mortar” role), there is little to no doctrine defining training and application standards for direct-fire suppression with individual small-arms. The classic, British model of 30 rounds per minute is certainly a valid starting point, but is only a starting point. Suppressive fire at 400 meters, to be effectively accurate, may not be any more rapid than one round every two seconds, but at half that distance, it might be twice as rapid, or even faster. It’s METT-TC dependent (I can make solid, upper torso hits all day long at 200M at a firing rate of one round/second, without even trying, and I make no claims to being any Alvin York…any competent shooter should be able to do so). At 50M, you might need to fire 2-3 accurate rounds per second, in order to be effective in keeping their heads down.

How do we control subordinate element suppressive fires, in order to prevent fratricide, while still ensuring adequate rounds downrange?

Controlling the rate and distribution of fires involves communicating when to start firing, where (general area as well as specific targets) to fire, and at what rate to fire (It’s critical to note that, while it’s a leader task, techniques for controlling team fires depends on collective training of the entire team). There are various ways to control organic fires at the fire team/stick level. The noise and confusion inherent in a real gunfight may limit the effective use of some of these. You have to possess the ability to utilize whichever method is effective and feasible, based on the immediate situation. Don’t get tied to just one.

The first method, and most obvious, is verbal control. This is arguably, the best method, except when the leader is too far away from his men, or the roar of battle limits their ability to hear his commands (the use of electronic hearing protection, such as Peltors, and/or intra-team radios MAY mitigate these limitations to some degree).

Hand-and-Arm signals are of some value in the midst of the fight, since they are not limited by noise. There are two major drawbacks to hand-and-arm signals, in my experience. First of all, subordinates may miss seeing the signal, as they focus on the enemy and their own rifle sights. Second, too often guys try to use hand-and-arm signals because they’re trying to be stealthy and not give away information to the enemy. The reality is, once the gunfire starts, the enemy knows you’re there. Quit worrying about surprise/stealth, and focus on aggressive violence-of-action.

Leading by Example should always be the first choice of good tactical leaders. This is the most common and typically the most effective method of initiating and directing fires. It is not restricted by noise, and if the subordinate can see you, he knows where you are firing. Then they mimic him, by shooting in the same direction he is firing, at the same rate he is firing. Team Leaders should use tracers to help direct their subordinates’ fire to specific target areas (or an IR designator at night, if all team members are equipped with NODs). The target zone can quickly be marked by the TL first firing at the center of the target area, then at the left and right limits of fire. This method, accompanied by the TL then moving to individual riflemen and specifically guiding their fire, is my personal “go-to” method, and the one I generally teach. It does require moral and physical courage from the TL, because he has to get up and move, even under enemy fire. If you lack moral and physical courage however, you’re probably not team leader material anyway.

The final method of controlling fires can be a pre-arranged event. Subordinates can simply be told to start firing when the approaching enemy reaches a certain terrain feature. I personally despise this method. In my experience, it leads to a ragged initial burst as every individual has a different perspective on what constitutes “crossing the line” (wow, there could be a LOT of unintended meaning read into that. There was no political intent in that statement. I promise.).

Well dispersed, accurately distributed suppressive fires are the best way to get inside the enemy’s OODA loop and stay there, by ensuring that accurate fire covers all parts of the target area. A team SOP may call for one buddy team to cover the left side of the objective, while the other buddy team covers the right, until specifically instructed to direct their fires elsewhere by the TL.

Ultimately, the maximum effectiveness of suppressive fires can be most positively ensured by prioritizing known, suspected, or likely positions of enemy cover/concealment.

a) Engage any exposed enemy personnel (specifically targeting, in order, crew-served weapons, grenadiers, communications personnel, then key leaders. In other words…the most immediately threatening, most casualty-producing weapons, then working your way down the threat matrix.), followed by positions indicated by enemy muzzle flashes (if you can see his muzzle flashes, it’s a pretty good indication that he’s firing in your direction, and thus a pretty immediate threat…).

b) Once all KNOWN positions have been engaged effectively, work on suspected positions. These may include edges of doors and windows (why the fuck would you bother shooting into the middle of an open door…?), the top front edge of fighting positions, both sides of the bases of trees, stumps, and rocks, etc….anywhere you’d be hiding if you were in the enemy’s position.

c) Finally, target fire at any LIKELY positions of enemy cover/concealment you haven’t already engaged in your specified sector of fire. This may include the ridge of a building rooftop, next to chimneys/smokestacks, bushes that may be concealing enemy combatants, etc.

There are a couple of things to consider, from the irregular/guerrilla view, of engaging suspected and likely positions of enemy cover/concealment…first of all, if you can’t see the enemy there, you don’t have a specific target. Instead of just one round, it is more effective to fire two or three quick rounds into the space a bad guy would be in if he was there, whether you see him or not. The inherent dispersion of these rounds means you’ve got a better chance of hitting him if he IS there.

Second, and arguably more critical, is the realization that if it’s a good hiding spot, but no one is actively shooting at you from there, doesn’t mean there’s not someone there, they just may not be a bad guy. If I were stuck in the middle of a gunfight that I wasn’t part of, and didn’t have a firearm (yeah, right……), I’d damned sure find a position of cover until I could determine the safest egress route. For the irregular war-fighter, this consideration means you may have to limit your subordinates’ fires to KNOWN positions of enemy cover. If they’re not shooting at you, or your buddies, you don’t get to shoot back. Fortunately for me, that would ultimately be a local concern to deal with, so I don’t have to prescribe a set of guidance…

The rate-of-fire should be directed by the team leader and needs to be high enough to prevent the enemy from returning fire accurately. That having been said, there is one caveat. The initial rate-of-fire, in an unexpected, surprise contact, should be as fast as humanly possible, while still placing accurate, aimed fire at those known, likely, or suspected positions of enemy cover/concealment. As soon as the first magazine is expended, perform a speed reload, then resume fire at a slightly reduced rate of fire (mimicking the TL’s rate-of-fire, or following his specific instructions), in order to keep the enemy from being able to respond effectively.

Deception Operations

Each Deception operation consists of five components:

• Objective
• Enemy Assumptions
• Method Selection and Operational Options
• Execution
• Exploitation

Objective

As with actual military operations, false military operations must have a clear objective. What are you trying to get the enemy to believe? What do you want him to not believe? Do you intend to draw his forces away? The more detail that goes into planning and understanding the objective, the easier the implementation will be.

Enemy Assumptions

People are hungry for information, especially war planners. Feed them a careful diet. You must be careful to understand what they already believe and feed those prejudices. If, for example, your enemy believes you will conduct a blitzkrieg assault across the narrowest part of the English Channel, create a force located in Dover and make its commander your general best known for that tactic: George S. Patton, III. For extra flair points, the Allies could have made the First US Army Group a real force with real men, instead of an entirely fictional force, and used that as the reserve force for Normandy. Let the enemy believe what they want to believe.

Method Selection and Operational Options
AmMerc does a quick job of covering the basics of this, and I won’t repeat those here. Instead I’ll make two observations. First, a deception operation is generally more successful if there is more evidence (read: more methods utilized) to convince the enemy of what you want him to believe. To that end, don’t focus on using just one method; instead use several. Second, whatever method you choose must be accessible to the enemy. The cadaver loaded with false plans would have done the allies no good if the Germans hadn’t found it. Likewise, the press reports in 1991 detailing Marine rehearsals for an amphibious landing would have done no good if Saddam Hussein had no TV tuned to CNN.

Execution

This is where the rubber hits the road, or the metal meets the meat. Execution of the deception operation must be believable in order to be believed. For example, suppose your enemy sees your deception force assembling to his right. If he observes that there is no logistics train supporting it, he could correctly conclude that you’re trying to deceive him. Likewise, if a deception force is too obviously exposed, with no effort at camouflage, it is not likely to be believed.

Exploitation
The primary purpose of deception operations is to get the enemy to continue believing in the deception even after you’ve launched your actual operation. This is difficult, since it requires everything to break your way, including the enemy’s stupidity. But if it can be achieved, it becomes a force multiplier for you, since you now have two things working on the enemy’s OODA loop – your actual operation and your deception operation.

Counterdeceptions

The difficult trick in running a deception operation is detecting the enemy’s own deception operations. If you can’t tell when the enemy is deceiving you, you can’t really tell if your deception operation is working or not, because you can’t tell if he sees your deception and is playing along or is actually being deceived.

