Category Archives: Troops

Better than the M4?

Headshots at 300 meters standing with an unzeroed bullpup? An instructive video on Israel’s latest automatic infantry assualt rifle, the Tavor-built TAR-21.

Via Defense Tech

Humiliation

Well, the Brit captives are home, after prostrating themselves at the feet of the pirates who took them, writing letters about their guilt and, in general, humiliating their country, their service and the West in general. The official line is that it didn’t matter, but I think anyone watching them knows that it does. Some will call this a victory. Mighty hollow one. At least they’re alive, which cannot be assuredly said of the three missing Israeli soliders held by Hamas and Hez, who have not made any similar public mea culpa. The MSM ignores them, of course. They would be released immediately if Hamas’s and Hez’s Iranian masters said the word. But they haven’t and probably won’t.

Lock and load

This war-movie standard phrase has always annoyed me. It even showed up in "Reluctant Lieutenant," a book I’ve been reading, purporting to have been used by sergeants on Basic Training firing ranges at Fort Dix, NJ in 1967. Bothers me, I say, because it’s not obvious to me how one could lock first and then load. But loading first and then locking the rifle’s bolt forward makes sense.

Indeed, the original order was to load and lock and it comes from the M-1 Garand Manual here, the standard rifle of the second world war. But Wikipedia says lock and load also makes sense in terms of locking the bolt back before loading the round into the chamber. In any case, they attribute the current usage to John Wayne in the movie "Sands of Iwo Jima" in 1949. So I suppose it could have been used that way at Dix eighteen years later, and ever since.

Name, rank and serial number?

Well, not anymore…

"The real priority is the safety of the prisoners themselves. Admiral Sir Alan West, former head of the [Royal] Navy, said this week: ‘Our guidance to anyone in that position would be to say what they want you to say.  ‘Don’t tell them secrets, clearly, but if they tell you "Say this", well if that’s going to get you out, then do it. It means absolutely nothing, what they say, to be honest.’"

I suppose it does mean something to someone, but probably only those already convinced of whatever the Iranian line is.

Captured Brits solution

Op-For points out that thanks to Parliament, Britain is in no position to start a war with anyone, not even Iran, and even if they were it would be amazing if they’d go to war openly over the troop hostage taking. But why do it openly, asks Peter Boston, a commentor at the Belmont Club:

"Were I calling the shots for the Brits I would sink a patrolling Iranian submarine or two. Quietly and without pubilc announcement. Although we wouldn’t hear about it for another 50 years or so I imagine such an event would create a major confidence crisis in top Iranian circles and start destructive internal recriminations flying around."

Sounds like a winner to me. Better, certainly, than bringing in Jimmy Carter for advice. Hopefully, they’ll be released like the last group before some Iranian sailors lose their lives. 

Doing what Iran does best

Why, taking hostages of course. A roundup at Pajamas Media for those following along at home.

Information war surrender

Strange, really, how the U.S. military capitulates when it comes to trying to influence the media war. I guess they expect to lose with the MSM and so they refuse to try to win. But that’s really pretty stupid. It may please them to, as Michael Yon notes, decline to set up press centers for the benefit of reporters who need reliable Internet and satellite connections, but they are cutting off their own noses.

"Billions of dollars are spent on the war each month, millions of dollars fly around here like sparrows, yet there are no designated places for journalists? While so many soldiers and their families shout for coverage from Afghanistan (remember that place?) and Iraq, I can sometimes be found from midnight to sunrise sitting outside, trying to transmit photos through a wireless network that only works sometimes."

Much is being made in the blogosphere of Gen. Vincent K. Brooks’ apparent threat to kick Yon out of Iraq. I suspect that has less to do with what he writes than his attitude combined with his former status as an NCO trigger-puller. But he also doesn’t fail to paint pictures of the ubiquitous PX with its incongruous multitude of flat-screen TVs, and the steak-and-lobster, cake-and-cookie mess halls which the brass cannot fail to dislike having publicized. It’s supposed to be all about guns-and-glory, not how many discounted components you can buy for your stereo or camera. As Yon’s reporting illustrates, it’s really about both. And it isn’t new. It was like that in Viet Nam, too. But at least there the military tried, and sometimes successfully did, influence MSM coverage.