How the frick does anyone get "good" at war? I understand that having combat experience probably makes you better at reading certain cues and gives you more confidence in your actions, but there's a seemingly infinite number of ways you can die in modern warfare without being able to do anything about it
>Creamed by artillery/airstrike
>Struck by an FPV drone
>Vehicle you're a passenger of hits a mine or eats a missile
>Ordered to attack a position that turns out to be too well defended
>Armored vehicle shoots at you with an autocannon from 2km away, at night, with thermals
>Took a left turn instead of right and got shot in the back by an enemy rifleman
Is it all just down to luck of not getting hit with random bullshit and not being commanded by morons who accidentally order you to commit suicide?
no idea but good thread idea
Fighting in a war is mostly for poor morons. Just don't be a poor moron.
But I am a poor moron!?!
>war is not fair
>more at 11
Well of course, aint nothing fair and I'm just a dumbass behind a keyboard in a nice air conditioned house, but it's just the seeming randomness of it what gets me. Consider some war hero MoH recipients like Audie Murphy or John Basilone, both of course went above and beyond the call of duty as the award says, but both could just as well have been yet another dead sucker at the hands of a machine gun.
But on topic, consider entirely green troops, they probably make some stupid mistakes that are more likely to get them killed by mistake, but a soldier whose seen combat many times is still just as likely to die from being at the spot where an artillery shell decides to land at.
It's a very interesting topic to me from a training perspective since training as a group seems extremely valuable, but how important is individual skill ultimately?
Some deaths are random but some deaths are mistakes. Those that live, learn the mistakes from those that die or from close calls. Another thing to consider is hesitation. A brand new troop may hesitate to kill but experienced troops with lots of killing experience will not. It's important to mix new troops into experienced units so that the new troops can learn from the combat experienced troop.
I've lost the gif and it's not warfare, but can't corner the dorner comes to mind. A guy who was dead set on killing people charges a cop who was just having another tuesday, cop hesitates and dies. You probably get a lot of similar shit in trench and urban warfare
And btw, every award ever given to anyone ever has been fluffed up to look extra impressive. This goes 10x for the military. If you were to talk to either of those dudes man to man, they’d both tell you they saw plenty of guys do the same things they did, some died doing it, and the others simply weren’t written up for an award. It’s only GWOT vets and seals who like to pretend like they’re actual heroes.
Go back to your containment board brownoid.
Constant development of combined arms warfare.
>The only hope you have is to accept the fact that you're already dead. The sooner you accept that, the sooner you'll be able to function as a soldier is supposed to function: without mercy, without compassion, without remorse. All war depends upon it.
This, basically.
>both of course went above and beyond the call of duty as the award says, but both could just as well have been yet another dead sucker at the hands of a machine gun.
Yes. That's reality for you. You accept your death, you act the best you can despite of it. A select few go on to be come heroes, the rest bleed to death, disemboweled or dismembered, begging and pleading for their mothers to save them.
War is hell.
Welcome to the military experience, moron.
It's all about optimizing the tiny advantages like hell because those are the only things in your control while the big things are up to fate.
>anon figures out war isn’t fair and no matter how well trained or equipped you are a 25c bullet can end it all
So Russia sends drones over no man's land to execute wounded soldiers?
>You stupid fools. Live by the sword, die by the sword. Today it is that man. Tomorrow it will be you.
Intense prayer
pure paganism
As far as I can tell it doesn't actually lower your chances of dying that much, but when you have an entire unit with a lot of veterans it cuts losses in most situations by proxy because the reaction to artillery/attacking enemies/ambushes etc. are all more ingrained and so the likelihood that a given veteran unit fights back fast and intensely enough to stave off an enemy or retreats in good order are much higher which reduces casualties in and of itself. The odds of our dying from something you couldn't see coming as an individual isn't that much less though
>but when you have an entire unit with a lot of veterans it cuts losses in most situations by proxy because the reaction to artillery/attacking enemies/ambushes etc. are all more ingrained and so the likelihood that a given veteran unit fights back fast and intensely enough to stave off an enemy or retreats in good order are much higher
I recently heard about / watched a 1947 movie "Theirs Is the Glory" about the battle of Arnhem, and what's interesting about it is that it was directed by a British combat veteran and starred actual guys who survived the battle who reenacted it. To watch them move physically during a scene where they make contact is pretty good:
?si=3cO88LRxCoNoeYcY&t=1084
Pls post more vids of ziggers getting shot point blank
pls i want to see their faces
Pic related would be easier to survive for someone who underwent a little more training, dude in the vid got tunnel vision and was moving way too fast towards what I assume was the last known position of the enemy. You can see he is aware that there are wiener suckers in the area by his stance. He fricked up by not utilizing cover/concealment, not utilizing his fireteam, and not taking advantage of HE. At least from the small clip we got to see. Obviously we only have one perspective and POV with the camera angel and what not. But I guarantee you there was a better avenue of approach in that situation, rather than sauntering out in the open standing almost fully upright.