Conclusions

Walter Scott was right: “Oh, what a tangled web we weave When first we practise to deceive!” The right metaphor from nature for a deception operation is a web, but it is the web of a black widow – tangled, without order, confusing, with no definite center, as contrasted with the orderly spirals most people think of. You must remember that deceptions are equal parts psychology and salesmanship: know your customer and know what will make him come around to your point of view. A deception is only a supporting operation, but a critical one, for it plays to the fears the enemy manifests while the actual operation works towards his vulnerabilities. Neglect neither and you will master both.

This post is for informational and educational purposes only

The Tactical Patriot online store

Hey readers, I just wanted to put a shout out for our new online store. There is tons of stuff here that will get you to where you want to be with your preparations.

The Tactical Patriot

Check it out, I know you will find something you can't live without. :)

EQUIPPING THE GUERRILLA FIGHTER, PART ONE (The Survival Load)

The guerrilla fighter is a true light-infantryman in the classical sense of the term. He is essentially, a woodsman-scout. The guerrilla operates in a manner that emphasizes the expert use of his personal small-arms, the use of stealth in all of his movements, using the available terrain and cover to counter the supposed technological advantages possessed by regime forces, and an expert grasp of the fundamentals of small-unit, “hit-and-run” maneuver warfare.

 

The guerrilla possesses the trained ability to operate day and night, over varied, broken terrain, using his field-craft expertise and whatever technological assets are available to him, to escape enemy observation until he chooses to attack. When he moves, the guerrilla moves from one position of concealment to the next. He strives to utilize appropriate movement techniques to maximize the value of masking terrain. When not changing positions, the guerrilla remains motionless and hidden from observation by regime forces that may possess the most advanced STANO (Surveillance, Target Acquisition, Night Observation) tools available. Like his woodsman-scout forebears, the guerrilla carries only the necessities to ensure his survival and combat effectiveness. Additional, unnecessary weight leads to excessive, accelerated fatigue, impedes and slows movement, and leads to a compromising over-reliance on the technology represented by the equipment, rather than his native wit and skill in field-craft.

The light-infantry paradigm is not found in Stryker Armored Fighting Vehicles, or even HUMVEE-mounted convoys to a disembarkation point two kilometers from an objective (although both of these certainly possess value in their own right). The light-infantry paradigm is found in field-craft, mobility, tactical expertise, and marksmanship. The ability to sneak inside the enemy’s reactionary gap un-noticed, strike with overwhelming violence-of-action at his weakest points, and then disappear into the surrounding environment before a reaction force can be mustered, is the key to interrupting the enemy’s OODA loop. This “hit-and-run” ability is the chief tactical advantage available to the irregular, small-unit force.

 

Conventional force militaries no longer possess a true light-infantry capability. The fundamental problem, over-burdening foot-mobile infantry soldiers has existed nearly as long as armies have existed. The modern development of advanced technological war-fighting assets has exacerbated the problem rather than remedying it. Despite the best efforts of military logisticians and theorists, the load of infantry forces has continued to increase. The modern, conventional-force “light” infantryman is often required to carry loads far in excess of 120 pounds, even when operating in difficult, broken, and steep terrain such as the alpine environment of the Hindu Kush of Afghanistan.

The load of infantry forces has been a subject of intense study since the 1700s, and is still a problem that has never been resolved. Technological advancements in weapons, STANO, communications, and personal protective equipment have added to the soldier’s load. This has only been partially mitigated by advancements in load-bearing technologies and attempts at miniaturization.

 

According to an unidentified infantry first sergeant of the 187^th Infantry Regiment (“Rakkasans”) of the 101^st Airborne Division, concerning load-bearing during Operation Anaconda during 2002,

“We had extreme difficulty moving with all of our weight. If your movement would have been to relieve a unit in contact or a time-sensitive mission we would not have been able to move in a timely manner. It took us 8 hours to move 5 klicks. With just the vest (Interceptor Body Armor vest) and LBV, we were easily carrying 80 pounds. Throw on the ruck and you’re sucking.”

 

Studies conducted by the United States Army following World War Two found that the average infantry rifleman had carried approximately 55 pounds during movements in the field. These studies concluded that this was the maximum weight for an approach-march load that would still allow the fighter to fight effectively when he got to the fight. A decade later, a follow-on study determined that this still applied, but allowed for a maximum 48 pound fighting load in actual combat, if carried by a conditioned fighting soldier.

 

The fighting load is doctrinally defined as the actual load carried by a soldier during combat. The approach-march load, on the other hand, is the load carried by the soldier in order to get to the fight. It includes the necessary equipment to survive until he gets to the objective.

Despite the advances made as a result of these studies, by 2003, soldiers engaged in dismounted combat operations in the mountains of Afghanistan were carrying a 60-80 pound fighting load and an approach-march load that was often (during true dismounted operations, rather than vehicle-based patrols) in excess of 130 pounds. The heaviest loads, typically carried by M240 assistant machine-gunners, were often in excess of 150 pounds. These figures, it is important to remember, are the doctrinal loads, and do not include the almost inevitable inclusion of personal items by individual soldiers.

 

As the previous quote from the Rakkasan first sergeant illustrates, today’s conventional-force light-infantry soldier simply cannot move fast with his doctrinal load. Additionally, these loads were developed based on a regular re-supply via rotary-wing aircraft or ground-vehicle convoy every 48-72 hours.

The guerrilla fighter will not have these support assets. He will be forced to live out of his rucksack almost exclusively, with his re-supply provided by previously established caches hidden throughout the operational area. The guerrilla light-infantryman must overcome these liabilities. The ability to function as a woodsman-scout will be absolutely crucial to the survivability of the guerrilla fighter.

 

The survival load/fighting load/sustainment load model is a useful framework for the logistics planning of the future guerrilla. The surest way for the guerrilla to maximize his ability to apply his light-infantry capabilities is to minimize his load-bearing requirements while utilizing re-supply caches and safe-houses throughout the operational area.

The survival load is the items that the individual warfighter carries on his person, either in hand, in his pockets, or on his belt, but not attached to the fighting load-bearing equipment. The concept behind the survival load is that it will allow the operator to escape and evade hostile pursuit and survive indefinitely, if not comfortably, long enough to return to the control of friendly forces. For the guerrilla fighter, this is the perfect goal for the survival load. While the guerrilla is unlikely to conduct combat operations without the benefit of his fighting and survival loads, there are numerous reasons that he may need to have mastered the survival load concept. Whether conducting a clandestine infiltration of denied, regime-controlled territory to conduct an operation, or simply the need to dump all of his personal gear in order to run faster while trying to escape an overwhelming enemy force while breaking contact, the guerrilla must develop and carry a survival load that takes into account his personal field-craft and knowledge.

 

Too often, even among survival “experts,” the solution to the survival load idea is misinterpreted as a hardware issue. The trend to rely on a survival “kit” is not the answer. The guerrilla fighter should never rely on the “Altoids can survival kit.” Instead, the focus should be on the effective use of the tools he would normally carry on his person, facilitated by proper field-craft and survival knowledge. As in everything for the guerrilla, software trumps hardware.

At its fundamental level, the survival load consists of:

 

·         Sidearm. In extreme evasion scenarios, or covert operations conducted in regime-controlled built-up areas, this will function as your primary arm. The primary attributes necessary are that it be utterly, unfailingly reliable, and readily concealable. Because of its role as a personal defense weapon, perhaps in direct-action combat missions, as opposed to simple self-defense against one or two hostiles, a magazine-fed, high-capacity semi-automatic pistol is the ideal choice.

·         Knife. This is a field-utility knife. While the possibility of its use as a combative weapon should not be overlooked, this knife is far more likely to be used for fire-building, shelter and hide-site construction, and the manufacture of traps and snares under survival conditions than it is to be used for silencing enemy sentries by stabbing them in the throat. While a fixed-blade knife may be the ideal, a stout folding knife, kept suitably sharp, more than adequately fills this role, while simultaneously being eminently more concealable (in the interest of intellectual honesty, I feel obligated to note that I carry a Cold Steel push-dagger for an EDC knife, and generally have no fewer than three folding knives on my person at any given time. As a team sergeant once pointed out to me, “Sergeant Mosby, a man can just never have too many knives on his-self!” My Victorinox Swiss Army knife probably gets more daily use than any other tool I own, of any sort. –J.M. Additional Note: I’ve since dispensed with carrying the push-dagger.–J.M.)

