Are we really training seriously for the next conventional war? All the signs I see say no.

SPC Erich Guenther — Thu, 06 Oct 2016 13:16:00 -0400

Response by SPC Erich Guenther made Oct 6 at 2016 1:18 PM

SPC Erich Guenther — Thu, 06 Oct 2016 13:18:26 -0400

We have not done a large REFORGER exercise in quite a while. The CBRN folks post on the internet that they are bored in their jobs at the company level and have nothing to do. Have yet to see recent or many post 2000 pictures of troops in level 4 protective gear. It just seems to me if the answer is yes, then the training might not be realistic or else I am reading things wrong.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 6 at 2016 1:25 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 06 Oct 2016 13:25:04 -0400

We need to go back to fighting MIBNs. My Fort Knox CCC was one of the last classes in 2004 to be taught with Warsaw Pact Soviet tactics defense.

Response by CPT Pedro Meza made Oct 6 at 2016 1:28 PM

CPT Pedro Meza — Thu, 06 Oct 2016 13:28:11 -0400

Yes we are.

Response by CPT Jack Durish made Oct 6 at 2016 1:32 PM

CPT Jack Durish — Thu, 06 Oct 2016 13:32:48 -0400

You can bet that the "next" war will be the only one you didn't prepare for

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 6 at 2016 1:47 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 06 Oct 2016 13:47:19 -0400

Russia is pissed off because we are sending troops to Europe on rotational basis we need to have another exercise like we used to back until 1990. That way they won't be tempted to take Poland or the Baltic states. Russia has snap exercises and they are doing everything in their power to weaken NATO. We Won't Get Fooled Again. President Obama has given them the courage to push us around. Reforge AR is necessary again

Response by Cpl Justin Goolsby made Oct 6 at 2016 1:53 PM

Cpl Justin Goolsby — Thu, 06 Oct 2016 13:53:44 -0400

We're always training for the next war. Warriors phase in and out. Yes, peacetime forces involve a lot of busy work... cleaning the barracks... standing in formations... whatever you do on your day to day job. But we're always training so we can be ready at a moments notice to jump into the next conflict. You might not see combat during your enlistment, but you might be responsible for training the junior troops that do see combat. That's why we always put an emphasis on Mission Readiness because if something happens tomorrow, we need to be ready.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 6 at 2016 2:02 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 06 Oct 2016 14:02:52 -0400

Some people say that climate change is the biggest threat to our future but yes we have sequestration. We have little or no spare parts we don't have much money for training and we can't even pay the reserve component for those who travel far because they're out of money before the end of the fiscal year. Yet we have money for planes that can't fly but we don't have spare parts for the planes that do fly. So if we have a next War half the plans will be grounded and the planes that could fly will be too dangerous to fly.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 6 at 2016 2:16 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 06 Oct 2016 14:16:53 -0400

The good thing about the reserve component is now it's finally trained up it's no longer the kind of unit that drinks beerr of the inside of their tank and call it a drill weekend. The reserve component is no longer 'useless' . Most of us have 3 or more deployments and most of us are still in so the Pentagon now knows Reserve component is here to stay and it will be used for the next War to support the active component.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 6 at 2016 2:32 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 06 Oct 2016 14:32:15 -0400

There is a truth in the Army, and that is that you always train to fight the last war.

With that out of the way, I would imagine that the senior leaders are trying to determine what the next war will look like. It is highly unlikely that it will be conventional.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 6 at 2016 3:21 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 06 Oct 2016 15:21:33 -0400

The company I'm in has changed to training METL tasks that are almost all oriented towards conventional war.

Response by LTC Jason Mackay made Oct 6 at 2016 4:00 PM

LTC Jason Mackay — Thu, 06 Oct 2016 16:00:05 -0400

If you look at recent statements from the CSA, that is where we are returning. The Army is like a huge ship. It turns a few degrees at a time.