There’s thousands of ways to increase survivability, many of which are slow, painful, and sometimes boring.
Larping and mag dumping at paper/steel is the equivalent of going to a Karate dojo at your local strip mall. Only thing it does is give you enough confidence to get you kilt in the streets. If you want actual combat training, there’s literally no excuse not to join the military and go Infantry, recon, SF
>Obviously we only have one perspective and POV with the camera angel and what not.
That is completely untrue. We know exactly what happened, we have this incident in FPV from the guy in pic related, we have drone footage of overhead, we even have a fricking interview with the guy doing the shooting.
A BMP or BTR crests a small hill, and the Russians get out from the back. The Russians descend the hill towards a trench line about 50 meters away from the hill, but before that trenchline there are a bunch of fighting positions.
Dude who got shwacked in that video was basically in the middle of the open on the highest point in the local micro-terrain advancing alone towards a trenchline.
The winning move here was not to park the BMP on top of the fricking hill to disembark all your dudes in the middle of a kill-zone, there is absolutely nothing that single soldier could have done better, he was gonna die no matter what he did.
Oh ok, sorry I didn’t lurk enough. Like I said, there was definitely a better way of doing things, which is seems to be confirmed.
But, it is undeniable that that man died a warrior's death. He was on his feet, ready to fight.
A lot more honor in that then dying because of your own cowardice.
youre the kind of guy who just dies without anybody ever remembering them lol
That is the fate of 100% of all humans.
The ones who know you will soon die too, and the ultimate fate of all life is the eternal death.
homosexual book for fedora homosexual wienersucker Black folk, repent NOW or kys
Everyone dies. I'm sorry you had to hear it this way.
And he will die like a man while you seethe online
>there is absolutely nothing that single soldier could have done better
Complete bullshit. The guy who got shot in that webm should either have
>attached bayonet and charged into the trench like a madman
>gone prone and sneaked inside
Both, preferably escorted by hand grenades.
His choice of standing up while in contact with the enemy like that was what killed him. It was 100% the wrong choice and an obvious result of bad training.
Not seen a single bayonet in Ukraine, oddly enough.
It’s because Slavs are pussies.
Select fire weapons with large mags kind of made them moot. Sure, some niche use can be found if you run out of ammo and want to still keep fighting, but it's better to just shoot the enemy.
>piggy dies
fantastic
>RT logo
>thinks RUSSIA TODAY would show a clip of some zigger losing
I fricking hate newbies like you wouldn't believe!
are you moronic?
he said "piggy" which is ukrainian, you said "zigger" which is russian. That video is in fact a ukranian dying.
Ukrainians aren't wearing 60+ year old helmets, you moron.
So here's a screengrab of where the BMP stopped to disembark everybody.
The Russians went down from the right side of the BMP and advanced in the same direction as the BMP is pointed.
Guy who got schwacked died after fifteen feet in front of it, near the middle of the picture.
And he should not have been standing up. He's in contact with the enemy, out in the open, which means he should've either been prone or crawling, possibly rushing, if the situation allows for it.
Standing up out in the open is just asking for you to get domed, which is exactly what happened.
>standing up out in the open
You understand this is a still picture right?
>nothing that single soldier could have done better
How about not standing up so anybody in the trench could see your silhouette set against the sky as clear as day?
>How the frick does anyone get "good" at war?
the soldier's job is not to be good at war, his job is to follow the orders of someone who may or may not be good at it.
That’s why you wouldn’t make a good soldier lol
>a good soldier
let me guess, you are the kind of moron who thinks being good at shooting targets on a range makes you a good solider?