 

·         Sun/Safety Glasses. In the mid-1990s, the Ranger Regiment issued Ray-Ban sunglasses as part of a new Ranger’s central supply issue. Nevertheless, Rangers were not allowed to wear them, because it was considered non-uniform (WTFO? I never did understand that. –J.M.). Today, thanks to the advances developed by operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, the use of safety lenses is generally accepted as mandatory. Polarized, tinted lenses during daylight, with ANSI Z87 safety ratings will increase visual clarity, reduce eye strain and fatigue, and protect the war-fighter’s eyes from battlefield debris and some shrapnel. The two most popular manufacturers of “tactical” sunglasses are Oakley and Wiley X, but any tinted safety glasses will suffice, and may look far less conspicuous than the latest cool-guy, CDI selections from U.S. Cavalry (again, in the interest of intellectual honesty, I have to admit, I wear Oakleys for work, and Wiley X for daily wear. –J.M.)

·         Cordage. Cordage is, rightly, considered a critical tool in the survivor’s tool kit. The simple truth is, there is no such thing as too much cordage in a survival situation. Many long-range surveillance units (LRSU, the operational descendants of the older LRRPs) and some ODAs, make it part of their standard operating procedure (SOP) to replace the laces in their field boots with 550 cord. It’s out of the way, readily accessible, and the operator is never without the requisite material to construct field-expedient shelters, snares, fishing lines and nets, and even poncho rafts for water-crossing operations (to this day, every pair of boots I own has had the laces replaced with 550 cord. –J.M.).

 

·         Compass. While the woodsman-scout background of the guerrilla light-infantryman means the fighter should possess the ability to determine directions, at least roughly, without a compass, he should rarely, if ever, be without a compass. The ability to reliably traverse terrain that the enemy considers impenetrable is the strength of the guerrilla. Possessing a compass, whether a standard orienteering compass on a lanyard around the neck, or a simple button compass on a watchband, should be considered a necessity for the guerrilla, as part of his ability to escape and evade when needed.

·         Fire Starter. This may be a simple waterproof match-safe stuffed with weather-proofed “hurricane-lifeboat” matches, a flint striker, or a flint-and-steel kit. The serious survival expert will never allow himself to be caught without some means that he can use reliably, to build a warming fire to stay alive.

 

·         Water Purification. The final aspect of the survival load that can never be overlooked is the ability to procure or manufacture safe drinking water. Historically, evaders have suffered horribly from dysentery after being forced by necessity, to drink stagnant, putrid water infested with bacteria. It is critical that the guerrilla devise a method of purifying water on the run in an evasion scenario. With the prevalence of store-bought bottled drinking water, soda, and sports drink, the guerrilla should always be able to find a receptacle to carry his water, as long as he can purify it to make it safe for drinking. Whether a small container of iodine tablets, a filter straw, or a pocket-sized, “standard” water purifier, it is critical to possess safe, clean drinking water to stay alive, healthy, and effective ( I use a product called “ION Stabilized Oxygen” for water purification. I’ve used it all over the world, purifying water from stock tanks and ditches, without ever getting ill. It’s smaller, lighter, and more effective than any micro-filter I’ve ever seen or used, and I can keep a bottle in the pocket of my jeans without noticing it).

Different experts on survival will recommend different elements to add to the “survival load.” When considering it as part of a layered, tiered approach to guerrilla equipment however, a minimalist approach, reinforced by proper field-craft training and survival knowledge, will more than adequately provide the essentials needed to keep the guerrilla fighter alive during escape and evasion scenarios in the remote chance that he has to ditch his fighting and sustainment loads, or is compromised and forced to E&E during covert operations in denied territory that precludes the carry and use of the normal fighting load.

Part Two of this article will discuss the layout of the guerrilla fighting load, with Part Three covering the sustainment load. The final installment, Part Four, will discuss strategies for the construction and use of re-supply caches.

Nous Defions!

John Mosby

Somewhere in the mountains

EQUIPPING THE GUERRILLA FIGHTER, PART TWO (The Fighting Load)

(In the previous installment of this article, we discussed the implementation of a 1^st line “survival load” for the guerrilla fighter. The overwhelming theme was, and should be, to minimize the amount of weight and equipment that the guerrilla carries to the minimum necessary. In this installment, I will delve deeper on a couple of the items of the survival load that are also de facto parts of the survival load. Further, we will discuss tactical equipment load-out elements of the 2^nd line fighting load-out. –J.M.)

 

(The selection of tactical equipment in preparation for future social unpleasantness must be predicated on some major philosophical constraints. Among these is the recognition that the world and nation we have known is rapidly imploding around us. If this recognition exists, there are some critical issues that must be addressed.

 

The first of these is the degree of seriousness in one’s preparations. If it is simply a hobby, because you enjoy shooting guns, that’s okay. There is certainly nothing wrong with that in a free society. You don’t need to invest any more time or money than you fell like spending. You will get away with airsoft-quality gear and base-level, budget firearms and tools. However, if you genuinely believe that “bad times, they are a-comin’” then you have to look at your preparations in a far more serious light. In this brighter, more intensely focused light, then quality becomes a far more important issue. How much is your life actually worth? How about the life of your children and spouse? What about a successful restoration of the Constitution and the Republic?)

Keeping in mind the previously mentioned importance of maintaining the lightest load possible for the guerrilla fighter to operate in the woodsman-scout model, the foundation of the 2^nd line fighting load-out is the load-bearing equipment (LBE). While it for a guerrilla fighter to toss a spare rifle magazine in his pocket, a bag of lunch and a blanket in a knapsack, and traipse off to war, experiences and battle damage assessments (BDA) conducted in Afghanistan have demonstrated that this is far from an ideal way to go about the business (on numerous occasions, following airstrikes on Taliban/AQ positions, SF ODAs have conducted BDA, and found dead enemy fighters with this very load-out). Such a poorly equipped soldier, regardless of the depth of his religious motivation, is a lousy match for a properly-equipped opponent with good training. While the guerrilla may spend a great deal of time in nothing more than his basic 1^st line “survival load” while in secure areas or performing covert operations in denied areas, whenever possible, when conducting combat operations, the guerrilla should be wearing adequate LBE to complete his mission.

 

With the wide-variety of LBE available on the market currently, how does the concerned citizen or potential future guerrilla fighter determine the type of LBE set-up that might be ideal? Should he copy the equipment used by an infantryman of the 82^nd Airborne Division or the 1^st Marine Division? Perhaps a set-up like that used by a member of the Ranger Regiment or the SEAL teams would be more suitable? Considering the difference in missions, logistics support, and organization of all of these organizations, the argument should be obvious that none of these is an appropriate model for the guerrilla fighter.

The guerrilla fighter must base his load-out on the likely circumstances of his future operations. While it is obvious to most that future guerrilla forces will not possess the logistical support services enjoyed by conventional military forces, it is also important to realize that even many historical guerrilla models will not fit. The potential future American guerrilla cannot expect external support from friendly nation-states, such as enjoyed by the Viet Cong from the North Vietnamese and Chinese, the Iraqi insurgency from Syria and Iran, or that the Afghani resistance forces enjoy from Saudi Arabia and Pakistan via the services of the Pakistani ISI. Even during World War Two, the French Resistance, from whom this blog borrows its title, enjoyed a high level of material, moral, and technical support from the Allied Forces High Command. Instead, the American guerrilla will necessarily be forced to literally, “live off the land,” turning to his friends and neighbors, as well as battlefield recovery, for logistic support.

 

While the utilization of auxiliary support will facilitate the occasional use of vehicles for transportation of both personnel and supplies, the ability of the regime to utilize airborne and space-borne surveillance and reconnaissance assets for vehicle-tracking/pursuit, means that vehicular transport for the guerrilla combat force will, in many cases be extremely limited. The resulting necessary reversion to “primitive” light-infantry foot-mobile travel will act as a limiting factor in the fighting and sustainment load-outs of guerrilla fighters.

For several decades, the standard-issue load-bearing equipment of the United States military’s ground forces was the LC-1 and LC-2 “ALICE” system. Comprised of a wide, thick pistol belt with various equipment pouches and canteens hung off it, this system used a pair of suspenders to help hold the loaded belt around the soldier’s mid-section. The ALICE system was sufficient, if not ideal. Drawbacks included the fact that the ammunition pouches were cumbersome and slow to reload from, the canteens tended to result in occasionally disabling (and always annoying) chafing, and the general reality that the system was neither well-balanced on the soldier’s body, nor ergonomic.