The Army has been back to decisive action CTC rotations since about 2012 or so.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 6 at 2016 4:38 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 06 Oct 2016 16:38:40 -0400

Define "conventional" war. Do you mean two near-tier states competing over large fronts trying to gain territory and footholds with established FEBA and FLOTs? I doubt we will see that again. I expect future conflicts will be similar to what we have experienced over the last 15 years. semi-organized insurgent groups with scattered pockets of held territories; probably partially dependent on sponsorship of local warlord or tribal leaders that are sympathetic to the cause.

Since you posted this in CBRN, are you thinking CBRN agents? I think that large scale use like what was done in WW1, won't occur. I would expect small-scale poorly defined attacks, probably with sub-standard delivery systems and outdated CBRN agent stores. We are already seeing this kind of attack in Syria and ISIL-controlled areas in Iraq.

I am not saying that we should not improve our CBRN defense readiness. I think there is a lot of room to increase our proficiency there.

On the other hand, one just has to look at Eastern Europe and Russian posturing to think that maybe there is a need to at least touch on a more conventional war approach.

This may already be doctrine, but I think each major command should focus on training for the most likely "flavor" of war in their region, but still consider alternative plans.

Response by SSG Mark Franzen made Oct 6 at 2016 5:21 PM

SSG Mark Franzen — Thu, 06 Oct 2016 17:21:01 -0400

I trained for 16.5 years and Every day you didn't if you were Going to Combat or Not so you
Keep yourself in check by being fit to Fight your Country. SSG MARK FRANZEN US ARMY

Response by SGT Philip Roncari made Oct 6 at 2016 6:28 PM

SGT Philip Roncari — Thu, 06 Oct 2016 18:28:51 -0400

I think this is funny because in my case when I enlisted in 1965 the 4th Div.was being reactivated we trained for almost a year to deploy to Germany,even were issued the green cold weather green wool uniforms,snowpack boots the whole enchilada,but alas lo and behold we were sent to sunny,hot Vietnam,so I would think the Military has to train for a variety theaters.

Response by SPC Erich Guenther made Oct 6 at 2016 7:02 PM

SPC Erich Guenther — Thu, 06 Oct 2016 19:02:00 -0400

And now the Russians are threatening to shoot down our aircraft if we bomb the wrong targets in Syria. After White House again leaked air strike information it should not be leaking to the public.

https://gma.yahoo.com/russia-warns-us-not-intervene-syria-threatens-shoot-181512495--abc-news-topstories.html

Russia Warns US Not to Intervene in Syria, Threatens to Shoot Down Any Airstrike Attempts

Russia has warned the United States not to intervene militarily in Syria against forces loyal to President Bashar al-Assad, threatening that it may shoot down any aircraft attempting to launch strikes. In a bluntly worded statement, a spokesman for Russia’s defense ministry warned that Russia and the Syrian government had deployed sufficient air defenses to block any potential attacks. It follows rumbling in Washington that the White House may...

Response by SFC George Smith made Oct 6 at 2016 7:43 PM

SFC George Smith — Thu, 06 Oct 2016 19:43:48 -0400

No matter how much you train you are never prepared ... and the best they can do it train for the last one they fought... on the conventional side...

Response by MSgt James Mullis made Oct 7 at 2016 9:47 AM

MSgt James Mullis — Fri, 07 Oct 2016 09:47:45 -0400

We always train for the last war and are surprised when the next is completely different. I wonder what the battlefield would look like if we had a war that starts with a region encompassing EMP?

Response by SSG Jeffrey Clonch made Oct 7 at 2016 10:54 AM

SSG Jeffrey Clonch — Fri, 07 Oct 2016 10:54:34 -0400

Training should include conventional and unconventional training. Future enemies are unknown and tactics will remain hidden. As far as when I left, you can only train your soldiers from the experiences you had. The 7-8 was always and may always be one of the best for learning your battle drills. Now they have FM 3-21.8, which has a more complicated version of how to do your battle drills, yet don't lay them out in a simple format that can be taught to the more uneducated folks. The battle drills are simple, easy to use and if your smart can be applied to almost any situation by changing some of the words. The key focuses that you want to train for is speed, surprise and violence of action. Depending on what you do, you may not be involved in the unconventional part. They have other units that perform these actions; such as, Psych Ops or Spec Ops. The ideal behind this is in the long run to reduce the amount of casualties on both sides. This is very important to the American government because this will reduce the amount of funding dispersed to Medically Retired Veterans.