Nah, individual action, accountability, adaptability, judgment, those are a few things make a good soldier. Not blindly following orders from someone who may or may not have more experience than you.
>Not blindly following orders from someone who may or may not have more experience than you.
ahhhhh I see.
So when your officer tells you to jump in a humvee and go patrol some dangerous area where the enemy may have put some mines or IEDs.. you will say no?
If there’s no plan put in place to avoid, mark/remove the threat of those mines then yes… That’s literally why NCO’s and Staff NCO’s exist.. If the officers frago is shit, then the NCO/Staff NCO steps in to unfrick it as best they can. Commanders intent is never suicide. And if it is, it’s the duty of the enlisted men to shut that shit down. Idk what kind of military experience you have, but this isn’t WW1, and we aren’t conscripts.
Being good is good but I would rather be lucky.
You can’t chose to be lucky. You can choose to be as good as you want to at any physical task. Unless you are physically or mentally impaired.
Join and enter the general staff and laugh your ass off as you send waves after waves of conscripts into minefields
Any officer above the grade of 0-3 legitimately cannot be trusted. You don’t get to field grade unless you’re an actual psychopath.
I think there is some irony in that experience and skill probably matter increasingly more the higher ranked as an officer you are, a company commander can read the terrain and use his supporting fires and whatnot and still risk getting fricked up by no fault of his own, a staff officer moves the pawns on the map, then a lot of people die, and he figures that he probably shouldn't do that thing that lost him a lot of men again.
Sure the intent is never suicide, but e.g., reconnaissance and being on point in general is just really likely to get you killed, kind of like the forlorn hope of the formation battles of past
>Sure the intent is never suicide, but e.g., reconnaissance and being on point in general is just really likely to get you killed, kind of like the forlorn hope of the formation battles of past
That’s just it though, there’s a proper way to conduct recon. In this day and age conducting recon shouldn’t even put you in range of an enemy patrol. If it does, then you already fricked up somewhere along the line, now it’s time to set in an ambush if you have the means, or break contact otherwise.
to be "good" at war is to never be in it or to be at such an overwhelming advantage that all (you) do is just confirm bodies.
Do yall think it's better to get the jump on your enemy with graceful speed or let them come to you as you?
Basically to be a proactive stalking hunter or a idle stationary hunter.
Also the Idea of combat within a building seems awful, you're fighting half of a human silhouette around a corner in shit lighting.
That’s a judgment call you have to make in the moment depending on the knitty gritty of the specific situation. And yes, MOUT is shit. That’s why you always carry more frags than you think you’ll need.
>Do yall think it's better to get the jump on your enemy with graceful speed or let them come to you as you?
It's entirely situational, but in general you want to do both of them if possible. Take advantage of the terrain and depth available to ambush the enemy, attrit him, whenever and wherever possible. Then only face him in a proper fight when you think you've got a good chance at taking him on. Never have a fair fight, if you can avoid it.
>Also the Idea of combat within a building seems awful, you're fighting half of a human silhouette around a corner in shit lighting.
The worst part of it is that you can't really surprise your enemy, since you're going through doorways, so any action is a "fair fight," where you're forced into trading shots with someone else. Might as well get into a knifefight.
That's why doctrinally you either just blow the whole building to pieces, or go in through the walls and roof, using explosives. Always avoid the places where someone expects you to be, where you might have to actually fight them.
In situations where you're forced to "fight fair" such as a doorway, should one approach this with intense vigor with adept speed or slow down and round the doorway methodically in order to tag the first bit of body part thats revealed?
CQB seems like one of those combat environments where it's easy to get plagued with videogame/movie logic rather than a cohesive strategy. I do know you need to be creative but I'm unsure how to quickly ID a target that's crunched up somewhere and what to exactly do when I have a vague understanding where a hoe is at.
>In situations where you're forced to "fight fair" such as a doorway, should one approach this with intense vigor with adept speed or slow down and round the doorway methodically in order to tag the first bit of body part thats revealed?
You should NOT take that fight to begin with. You will never outperform someone who's inside and aiming at a chokepoint like that. You're just signing your own death warrant by going through it. If the enemy inside knows you're coming, the first guys in through the door are going to die.
>but I'm unsure how to quickly ID a target that's crunched up somewhere and what to exactly do when I have a vague understanding where a hoe is at.
You don't.