In the middle 1990s, the Army’s Natick Laboratories, in cooperation with elements of the United States Special Operations Command and the U.S. Marine Corps (with the exception of some units in USASOC, the USMC amazingly adopted the MOLLE system before the Army did), began development of a new, modular, lightweight load-bearing system, referred to as MOLLE gear. This new system, and the advances that have been developed since, offered several distinct perceived advantages to the modern war-fighter. With MOLLE gear, equipment-carrying layout can be tailored to the needs of the individual war-fighter, rather than a doctrinal SOP, equipment can be spread more evenly over the fighter’s torso, reducing fatigue, and since it is held closer to the body’s center-of-gravity, the MOLLE gear offers considerably less of a hindrance to combat athleticism.

 

The current ready, inexpensive availability of the older ALICE gear on the military surplus market makes it an obvious, popular choice for many potential future guerrillas, as well as auxiliary support personnel to stockpile for future support of resistance activities. There is nothing wrong with this, but the reality is, for all intents and purposes, some variation of the MOLLE system is an effective leveraging of the currently available technology for the guerrilla to take advantage of.

The foundation of a MOLLE-based 2^nd line fighting load-out comes in one of three basic forms: the plate carrier, the chest harness, and the new, “War Belt” configuration, based loosely on the older ALICE system.

Plate carriers, designed to carry ballistic protection against small-arms direct-fire threats, as well as load-bearing (with a notable exception that will be discussed below), offer one huge advantage over the other two options: they can save the guerrilla’s life by stopping enemy bullets! The use of body armor in current conflicts has saved an untold number of American lives from small-arms fire, as well as shrapnel threats from IEDs and indirect-fire weapons.

For the guerrilla fighter however, there are several mitigating drawbacks to plate carriers that must be considered. First among these is the fact that the weight of body armor may be detrimental to mobility for the foot-mobile guerrilla. While no one who has ever been on a two-way firing range will argue the inherent value of body armor, there are some within the military who have questioned whether some of the lives “saved” by body armor were not in fact, “saved” because they needed to be saved since they couldn’t move fast enough to exit the path of incoming fire.

 

Certainly, the use of a ballistic-protection “outer tactical vest” such as the Interceptor vest, with groin protection, side plates, deltoid protection, and throat guards are best left to vehicle-mounted war-fighters. The weight of these systems and the resulting decrease in mobility is what led to the development of what are now termed “plate carriers,” designed to hold a single plate in front of the vital areas of the torso, and another in the back. Currently, there are plate carrier systems available that, combined with ceramic, multi-hit protection, NIJ Level Three rifle plates, weigh less than 15 pounds (I don’t know about you, but I can run pretty damned fast, even with an extra 15 pounds on if I’m scared enough! –J.M.). The applications of a plate carrier in fighter survivability should certainly be considered when developing the 2^nd line fighting load-out.

Chest harnesses, unlike plate carriers, are simply lightweight panels of nylon with MOLLE/PALS-compatible webbing straps, covering the front of the torso. While the chest harness suffers the obvious drawback of not offering any ballistic protection whatsoever, they do offer increased mobility due to reduced weight. The guerrilla can move much faster and possibly more quietly, with a loaded chest harness on than with the same load attached to, or over a plate carrier. In hot weather, the reduced weight and increased ventilation of the chest harness may be life-saving, due to the reduced risk of heat-related injury or death.

 

One major complaint about the chest harness MOLLE system in the recent past has been constant lower back strain as a result of the load being unbalanced towards the front of the torso. While this is correctly remedied by the addition of a small assault pack or filled hydration bladder on the back, a new model of MOLLE load-bearing gear was developed instead. The “war belt” or “battle belt” system involves the use of a MOLLE-compatible belt system, often (but not necessarily) supported by a set of suspenders with padded shoulder straps. This system has found a great deal of favor in the civilian tactical shooting world, and apparently among some contractors and special operations personnel.

One combination of these systems that has the potential to offer great benefits to the guerrilla fighter in the future is the use of a low-profile plate carrier, with no MOLLE webbing, that can be worn under a baggy sweatshirt or coat, for ballistic protection from rifle threats, with a chest harness that can be quickly donned if necessary, or the addition of a war belt system (while I currently train with a “normal” external plate carrier, and attached pouches for gear, I am seriously contemplating this idea, due to the theoretical ability to utilize the plate carrier, even during covert operations in denied-area, regime-controlled territory, that require no readily visible paramilitary signature. –J.M.).

The final decision of whether a plate carrier, chest harness, war belt, or combination system (or older ALICE system) is most suitable for a particular potential future guerrilla must be based on the needs and preferences of the individual, including physical fitness levels, preferences, perceived future missions, and of course, current budgetary limitations.

Regardless of the final choice of systems, if the guerrilla fighter selects a MOLLE-based system, the next important choice is the selection of a manufacturer. With the current demand for MOLLE-compatible LBE, for the war efforts, law enforcement militarization, and the civilian enthusiast, there are a vast number of companies producing MOLLE gear in one form or another. Unfortunately, this high level of demand also means the cost of quality MOLLE gear is still relatively high, especially when compared to older surplus ALICE gear. While it is possible to procure less expensive imported gear, it is imperative to remember that most of the imported equipment manufactured in the People’s Republic of China (PRC) is intended solely for use by the recreational airsoft culture.

 

(While it looks, at first glance, comparable to hard-use gear, relying on equipment intended for a kid’s game in a life-or-death situation is stupid. If the guerrilla chooses the cheapest airsoft gear he can find, and dies because of an equipment failure, I will personally make it a point to laugh at his funeral. Yes, I am an asshole like that! –J.M.)

(Domestic manufacturers of quality tactical MOLLE gear that I have personal experience with include—but are not necessarily limited to:

 

·         Blackhawk Industries. Ironically, although much of their manufacturing now takes places in the PRC, the chest harness I have from them has had the ever-loving dog shit kicked out of it, and is still going strong.

·         Eagle Industries.

·         High-Speed Gear, Incorporated.

·         Special Operations Technologies.

·         Special Operations Equipment.

·         5.11 Gear. Although 5.11 is the least expensive of these manufacturers, I LOVE their gear.

 

 My 1^st line pistol mag pouches are 5.11, as are some of my PC-mounted rifle mag pouches, and my assault pack. Not a single complaint from me.

 

·         TAG/Shellback Tactical. –J.M.)

 

The guerrilla light-infantryman must consider the historical triumvirate of infantry duties: shoot, move, communicate. The necessity for mobility for the woodsman-scout paradigm of the light infantry leads to the oft-quipped line, “Travel light freeze at night.” While used as a self-mocking joke amongst infantrymen in the military, the humor is found in the truth. It is essential that the guerrilla ensure that every piece of gear on his fighting load is focused on the two tasks of shooting (fighting) and communicating.

 

The key phrase of “shooting” is actually intended to cover all of the actual tasks involved in fighting and killing the enemy. Primary among the logistical demands of this is, of course, ammunition for the primary personal small-arm, ideally a rifle. Opinions on how much ammunition the individual war-fighter should carry on his fighting load differs, based on who you ask and what their specific mission experience has been. Some tactical trainers insist that, for the armed citizen, no more than three or four rifle magazines will ever conceivably be needed. Former special operations sergeant-major Kyle Lamb (USA, retired) is an advocate of this approach, even for military special operations. As he explains in his excellent book “Green Eyes, Black Rifles,” three magazines of 30 rounds each, equals 90 rounds. Assuming it takes three rounds per bad guy to nail him to the ground, that still allows for 30 dead guys accounted for by each shooter before he runs out of ammunition. If a person is in THAT serious of a fight, then either he’ll have plenty of buddies around to borrow magazines from, or there will be plenty of rifles and magazines lying around to pick up. There’s quite a lot to be said for that argument, including the fact that such a minimalist load will do a great deal to ensure maximum mobility for the guerrilla light-infantryman.

On the other hand, unlike a military special operations soldier, the guerrilla does not have the option of counting on a regular re-supply of ammunition, nor the ability to readily call for a heli-borne quick-reaction force if help is needed. It is entirely possible, and far from uncommon, for every soldier in an unconventional warfare, small-unit element, such as an ODA, or a LRS team, to run through more than three magazines performing just one “Australian Peel” break-contact maneuver. Additionally, in the event of a contact, it is plausible that, while performing an exfiltration from the immediate battle area, a guerrilla unit could be forced into a further contact with pursuit forces, before having the opportunity to re-supply from a pre-positioned re-supply cache. It should be considered that the U.S. Army doctrinal “basic load” of ammunition, 210 rounds, could serve as a MINIMUM basic load for a guerrilla unit (As a young Ranger, I was blessed to have a squad leader who encouraged us to carry nine magazines on our old ALICE LBE, and one in the rifle. When I was an NCO, as an 18B, my personal rule was to carry 12 full magazines: one in my rifle, one in a “butt-cuff” pouch, and ten on my LBE. My current standard is 10 magazines: one in the rifle, one in a speed-reload pouch on my belt, and eight on my plate carrier or chest harness. All of my magazines are 30-round capacity, and all of my magazines are loaded to full-capacity. I’ve never suffered a malfunction due to the rumored propensity of 30-round M16 magazines to not function reliably with more than 28 in the box. –J.M.). While this certainly adds more weight to the load-out, the reduction in weight from other items that are unnecessary, attenuates this drawback. Considering the probabilities of being out-numbered and pursued by regime forces, it’s unlikely the guerrilla fighter will ever be carrying “too much ammunition.”