Last if they aren't training for everything they are training wrong. Our units will become complacent and someone will find the opportunity to strike at our weakest spots. I have seen in happen in Iraq multiple times. The enemy sits and they watch. They strategize the details of how we are going to be predictable.

So as CPT Jack Durish said the next war will be the one you didn't prepare for is 100% correct. The enemy knows us before we will ever know them.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 7 at 2016 1:49 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 07 Oct 2016 13:49:34 -0400

We train for whatever type of war could possibly happen. I'll give you a hint though. We're never fully prepared when something does kick off. We are always a step behind at the beginning. It's the nature of the beast.

Also side note, the technology will change every single war based on the biggest threat from that particular war. Look it up. I bet you if the next war involved large scale use of chemical warfare, our current gear will be completely different by war's end.

Response by SFC Marcus Belt made Oct 7 at 2016 10:10 PM

SFC Marcus Belt — Fri, 07 Oct 2016 22:10:16 -0400

How conventional are we talking? Look at the US Military's current capabilities gaps...that's where the next fight will start. Cyber? Probably. Economic? Definitely. Information? Yep, that too.

There are domains where the various elements of DIME become difficult, perhaps impossible for the US to wield offensively because of the nature of our republic and its various instruments.

Response by 1LT William Clardy made Oct 9 at 2016 9:40 AM

1LT William Clardy — Sun, 09 Oct 2016 09:40:43 -0400

I have a simple, albeit only semi-relevant, metric for how seriously a unit is training (or otherwise preparing) for any conflict: How many 4-day weekends have you had this year versus how many 1-day weekends?

Response by CW3 Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 9 at 2016 10:36 AM

CW3 Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 09 Oct 2016 10:36:21 -0400

War is ever evolving. No one standard will ever prepare you for all the complexities. With this thought, we train the best way we know how to. The best training comes from those who have seen, fought and witnessed war first-hand. Doctrine, guidelines and practices are general baselines used to build a certain skill-set within an individual and prepare their mind and body to respond to an unplanned event (Battle Drill). Outside the textual confines of printed expectancies exists reality. The truth is, every war, conflict and battle will always remain uncertain until the men and women who oppose such a threat engage the opposition. This truth is due to one simple fact; we all have the ability to choose, act and respond individually and independently. Choice is everything.

Focus on the twenty-five meter target, learn, problem-solve and continually war game strategies of past historical accounts.

In the end, the knowledge you have doesn't belong to you, it belongs to your Soldiers. So be sure to share that knowledge--because that's where effective training comes from.

Response by SFC Marcus Lewis made Oct 9 at 2016 11:09 AM

SFC Marcus Lewis — Sun, 09 Oct 2016 11:09:10 -0400

No because by the time all data & AAR's are calculated it takes TRADOC 3 years to implement the new training.

Response by Sgt Wayne Wood made Oct 9 at 2016 4:33 PM

Sgt Wayne Wood — Sun, 09 Oct 2016 16:33:55 -0400

we never train for the next war. we only train for that last (previous) war.

Response by PVT Mark Brown made Oct 10 at 2016 1:35 AM

PVT Mark Brown — Mon, 10 Oct 2016 01:35:44 -0400

I am keeping prepared, even at 68 years of age. I have the fire power both weapons and ammunition along with bug out bags and subsistence preparations. Bring it on, and you know they will, sooner than later.

Response by CPL Kevin Wheeler made Oct 12 at 2016 8:05 AM

CPL Kevin Wheeler — Wed, 12 Oct 2016 08:05:58 -0400

SFC I'd say no we are not. I think the next war is gonna be right here at home.