Someone who's waiting for you to come in will always outperform you. That's why you either always throw a grenade in through the door first (only works if they're in that specific room, and not one room back), or preferably, don't go in through the door at all. Blow a hole through a wall and start tossing in grenades. Breach through a window, or the roof. Set the entire building on fire. Blow it to pieces with direct fire artillery. Whatever it takes to avoid a fair fight with the enemy.
CQB is a shitshow and will always lead to a large amount of casualties, and the reason why it's such a shitshow, is because a CQB environment forces fair fighting. It forces men into shooting at each other, when all of tactics and doctrine is basically built on the idea of trying to have only your own side shoot at the enemy, as much as possible.
Fascinating, good tenants to uphold and consider anon. I appreciate the effort posting.
I guess in the meantime I'll try and find cqb footage to show someone getting out of a disadvantaged position aka a fair fight and doing shit to get into a non fair fight position.
>Someone who’s waiting for you will always win
Not really. Action is always faster than reaction so an aggressive person has a good shot at killing someone who’s just waiting for them to round a corner provided they use proper clearing technique. Happens in training all the time.
War was and will always be an incredibly stupid and horrorific thing because of its ability to erase even the most talented human in a matter of seconds
Remember that scene in the Seven Samurai where the ultra-leet super ninja-samurai that can defeat anyone in a swordfight gets killed by a potshot fired by a bandit with a musket
Yeah
>Creamed by artillery/airstrike
At least 70% of WW2 casualties were from this.
Only about 10% of those who died were shot.
No single person can get good at war by themselves in a way that minimizes the probability of them being killed. That kind of warfare needs the backing of an entire state. The grunts need to rely on the men to their left and their right, good intel, timely logistics, and keen commanders. Obviously, to have any of that, it helps to be a functioning high trust nation state where people feel like taking initiative won't result in them and their families being killed or gulag'd by embarrassed commanders. Failing having this, you can just throw bodies at the problem until you win.
Unless you are unlucky and juarget artyd immediately you start to learn things.
The sound the bullets make when they are shot directly towards you or towards someone else nearbyor just shot at random.
You get better at spotting enemy fire positions.
You stop being frozen in fear at every explosion.
You begin to keep your head calm and think critically in the middle of fire.
You get good at throwing grenades where you really want them to land.
Your aim gets better and you stop shaking and ducking because of explosions near you.
You can start to tell when arty is correcting aim towards your position or if it is something else or if the arty is firing at some other positions nearby.
You learn to use properly more and more equipment so you can switch from rifle to manpads to atgm and be proficient with all.
Still even if you get amazingly good unless you fight in urban combat where it can make a massive difference in open fields arty is a b***h and even the best of the best is just an unlucky shell away from dying like the best of the VDV getting pummeled by a few artillery pieces while ordered to hold an airport during the early war.
Also bad luck is bad luck. Likelandmines and just some random guy that hid inside a bush shooting at you from the side.
Forest combat also you can get quite good and it makes a difference.
Still even the best can't do shit against carpet bombs if you have no AA.
War is now about seeing and not being seen, shooting first and being there or not being there. It boils down how many loses are acceptable because its unavoidable to go unseen forever. The rest is playing chicken until someone comes on top.
semen retention unironically
Combat experience is bullshit, you might live through enough skirmishes to get desensitized to receiving fire and not shitting your pants but whether you live or die is completely RNG.
There's a lot of random luck invovled. Who is good and isn't seems to have more to do with the organization of the unit and the army at large. And there's still a lot of chance involved for the individual.
I was a POG in the US Army during the gwot and helped patch up wounded guys and our biggest causes for surgery for traumatic injuries were motocycle accidents and IEDS, in that order. Shit like appendectomies and cholecystectomies were even more common. Imagine getting appendicitis in the field before modern medicine and transportation.
>How the frick does anyone get "good" at war?
You become an officer and take your job seriously.
Today, zoomer anon found out life is not, in fact, a video game.
become a fighter pilot in a first world country, that's about it really
>don't panic
>be lucky
That's all it boils down to. The secret is that there is no secret.
luck issue
As a single soldier, your best bet is being part of an army that has systems in place to address these threats. You can't practice enough to be able to sense drones, mines or whatever. As an infantry, best you can do is to have good stamina, decent aim and some logic.
Survivorship bias. You can do everything right and still die, but if you didn't, you probably did something right.