 

While a sidearm is considered part of the 1^st line survival load, it should be noted that there are various options for carrying it, once the LBE is added. The obvious method for carry of the sidearm solely as part of the 1^st line load is a concealed carry holster (Appendix, Inside-the-Waistband Glock 19 for me, since I know you were dying to ask, if I haven’t previously mentioned it. –J.M.). Once the guerrilla is carrying a fighting load, on LBE however, the facility of concealed carry holsters is greatly reduced. In these cases, any number of holsters might work, dependent on the preferences of the individual. It should be noted however, that it is important to remember that the sidearm is, ultimately a next-to-last-ditch weapon, followed only by the fighting knife and unarmed combatives. As such, it should remain attached to the individual, not the fighting load LBE (I have favored a drop-leg holster for as long as I’ve been able to carry a sidearm in the field. While some supposed internet “experts” deride these as suitable only for the airsoft crowd and “keyboard commandos,” this is ignorance speaking. Remember that this design was introduced to the world of gunfighting by none other than the British SAS. From the sands of North Africa in World War Two, to the Princess Gate hostage rescue, to the mountains of Afghanistan today, David Stirling’s boys stand second to no one as a fighting unit. The drop-leg holster is not intended to be worn hanging down to your knee like some Hollywood-mythic gunslinger, a la Angelina Jolie in “Tomb Raider.” It should be worn low enough to clear your body armor or LBE, but otherwise, as high as possible on the thigh. In such a position, it is more than adequately comfortable for long-term wear, and is still accessible when needed, as it will be when needed, in a hurry! –J.M.).

 

In addition to rifle ammunition and a sidearm (which is, ultimately, not to be considered any sort of mandatory item for the light-infantryman of any genre. While I would not forego my pistol to save a couple of pounds, there is legitimately, no reason for every war-fighter to “need” a sidearm…unless he feels he needs it), the 2^nd line fighting load-out should include spare ammunition for the sidearm (I keep two spare magazines on my trouser belt as well.—J.M.) and a combat/utility knife.

The combat knife, like the 1^st line survival load-out pocket knife, may very well see its primary usage for general field-craft and utility applications. On the other hand, it is far more likely than the 1^st line knife, to be used in an anti-personnel role, so it should feature more characteristics of a “combat” knife. One perennially popular example among special operators (in my experience –J.M.) is the classic Marine Corps stand-by, the Kabar. Developed during World War Two and in constant service with the Corps since, the Kabar has a well-earned reputation as a general utility knife, as well as an effective fighting weapon (On the other hand, my personal choice is a Cold Steel push-dagger, despite the lack of utility for general field-craft chores. I carry plenty of utility knives. Since I have boxed for over 20 years, the delivery system of the push-dagger makes total sense to me, requires no difference in my combatives training program to use efficiently, and, well…I just like a push-dagger! –J.M.).

 

In addition to the actual weapons-specific fighting gear above, the last critical element of “fighting” gear on the fighting load-out of the guerrilla fighter should be an individual first-aid kit/”blow-out kit.” A serious injury or wound can be the single most mobility-reducing issue to impact the combat effectiveness of a guerrilla fighter. With the development of the military’s Tactical Combat Casualty Care (TCCC or TC3) protocols, first adopted by USSOCOM in 2000, there exists a single, doctrinal methodology for providing battlefield aid to casualties that makes complete sense and takes into account the necessities of actual combat (If you are unfamiliar with these protocols, I suggest you spend some serious time studying and mastering them. They do, and will, save lives in combat! –J.M.). Predicated on actually receiving training in how to perform this protocol of care and wound management (preferably before getting into a firefight), an individual blow-out kit should be based around them. The equipment required is minimal, weighs very little, but will prevent death from most small-arms fire wounds if treated properly and rapidly. The TC3 protocols require trained medical personnel to execute above the basic, level one “Care Under Fire” guidelines, but in essence, should be considered an integral part of planning for medical care for the guerrilla force.

Beyond the fighting portion of the “shoot (fight), move, communicate” aspects of the 2^nd line fighting load-out, the issue of communications within the guerrilla force should be considered. While there are ways to leverage the technology of two-way radios into the communications package of the guerrilla force/resistance effort, the communications security (COMSEC) protocols demanded are beyond the scope of this article. The use of two-way radios, especially FRS/GMRS radios (unlike many “survival” and “preparedness” writers, I recognize the weak transmission strengths of these line-of-sight radios as a strength, since it actually reduces the chance of successful signals intercept at any extended range. Further, in alpine environments, using ridge-top LP/OPs, the line-of-sight transmissions of these radios is more than sufficient for use in guerrilla base security networks. Additionally, their limited range is not an impediment for intra-unit communications needs. –J.M.) however, should never be allowed to overshadow the effectiveness and usefulness of written and/or oral communications, delivered via courier to the guerrilla force. There is a reason that guerrilla wars are referred to as “long wars.” Time ultimately, favors the guerrilla, if he maintains his security.

 

Ultimately, this is the fundamental load for the guerrilla 2^nd line fighting load. While there are numerous other equipment items that could be useful for the guerrilla fighter to add, from STANO to breaching tools, these should be assessed on a mission-essential basis, and only added to the load, when needed or warranted. The above load, when combined with a 3^rd line sustainment load, already exceeds the loads traditionally carried by historical guerrilla forces. The difference however, must be weighed.

Historically, guerrilla forces have not hesitated to “tax” the local civilian populace to support their efforts, as well as having been at a dramatic disadvantage due to the lack of available technological assets available. The potential future American guerrilla however, has no moral ground (in my opinion –J.M.) to tax the civilian populace, and should make every effort to leverage whatever technology he has available, as long as it does not in itself, become a burden by detracting from his field-craft skills and the application of true light-infantry tactics, techniques, and procedures.

 

Nous Defions!

John Mosby

Somewhere in the mountains.

Combat Rifle – Basics to help keep you Alive

I have always been a little wary of the term ‘gun fighting.’ I trawled YouTube and the internet in general before my training course to get an idea of what people were up to and therefore what may be in people’s heads when they showed up to my courses. There is a lot of ‘tacticool’ and a lot of ‘Hollywood’ out there. In my opinion, there is altogether too much standing on square ranges, engaging targets from a standing position, as if they are not shooting back and as if they are not potentially in depth or cover and able to take you out as you stand there. Some of it seems very impressive but in my mind much of it is almost in the category of ‘circus trickery’ carbine mastery - showing off. Although there is a lot to be said to being awesome with your carbine, most of this lacks tactical application and if you don’t have all day every day to practice, you will be missing out on good solid basics and putting yourself at great risk.

Some of the instruction also appears to incorporate drills almost for their own sake that appear to have been invented as ‘something to do’ on what are otherwise very limited ranges.

I see a lot of this training as an equivalent to boxing training by just punching a heavy bag. It’s not punching back, and I can stand there and hit it all day, looking good. When it starts to hit back, you need to think about moving, duck and covering….

What you need to focus on are very good basics. I will attempt to explain some of this below:

Reaction to Contact: This can be covered by RTR, which stands for:

Return fire

Take Cover

Return Appropriate Fire.

What does this mean? It means that once you come under fire, or see the enemy, you immediately bring reactive fire onto the target in an attempt to kill, disable or at the very least distract the enemies aim at you (if you miss close!) You then take cover. You then adopt a fire position and bring accurate fire onto the enemy. This is the first part of your reaction to contact and will be followed up depending if you are alone, or with others, and whether you are in an offensive or break contact mode. So, basically, what you do next all follows from your initial reaction of RTR.

When you train with me, I will drill into you not only the initial ‘R’, but also the ‘Take Cover’. This can simply be in the form of reaction drills where the target comes up (front. right, left or rear), you go from a ready to a fire position and engage with a controlled pair. But MOST IMPORTANTLY you then go into cover, which can be simulated on the basic range with a step to the left or right and taking a kneeling fire position, following up with a steady aimed shot from the kneeling, or prone position, to simulate the final ‘R’.

