1
/
of
1
ReadCycle
Discussions on Training and Employing Light Infantry
Discussions on Training and Employing Light Infantry
Regular price
$2.99 USD
Regular price
Sale price
$2.99 USD
Shipping calculated at checkout.
Quantity
Couldn't load pickup availability
In 1983, General John A. Wickham, Chief of Staff of the Army, announced the decision to field one or more new light infantry divisions in the Regular Army force structure in order to improve the nation's capability for strategic response world-wide. Since then, the questions of light force composition and employment have occupied a central place in the wide ranging discussions which were generated by General Wickham's decision. Historical studies, analyses, wargames, simulations, and seminars have been conducted to create and refine the structure and doctrine of the new light forces. Seemingly, no stone has been left unturned in the effort to draw the right conclusions on controversial questions. Yet, in at least one regard, significant information available from a valuable source has not been fully tapped. That source is the military experience of our allies.
In this regard, the interviews of the two British colonels contained in this report and addressing the subject of light infantry come at a most opportune time. Since World War II, no other nation can match the experience of Great Britain in terms of military intervention in low-intensity contingency operations utilizing light forces. Indeed, scrutiny of these British operations is necessary; it can only produce new, enlightening perspectives on how to train, equip, and employ American light infantry.
Colonel Neville Pughe of the British Army Parachute Regiment and Colonel Andrew Whitehead of the 3 Commando Brigade, Royal Marines, share their individual viewpoints on light infantry in the interviews which follow. Their viewpoints truly are unique. The concepts and ideas which these distinguished soldiers express may strike with a note of unfamiliarity among U.S. officers, but also with a note of truth. At the core of their comments is the notion that light infantry is a state of mind more than it is a question of equipment, mobility, structure, or capability. Being light for them does not necessarily mean having lightweight equipment and austere organization. Instead, it is a mental approach toward the battlefield, an attitude which is characterized by flexibility, adaptability, imagination, and knowing how to use terrain. If these ideas at first seem new or different, at the very least they are profitable for causing one to devote fresh thought to the meaning and purpose of light infantry.
The Combat Studies Institute is grateful to COL Pughe and COL Whitehead for their cooperation in the publication of these interviews. When they were interviewed, there was no stated intention at the time to make their comments more widely available. It should be noted, however, that the views which they express are theirs alone and in no way represent the British Army, Royal Marines, or British Government.
In this regard, the interviews of the two British colonels contained in this report and addressing the subject of light infantry come at a most opportune time. Since World War II, no other nation can match the experience of Great Britain in terms of military intervention in low-intensity contingency operations utilizing light forces. Indeed, scrutiny of these British operations is necessary; it can only produce new, enlightening perspectives on how to train, equip, and employ American light infantry.
Colonel Neville Pughe of the British Army Parachute Regiment and Colonel Andrew Whitehead of the 3 Commando Brigade, Royal Marines, share their individual viewpoints on light infantry in the interviews which follow. Their viewpoints truly are unique. The concepts and ideas which these distinguished soldiers express may strike with a note of unfamiliarity among U.S. officers, but also with a note of truth. At the core of their comments is the notion that light infantry is a state of mind more than it is a question of equipment, mobility, structure, or capability. Being light for them does not necessarily mean having lightweight equipment and austere organization. Instead, it is a mental approach toward the battlefield, an attitude which is characterized by flexibility, adaptability, imagination, and knowing how to use terrain. If these ideas at first seem new or different, at the very least they are profitable for causing one to devote fresh thought to the meaning and purpose of light infantry.
The Combat Studies Institute is grateful to COL Pughe and COL Whitehead for their cooperation in the publication of these interviews. When they were interviewed, there was no stated intention at the time to make their comments more widely available. It should be noted, however, that the views which they express are theirs alone and in no way represent the British Army, Royal Marines, or British Government.
Share