Response by PO1 Roger Waddle made Oct 12 at 2016 8:20 AM

PO1 Roger Waddle — Wed, 12 Oct 2016 08:20:34 -0400

Warfare as we know it has changed forever the best course of action IMO would be cross trains and be even more flexible

Response by PFC Stephen Eric Serati made Oct 12 at 2016 9:23 AM

PFC Stephen Eric Serati — Wed, 12 Oct 2016 09:23:00 -0400

It won't be a conventional war.

Response by CWO2 Shelby DuBois made Oct 12 at 2016 10:15 AM

CWO2 Shelby DuBois — Wed, 12 Oct 2016 10:15:18 -0400

After Viet Nam we had a draw down of manpower and budgets. Half of Congress was cowtowing to beligerent, anit-military and anti-American college students (sound familiar?). We had a gas crisis...long lines at the pumps, gas stations closed or imposed limits on gallons...(some used last number of your license plate to dictate whether you were able to buy gas on odd or even days.) Our DOD was impotent and even the military couldn't get gas. Our fighter squadrons went to a four day work/fly week...so any gas we did have would go to the C130's for inflight refueling and cargo missions. Tank tactics were taught on golf carts. Deployments were longer, ships out to sea longer, parts were breaking and harder to get and even harder to pay for. Pay was lousy and base housing was, in a lot of places, rat traps. Anybody remember enlisted housing at El Toro? History repeats itself...so I'd say no...we are not training for the next one. We are marking time. Russia knows it, China knows it and of course, Iran knows it. So we have a few flashy weapon systems to show the public. THe only ship in the Navy has right now as far as the public is concerned is the Zumwalt. The Air Force is still fighting over mothballing the A10. The Marines are worried about what to call the 'cockpit' in the next generation of fighters.
And the public is leaning towards another socialist leaning, UN loving, One World zealot. So...No.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 12 at 2016 10:59 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 12 Oct 2016 10:59:06 -0400

Potential adversaries know that we struggle in fights where it is a game of battlefield wack a mole. They saw it in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan. That type of fight is more likely than the planned Cold War meet them at the Fulda Gap type fight.
As a nation our people have shown they are casualty adverse going back even to WWII. They will demand and expect a quick victory as opposed to a protracted slug fest involving high casualities with little to no gain.
Our national industrial base required for a major fight is no longer there to quickly build and repair ships, aircraft, vehicles and other implements of war that will be needed.
Military manpower in a major fight will be an issue as the Regulars, Reserves and Guard warfighters will need replacements not seen since Vietnam, Korea or WWII. The draft would have to come into play and not too many of our young folks and their families would want to play that game.
So, if by continuing to train for wack a mole fights is what is happening than that is probably the best bet.

Response by TSgt James Carson made Oct 12 at 2016 2:23 PM

TSgt James Carson — Wed, 12 Oct 2016 14:23:16 -0400

Too bad you are still often training for the last war and new legal matters when fighting these wars. Politics are such a big part of this as well. REMEMBER! You are a tool and cannon fodder. To think differantly is folly. Remember how you felt after buying a car from that used car salesperson. Well be ready for the real world when you complete twenty years of service. You'll see all was just a lie or you will skip down the yellow brick road and be happy.

Response by SGT Ronald Audas made Oct 12 at 2016 4:21 PM

SGT Ronald Audas — Wed, 12 Oct 2016 16:21:07 -0400

Many of us from the Vietnam era ( I include Korea in the era ) are old and beatup.Military technology has left us long ago.But...be assured that whether conventional or unconventional,we will stand our ground as best we can.Pretty sure the next engagement will be different and not very pretty.Regardless of your degree of trainning,2 things will remain the same.The Government calling the shots and not being able to tell the enemy from your friend.Once again,we will have to fight with 1 hand behind our back.

Response by GySgt Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 12 at 2016 5:43 PM

GySgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 12 Oct 2016 17:43:30 -0400

As long as you are training to shoot and move, pushing yourself physically and mentally, you are preparing. We are just the grunts in the effort, leave the winning of hearts and minds to the politicians.