It’s a 360 degree battlefield. In any situation you cannot afford, if you can avoid it, to be hit by a rifle round. That is penetrating trauma and particularly in a post-collapse situation your ability to either fight the resistance campaign, or protect your family/tribe, or both, will be severely curtailed or over. Done. So let’s get away from standing ‘gun fighting’, however fast you can run your gun.

However the thing to note about the RTR procedure is that the initial ‘R’, the initial return fire, is also optional. In a close quarter engagement you will need to react fast and get accurate fire onto the enemy. That works in a situation where you both see the enemy and they are close enough for you to get a quick accurate shot or two off into them before taking cover. It’s a judgment call. Many times, either in a wooded or longer range or even desert environment, you will come under contact and not initially locate where the fire is coming from. In such a situation returning initial fire from the standing position may get you killed. You could fire into likely cover, but that is best done from the last ‘R’ i.e. Return Appropriate Fire after having taken cover.

Therefore, if you come under contact from an unknown location and cannot effectively return initial fire, to try to do so will leave you standing there effectively frozen on the enemy’s ‘X’: Far better to skip the initial ‘R’ and just move straight to Take Cover. Once you have done that, either alone or with your tactical element, you can scan and attempt to locate the enemy before going into your follow on drill as appropriate.

The most effective reaction I have seen of this unseen enemy situation  is exemplified by a team coming under fire from a range of 100-200 meters where the enemy was not immediately obvious, the team immediately bomb-bursting and zigzagging into cover, followed by locating the enemy, communicating this, and bringing accurate rifle fire down upon them.

If we go back to the initial ‘R’ then we will see that the reaction is a balance of speed and accuracy as ranges increase. You will train and know yourself what distance you are effective out to. At close ranges you will be best to use the point shooting method, looking over the sights, and immediately engage the guy before he hits you. As ranges increase, you will be moving to your sights with quick reactive controlled pairs, until you find that you need to hesitate and acquire the target for just that faction of a second longer. You will know where your skills are at and you can work to improve that. There will be a point, where you either don’t see the enemy after the first contact, or they are at a longer range, where you will know you are best to simply get into cover before returning fire.

So, second in importance to being a good reactive shot is the overwhelming importance of TAKING COVER. Russian conscript troops train to assault by exiting their APCs and running towards the enemy positions firing their AKs on automatic from the hip. And that is supposed to happen after a massive bombardment designed to leave no one alive to assault. I have seen pretty much that level of skill on the internet videos out there, the difference being that the standard US Civilian is firing from the shoulder as he does the Hollywood line walking towards the targets.

When you move from individual reaction drills to fire and movement, you are using a combination of cover and accurate fire to maneuver, either towards or away from the enemy. You may be crawling, moving in ‘dead ground’ out of sight of the enemy or conducting short rushes covered by your buddies. However, whenever you are not moving, you are in a fire position in cover. If you are not firing or moving, you are in cover. I always train from the very basic level that if you have any stoppage on your weapon, from an empty magazine to an actual stoppage/malfunction, you are at least getting down onto one knee to simulate taking cover. If you are on a movement lane then you will actually take cover.

If you happen upon a chance contact, let’s say it’s out there in the woods, and you deal with the first guy or two with your well drilled carbine skills, you simply don’t know where the rest of them are. Don’t stay up on your feet going all Hollywood. Take Cover. If you are with a team, at least two of you, which I hope you are, then you will go into fire and movement either to assault forward and clear, or to break contact back out of there.

This leads me onto a related topic, that of ‘bounding overwatch’. I take issue with how bounding overwatch is mistermed and also with some of the ‘tacticool’ madness that I see creeping in. Ok, so here it is:

Fire and Movement: This is the principle where movement under enemy direct fire is achieved through the combined use of suppressive fire and cover. If there is no cover (think billiard table) then you rely solely on your suppressive fire to allow maneuver. The principle of fire and movement (or maneuver) can be summarized by the words “no movement without fire.” This applies at any element from a pair up to a battalion. It’s not the size of the elements that matters, it that fact that they are fire and maneuvering.

Bounding Overwatch: This is where you are not actually firing at the enemy. There is no enemy seen but you believe the threat to be high. You are placing elements in position to provide potential fire support. So think of it like ‘dry’ fire and movement. Again, it does not matter what size elements you have, from two buddies up to two platoons. Think about having to move over some open ground and you think there may be enemy in the area: you place an element down in cover on the hill to give potential fire support. You then move an element across the open ground, they take up fire positions, and the original cover element then moves up. If at any time it goes hot due to enemy contact, you are immediately going into fire and movement. In this sense, bounds taken in bounding overwatch can be further than the usual “I’m up, he sees me, I’m down” short bounds usually done during fire and movement.

Ok, so now we have established the difference between fire and movement and bounding overwatch, we can now see the utility of being able to switch between the two and also use bounding overwatch as a way to conduct a high threat move or clearance through or towards an objective. Watching some of the prepper shows, I saw some tactical madness with buddy pairs ‘moving tactically’ in an exaggerated half crouch back to back. Front guy walking forwards, rear guy back to back walking backwards, moving slowly in the open. NO.

This is where this kind of madness creeps in. Nobody is supervising this and it just spreads because people think it is the thing to do. Let’s go back to our solid basics. If you and a buddy had to move through an area where you had to clear, or move to an objective where there was a high threat of enemy contact, what would you do? Bounding overwatch right? Yep.

But what about covering the rear, I hear you say? Well, you are moving through and over the ground so you are covering that ground and the rear is the ground you just covered. You check rear anyway as you are moving, but you don’t walk backwards. This was learned from years of experience on patrol: it used to be done, for example on endless long patrols by the British Army, but you just don’t walk backwards anymore. You will trip and fall. Turn and look, then resume. There is nothing wrong with coming together in your pair for a halt, and placing one covering front/flank, the other rear/flank. That is a basic security formation for a halt.

So in summary, what has this article been about? It’s been about the need to build a good solid foundation of basic skills. I have said this before, and I chuckle to say it again, but that's all there really is: good solid basics, practiced until they become slick second nature drills. Don’t be misled by tacticool snake oil salesmen. Learn to run your gun in the standing, kneeling and prone positions, learn to use cover with your fire positions; learn the importance of taking cover.

One final thing: PT. PT is crucial. Fire and movement under enemy direct fire is an anaerobic activity – you will not be able to suck in enough oxygen to make it comfortable. However we are all training to survive here and you may be older or in not such good physical condition. This does not disbar you from these techniques. Yes, when conducting rushes during fire and movement the faster you can cover that ground the less likely you are to be hit. But there is an important distinction between speed and momentum.

Momentum is keeping up the pressure on the enemy by the use of accurate suppressive fire that is killing the enemy or making them keep their heads down in cover, allowing you to maneuver. If you can locate the enemy and generate such suppressive fire you will allow yourself to move. You may be able to move in a steadier fashion, talking account of your slower speed and utilizing adrenalin to spur you through it. On my ranges, if you are less physically capable, I will not exhort you to efforts beyond your capability. At the very least, this would compromise safety. You will do the techniques at a steadier pace, and take away the fact that you need to work harder on your PT.

Max Velocity

Live Hard, Die Free

When Injustice Becomes Law, Resistance Becomes Duty

Lee Daiber
Activist Post

The entire world is waiting – watching for your signal, your cue. They wait for the call of your voice, the announcement of your arrival. This sleeping giant grows restless with unease. The silence breeds madness in the desperation of so many set in the very ways that inspire their own hopelessness – too dependent on the system around them to make the first steps toward liberation; too afraid to leave the comforts of miserable domestication by the state. It’s your voice they wait for, your initiative to take heed of your responsibilities to the world around you should you have the courage to take a stand in the face of overwhelming odds. After all, this is your future we are talking about.

Many of you may be students – some preparing to begin college, others perhaps already in the midst of pursuing a “higher education”. Regardless, you have no doubt noticed the unacceptably, unjustified high cost of tuition – the price you pay for a promising and semi-successful future. Yet, that promise (or illusion of promise) has become increasingly less convincing in a world where a high percentage of college graduates not only fail to find a career in their field of study, but a growing percentage end up so financially strapped from student loan debt and lack of sustainable income that they find themselves moving back in with their parents after four or more years of college education. What is the sense in accumulating massive amounts of debt pursuing a degree that provides absolutely zero certainty of financial well-being? You do not need a college education to wait tables or prepare fast-food orders, and yet a growing percentage of college graduates find themselves doing just that.

This is the new age - same as the last. War, poverty, violence, corruption and injustice plague our world and continue to spread throughout.

The system – this system in which we live has become destructive and violent. The machine that drives it is composed of the planet’s most powerful financial, governmental, and corporate entities pursuing even more power and profit. We have used our most incredible technological discoveries and scientific breakthroughs for means of destruction and financial gain, meanwhile suppressing advancements to free society from controlled resources. Domestic surveillance programs are expanding at a rapid pace by governments around the world with the United States seemingly taking the lead. All forms of digital communication are subject to being monitored without warrant or reason through programs like Trapwire, Stellar Wind, ARGUS and more. Your privacy is now a thing of the past all in the name of state-sanctioned “security” from the very threats that the state propagates and encourages you to fear.

This imperial system is racist, violent and murderous. Profit outweighs fairness and ethical practices. The financial growth and expansion of multinational corporations and institutions rests upon the shoulders of the people of this planet – crushing our backs beneath the demands of the system. Our livelihoods are minimalistic in comparison to the top echelons of big-business and world banking – a struggle that has encompassed the globe. We spend our lives pursuing fiat-currency – paper that holds no value other than that which is dictated by the very system that preys upon the common person.

These entities have infiltrated governments around the globe and impose great influence on policies and decisions; their interests pushed ahead of the interests of the people and often cause further suffering and/or injustice. Your livelihood, your quality of life and in many circumstances, the longevity of your life is dependent on your financial well-being – binding you to commit your obedient consent to the system which denies you of your basic human needs without first paying the price. Any decent, sensible human-being can understand the problem this entails. Chances are, deep down you already know something just isn’t right in this world.

The fact that this is the harsh reality is not your fault. The events that have come to pass that have led to our current situation were beyond your control and set in motion before many of you were even conceived. However, if you continue to stand idly by and allow these occurrences to take place without standing for what is right and just, without standing for a better future, then the truth of the matter is you will be all there is to blame. Stop settling for “just the way things are” – it does not have to be this way. Only in our own apathetic dismissal and inaction do we restrict ourselves to such confines. Do not make the same mistakes as previous generations. Resist society’s push to conform you into a set path that is clearly failing. Stand up for what is right – strive for a better world where fairness, justice and equality are doctrine, and compassion, empathy and sustainability are paramount.
Think outside the box. Question everything. Begin thinking in revolutionary ways. Forget everything you have been told. Is the current modus operandi the best way? The only way? What can you do to impact the world around you? Take the lead – set the example. Become actively engaged in the world around you and begin educating yourself not only with current world events, but look to history for lessons. Discover ways to become less dependent on the system and promote a much more self-sufficient lifestyle. Utilize technology in ways that empower you, your community and the world. Vast resources and information are at your disposal and the only thing that has prevented you from utilizing these materials is society’s push to focus on distraction and entertainment. Find enjoyment in dissent. Take pride in your activism and encourage others to do the same. Stop the mindless pursuit of self and instead practice empathy and compassion. Do what you can to make life better for others and find reward in your actions. After all, is a life lived for yourself more gratifying than a life lived for others? Will you be remembered for selfish, material success or for selfless commitment?

Where do go from here?

When one begins to recognize the faults and fallacies of our modern world, it is quite easy to become overwhelmed. You want to make a difference; you desire a change, and yet the concept of changing the world becomes such a large task that many simply choose to give up on the idea altogether. It is easy to see how we ended up where we are today when you realize this. However, with the advancements in technology and the opportunities brought to the table via the Internet, many of the traditional barriers and obstacles encountered by previous generations of activists and concerned citizens are a thing of the past. With the capability to bring people together from all over the planet and present ideas to the masses, the Internet provides us with nearly infinite possibilities, resources, tools and potential if only we utilize it properly and efficiently. Coupled with the efforts of traditional activism, i.e., flyer hanging, pamphlet disbursement and good old-fashioned demonstrations, marches and protests, we the people are capable of making a substantial impact - perhaps more so than we even give ourselves credit.

The true power in this world belongs to the people. We are the gears in the machine, the cogs that keep this system in motion. Our hands built the roads, buildings and other infrastructure. Our daily lives finance the operation of the machine. Simply put, we are holding all the keys and the only obstacles in our paths are ourselves. Our own manipulated perspectives of reality are holding us back, preventing us from stepping through the doorway to a more peaceful, reasonable existence. Never doubt the power of an informed people, actively engaged and fearlessly standing against injustice. The power that the people hold with civil acts of defiance are simple, efficient and effective and in the face of injustice, it is the duty of the people to stand firmly in opposition. Where do we go from here? Ultimately, we are the answer to our own question. We must turn to one another, recognize our common fate, our shared and equal existence on this planet and our shared duty to establish a more stable, sustainable way of life in harmony with our surroundings and with respect for our planet. We the people will either become our salvation from destruction, or our own demise.

A simple solution needs only commitment, organization, a plan of action and consistent momentum. Certainly nothing is ever accomplished without first making a commitment to not only become involved, but to stay involved through the process. We do not have the luxury of dismissing our own individual responsibilities, lest we ourselves become a part of the problem. Organization is key to success in most circumstances and certainly helps activists become more effective in their efforts. Obviously, if a movement of any variety lacked organization it would merely become a chaotic and ineffective mess. Strategy, planning and organization will provide a sense of solidarity and a clear direction for action. Most importantly, without continued dedication and momentum, even the most organized and planned out movements are doomed to stagnancy. To prevent this from happening and to assist in the first steps to addressing the problems, I will break down a simple plan for us to begin our path to true effective change in three basic steps.

Step 1: NETWORK
This is the most crucial step in the process and the foundation of everything that follows. Many of you may remember “show and tell” from your days in elementary school. This step is essentially just that, although a more appropriate name might be share and learn. In this step not only should you continue to actively pursue knowledge of the events unfolding in our world and be aware of elements of corruption and injustice, but share that information with others and in turn, listen to the knowledge others can share with you. Begin networking with like-minded individuals near and far (with a focus on those in your region for effective group-building). Organize flyer posting campaigns and head out on the streets to hang informational flyers and hand out pamphlets that will directly influence your local networking ability. This is your hub - your community. Those who join the cause with you locally will only further benefit your efforts in your region and provide further assistance on a large scale. As time passes, you will be able to build a closely-knit, efficient and organized local chapter of the world wide effort for change. Your group will be able to contribute both to your community and surrounding communities and to the global movement as a whole. All that is required of you is some of your time, commitment and a dedicated effort.

• Post flyers in your area: Inform others of the cause for concern. Encourage their involvement.
• Social Sharing: Never underestimate the power of social networking. Share information often and everywhere. This will help you locally and the movement as a whole.
• Utilize informative resources: Provide yourself and others with up-to-date news/events.
• Establish a communication point: Create a group for your area and direct those who join your local efforts to your group for quick and easy organization. This will benefit greatly as efforts begin to expand beyond local borders.
• Network and build your local group: Meet others in your area, join efforts and team up.
• Learn self-sufficient alternatives: Discover ways to become less dependent on the system.
• Assist with local community needs: You and your group can effectively help by assisting with local problems. Help with shelters, food banks and more.Learn to effectively work together to achieve goals that you set together.

Simply put: research all that you can. Share what you know and be sure to listen to others as well. Broaden your horizons and open your mind to new possibilities, ideas and suggestions. Get active by posting flyers and handing out pamphlets as often as you can. Make it easy to build your team by including a link or qr code on your pamphlets or flyers to direct others to your group. Begin working with your group to organize efforts locally. Develop new relationships with others and learn to work as a team. Develop or utilize alternative methods/practices, such as urban/guerrilla gardening to reduce your dependency on the system. Most important, have fun! Be creative in your activism, find enjoyment in your actions, and take pride in knowing you are standing up for your rights!

Step 2: ORGANIZE
Once you have established your local team/group, begin reaching out to other groups to organize your efforts. Broaden your reach and your objectives. Begin working with groups around the world to formulate a (non-violent) course of action. As momentum grows not only should your local group continue to expand, but more groups will begin to launch and expand globally. As this occurs, we will begin to organize this growing community as a whole by implementing tools for an online polling system where we can each have our say and cast our vote on decisions pertaining to the direction of our movement, objectives to pursue, event planning and more.