Response by MSgt James "Buck" Buchanan made Oct 12 at 2016 7:09 PM

MSgt James "Buck" Buchanan — Wed, 12 Oct 2016 19:09:40 -0400

Been out over 20 years, but my impression is that there is no "outside the box" thinking when it comes to training for war. We currently face an enemy who has no scruples, and realizes that our military commitment is along the lines of treating people with Christian humanity, that is, "love your neighbor", "love your enemy". While I understand and try to live by these principles, the radicals see them as a sign of weakness and will always try to exploit them. We must train to fight fire with fire, and then love the enemy as he rehabilitates after being conquered.

Response by GySgt Charles O'Connell made Oct 12 at 2016 7:14 PM

GySgt Charles O'Connell — Wed, 12 Oct 2016 19:14:45 -0400

The focus of training should be the conduct of military operations in different environments/geographic locations, i.e. deserts, mountains, plains, jungles, urban centers,... And to some extent the various exercises that take place either in the U.S., or joint operations with NATO members covers these scenarios. What I've seen, internally and externally, is the loss of focus on why we have the Armed Forces. I can tell you, in my opinion what they're not for: 1. They are not peace keepers, 2. They are not humanitarian relief workers, 3. They are not an laboratory for social engineering. They are our national defence.

Response by SSG Wayne Wood made Oct 12 at 2016 9:14 PM

SSG Wayne Wood — Wed, 12 Oct 2016 21:14:21 -0400

A major obstacle to being fully prepared for ANY war is overcoming the "Peace Dividend" mentality that always accompanies "peacetime." When the gurus in DC talk of cutting "fat and waste" expect to lose a leg. When I first came in during the "Cold War" we had almost half a million troops in Western Europe and were considered little more than a speed bump for the "Red Horde." Now we are talking rotating brigades - ooooooooh I imagine Putey-Poot is shaking in his boots.

First step IMHO is to field an adequately sized and armed force. Second, is to ensure those troops are trained to high standards and KNOW their jobs. As Norman Schwarzkopf said, the best plan goes down the tubes the moment the first shot is fired - then it is up to the small unit leaders and PFC on the ground who takes charge when there's no one else who wins battles and wars. The American soldier (by that I mean ALL branches) has always shown an extraordinary ability to adapt and overcome in the worst of circumstances.

Don't get me wrong, our leaders and gurus NEED to continue planning for contingencies around the globe - I remember when XVIII Airborne Corps hosted Gallant Knight 82 planning for a possible Soviet invasion and takeover of the Gulf through Iraq and Saudi Arabia in Feb 82; it turned out to be prep for what became known as Operation Desert Shield in 1991; which led to Desert Storm. But all the planning in the world is no good if you don't have enough bodies or bullets and those bodies don't know how to hit the target.

Until we change the current attitudes of the civilian leadership toward defense - more than just lip service - it's putting a Band-Aid on a bullet hole at best and probably peeing in the wind. I keep hoping one day DC will learn it's cheaper in the long run to MAINTAIN a strong military than to constantly tear down and have to rebuild it over again every war. Both in money and in blood.

Response by SPC Byron Skinner made Oct 12 at 2016 9:47 PM

SPC Byron Skinner — Wed, 12 Oct 2016 21:47:01 -0400

Sp4 Byron Skinner. The question is what is conventional war. Currently there is only one country that can field 10,000 Main Battle Tanks, 3,000 Combat Air Craft, 308 Fighting Ships. The United States. You can combine all of the forces of Russian and China and there is little chance they could in what I think you are referring as a conventional setting do anything other then to be crushed. The days of massed Armies squaring off like Germany and the Soviet Union are history. Conventional Warfare now is none state insurgency. The US has yet to figure out a way to fight them and still maintain or moral principles. This is the most effective weapon an insurgent has. If the US was to sacrifice its moro standing we could wins Syrian type conflict The Russian Have show how weak there military is. They go and leave nothin' but memories but don't have the military to close the deal. Winning a war is more what you do after the killing. To verify this just look at what the Soviet Eastern Europe to the US/France/Britain's occupied areas of Germany. The US's secret in a period of three years the US made over 50,000 M-4 Sherman Tanks, production of M-4's was stopped before the invasion of Western Europe at Normandy. The US made more tanks in three years more then all the rest of the countries of the world made in the 20th. Century.