Our efforts to expand our movement and our reach will continue with increasing momentum and effectiveness. Throughout this process we will host events, contests and more to encourage and reward achievements and efforts. Planning for the next phase of the process will begin as an open-forum discussion where input, ideas and suggestions are welcome and encouraged.

• Continue local group efforts: Strive to set a leading example of teamwork and leadership within your community. Inspire change through action.
• Establish joint efforts: Begin networking with other groups and collectively working together to develop new events, campaigns and ideas.
• Protect yourself with knowledge: Become familiar with your rights.
• Establish representation: Implement an online polling system allowing for voting.
• Plan for the future: Begin planning and organizing mass acts of civil non-compliance. Simple, effective, non-violent demonstrations of our unanimous disapproval and our refusal to continue to participate and allow this current destructive system of operation.

Step 3: MOBILIZE

The on-going efforts that result from our work and progress up to this point. Determined by vote and community planning, we take action as a global voice that is truly for the people and by the people. Whether it be mass boycotts or global protests, now is the time we stand together, united for a better world and a more promising, sustainable way of life - free of the violence, oppression and greed that exists within our world at present.

The ball is in our court

Where we go from here is entirely up to us. Now is a time that we need to take a step back and take a good look at the state of the world around us, the path we are taking. The big picture. We must ask ourselves some tough questions and search deep for the right answers. Can we continue down this same path much longer? Are we ready to stand together? Can we achieve far greater than this? Or are we doomed to our own destruction? We are free to decide our own destiny.

Albert Camus once said “The only way to deal with an unfree world is to become so absolutely free that your very existence is an act of rebellion.”

No authority can neither give nor take your freedom. The truth is, you are already absolutely free. It merely comes down to a simple choice: Do you choose to live free, or submit to the unjust rule of a governing few?

** Lee Daiber is the creator and administrator of the Freedom Informant Network. He is an undergraduate student majoring in digital media production with a minor in journalism. Lee is a veteran of the US Navy and is dedicated to pursuing a better world free of the corruption, injustice and control that exists today.

40 Statistics About The Fall Of The U.S. Economy That Are Almost Too Crazy To Believe

Michael Snyder
Activist Post

If you know someone that actually believes that the U.S. economy is in good shape, just show them the statistics in this article. When you step back and look at the long-term trends, it is undeniable what is happening to us. We are in the midst of a horrifying economic decline that is the result of decades of very bad decisions.

30 years ago, the U.S. national debt was about one trillion dollars. Today, it is almost 17 trillion dollars. 40 years ago, the total amount of debt in the United States was about 2 trillion dollars.  Today, it is more than 56 trillion dollars. At the same time that we have been running up all of this debt, our economic infrastructure and our ability to produce wealth has been absolutely gutted.  Since 2001, the United States has lost more than 56,000 manufacturing facilities and millions of good jobs have been shipped overseas.

Our share of global GDP declined from 31.8 percent in 2001 to 21.6 percent in 2011.  The percentage of Americans that are self-employed is at a record low, and the percentage of Americans that are dependent on the government is at a record high.  The U.S. economy is a complete and total mess, and it is time that we faced the truth.

The following are 40 statistics about the fall of the U.S. economy that are almost too crazy to believe...

#1 Back in 1980, the U.S. national debt was less than one trillion dollars.  Today, it is rapidly approaching 17 trillion dollars...

#2 During Obama's first term, the federal government accumulated more debt than it did under the first 42 U.S presidents combined.

#3 The U.S. national debt is now more than 23 times larger than it was when Jimmy Carter became president.

#4 If you started paying off just the new debt that the U.S. has accumulated during the Obama administration at the rate of one dollar per second, it would take more than 184,000 years to pay it off.

#5 The federal government is stealing more than 100 million dollars from our children and our grandchildren every single hour of every single day.

#6 Back in 1970, the total amount of debt in the United States (government debt + business debt + consumer debt, etc.) was less than 2 trillion dollars.  Today it is over 56 trillion dollars...

#7 According to the World Bank, U.S. GDP accounted for 31.8 percent of all global economic activity in 2001.  That number dropped to 21.6 percent in 2011.

#8 The United States has fallen in the global economic competitiveness rankings compiled by the World Economic Forum for four years in a row.

#9 According to The Economist, the United States was the best place in the world to be born into back in 1988.  Today, the United States is only tied for 16th place.

#10 Incredibly, more than 56,000 manufacturing facilities in the United States have been permanently shut down since 2001.

#11 There are less Americans working in manufacturing today than there was in 1950 even though the population of the country has more than doubled since then.

#12 According to the New York Times, there are now approximately 70,000 abandoned buildings in Detroit.
#13 When NAFTA was pushed through Congress in 1993, the United States had a trade surplus with Mexico of 1.6 billion dollars.  By 2010, we had a trade deficit with Mexico of 61.6 billion dollars.

#14 Back in 1985, our trade deficit with China was approximately 6 million dollars (million with a little "m") for the entire year.  In 2012, our trade deficit with China was 315 billion dollars.  That was the largest trade deficit that one nation has had with another nation in the history of the world.

#15 Overall, the United States has run a trade deficit of more than 8 trillion dollars with the rest of the world since 1975.

#16 According to the Economic Policy Institute, the United States is losing half a million jobs to China every single year.

#17 Back in 1950, more than 80 percent of all men in the United States had jobs.  Today, less than 65 percent of all men in the United States have jobs.

#18 At this point, an astounding 53 percent of all American workers make less than $30,000 a year.

#19 Small business is rapidly dying in America.  At this point, only about 7 percent of all non-farm workers in the United States are self-employed.  That is an all-time record low.

#20 Back in 1983, the bottom 95 percent of all income earners in the United States had 62 cents of debt for every dollar that they earned.  By 2007, that figure had soared to $1.48.

#21 In the United States today, the wealthiest one percent of all Americans have a greater net worth than the bottom 90 percent combined.

#22 According to Forbes, the 400 wealthiest Americans have more wealth than the bottom 150 million Americans combined.

#23 The six heirs of Wal-Mart founder Sam Walton have as much wealth as the bottom one-third of all Americans combined.

#24 According to the U.S. Census Bureau, more than 146 million Americans are either "poor" or "low income".

#25 According to the U.S. Census Bureau, 49 percent of all Americans live in a home that receives direct monetary benefits from the federal government.  Back in 1983, less than a third of all Americans lived in a home that received direct monetary benefits from the federal government.

#26 Overall, the federal government runs nearly 80 different "means-tested welfare programs", and at this point more than 100 million Americans are enrolled in at least one of them.

#27 Back in 1965, only one out of every 50 Americans was on Medicaid.  Today, one out of every 6 Americans is on Medicaid, and things are about to get a whole lot worse.  It is being projected that Obamacare will add 16 million more Americans to the Medicaid rolls.

#28 As I wrote recently, it is being projected that the number of Americans on Medicare will grow from 50.7 million in 2012 to 73.2 million in 2025.

#29 At this point, Medicare is facing unfunded liabilities of more than 38 trillion dollars over the next 75 years.  That comes to approximately $328,404 for every single household in the United States.

#30 Right now, there are approximately 56 million Americans collecting Social Security benefits.  By 2035, that number is projected to soar to an astounding 91 million.

#31 Overall, the Social Security system is facing a 134 trillion dollar shortfall over the next 75 years.

#32 Today, the number of Americans on Social Security Disability now exceeds the entire population of Greece, and the number of Americans on food stamps now exceeds the entire population of Spain.

#33 According to a report recently issued by the Pew Research Center, on average Americans over the age of 65 have 47 times as much wealth as Americans under the age of 35.

#34 U.S. families that have a head of household that is under the age of 30 have a poverty rate of 37 percent.

#35 As I mentioned recently, the homeownership rate in America is now at its lowest level in nearly 18 years.

#36 There are now 20.2 million Americans that spend more than half of their incomes on housing.  That represents a 46 percent increase from 2001.

#37 45 percent of all children are living in poverty in Miami, more than 50 percent of all children are living in poverty in Cleveland, and about 60 percent of all children are living in poverty in Detroit.

#38 Today, more than a million public school students in the United States are homeless.  This is the first time that has ever happened in our history.

#39 When Barack Obama first entered the White House, about 32 million Americans were on food stamps.  Now, more than 47 million Americans are on food stamps.

#40 According to one calculation, the number of Americans on food stamps now exceeds the combined populations of "Alaska, Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Utah, Vermont, West Virginia, and Wyoming."

This article first appeared at the Economic Collapse.  Michael Snyder is a writer, speaker and activist who writes and edits his own blogs The American Dream and Economic Collapse Blog.