Response by LCpl Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 12 at 2016 11:39 PM

LCpl Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 12 Oct 2016 23:39:05 -0400

I see the recent Russian "encroachment" on neighbors, the Peacekeeping responsibilities, the presence of the US like we have now continuing to be our "front" so to speak. Airpower, drones and ships will fight the next "War" type of front with the military forces standing by after the fact and being mission based to accomplish strategic targeting. I don't believe we will have a battlefield type of war again. Too many blurred lines politically within countries and in our own for that matter. We have to maintain the Armed Forces because the types of situations I mention above will be many and will require 1000 "advisors" ( always loved that word) 3000 "advisors" there, 2000 "advisors" over there, etc, etc

Response by SSgt Robert Rowland made Oct 13 at 2016 4:46 AM

SSgt Robert Rowland — Thu, 13 Oct 2016 04:46:26 -0400

Just like Nam and Beirut the politicians keep us on a short leash to play fair make nice and get killed and lose the war. Disgusted.

Response by SSgt Robert Rowland made Oct 13 at 2016 4:50 AM

SSgt Robert Rowland — Thu, 13 Oct 2016 04:50:17 -0400

Just like in Nam and Beirut the politicians keep us on a short leash to play fair and make nice. Meanwhile peasant guerrillas are shooting at our destroyers with Exocets. Putin says his Air Force will shoot to kill with no warning. Sexual harassment class tonight after duty shift.

Response by SFC Antoine Hines made Oct 13 at 2016 6:35 AM

SFC Antoine Hines — Thu, 13 Oct 2016 06:35:01 -0400

Presently....of course not, this administration has taken the military as a social experiment and not as the true fighting force that it should be.

Response by TSgt Lars Eilenfeld made Oct 13 at 2016 3:03 PM

TSgt Lars Eilenfeld — Thu, 13 Oct 2016 15:03:01 -0400

Nope, we're training to apologize and be more culturally sensitive like good ol barry

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 24 at 2016 8:45 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 24 Oct 2016 20:45:49 -0400

Come back in, get promoted to a position where you can make a difference, do work.

Response by Sgt William Straub Jr. made Oct 25 at 2016 9:41 AM

Sgt William Straub Jr. — Tue, 25 Oct 2016 09:41:52 -0400

No, in my honest opinion, the chances for a world wide conventional war that doesn't go nuclear are slim. We need to be more concerned with the unconventional conflict, against un-uniformed but cohesive opponents. ISIS, ISIL, Boko Haram, and the like. They have an extremely large advantage over our troops in the simple fact they have no moral compass. No hesitation in using children as weapons, no hesitation in using innocent civilians as shields, and no hesitation in using shelters such as Churches, Historical Building, and the like as shields. Until and or unless we decided to use tactics that are less concerned with collateral damage, we will always be hand cuffed. I hate to sound like a vicious person, but when you let your moral high ground take control of your battle choices, you play right into the hands of your enemy. VC learned that years ago. A close friend of mine was a grunt in Viet Nam, while doing a patrol through one of the villages, a child came towards his squad ostensibly wanting a candy bar. From about 30 meters out one of the squad saw the wire connecting the kids hand to the grenade on his back. Shot the kid in the leg, luckily when he fell the wire hadn't had enough pull to remove the pin from the grenade. Kid lost a leg, but no GI's were killed. This type of scenario played out all over the country. As long as US troops hold all life as important, we are at a disadvantage. I don't have any answers, but I do believe that until the possibility of collateral damage is put on the back burner, we will have problems. I don't know if there is any training for this.

Response by Cpl Bernard Bates made Nov 9 at 2020 12:26 AM

Cpl Bernard Bates — Mon, 09 Nov 2020 00:26:15 -0500

I think the next war will be knocking satellites out in space and long range Missle attacks. The side that looks like they will lose will probably use nuclear warheads on their missles. Also cyber attacks will also be used to knock out our electronics. I suspect we will be using an arsenal of weapons we haven't heard of yet. Semper Fi.