There are a lot of weird experimental products in the world of Military Publishing…there’s no other subject for adults where professional volumes are published in the same format as children’s picture books where every other page is a full page image so that when you hold it in your hands you always have 50% picture/50% text, and yet that’s exactly how military atlas’s are formatted.
Will definitely get the book. Though as a young new Infantry Officer with 3rd Battalion 2nd regiment 2 MarDiv we began learning how to implement a mobile defense in depth. Just the bits provided and with only 38 Marines you would want to engage the enemy in ever increasing volumes of fire. What do I have at the company level and the battalion level. For sure we would staggered out fighting positions and not be static at all. Hopefully the terrain would support us driving the amor and infantry into a canalized postion. Maybe we kill them enough to stop their advance or maybe start to displace one fire team at a time, giving some ground but buying time. If we are the pointy end of the force spear attriting the advance to weaken it only helps the main force. Have not read the spoiler so wish me luck when I get the book and the tactical problem!
My USMC LAI/LAR unit took friendly fire from the USAF on movement to Kuwait International Airport. The Iraqi defense of the Kuwait city airport was said to have been conducted by some of the Iraqi’s best troops.
Ya the second mission you actually have to look at the map and mentally calculate how far the distances are.
I'd just been out for a hike, so I thought "3 clicks at night vs. a hot landing against potential opposition? That's seems an obvious choice"... but that was just my thought process, didn't have an prior education or experience in anything of the sort
My first run I tried to game it and very quickly died. I figured the quote about simple plans was foreshadow and usually in games you are rewarded for personal initiative. I chose forward defense and personally scouted. Died.
Second run I tried to choose sound decisions. Slope defense made sense to me. Artillery is a bitch. The ambush seemed risky. Even if nothing went terribly wrong, I'd have to successfully plug 4 gaps. Any mistakes and armor would get through. I made good calls. Did not search for Piper, kept the OP etc. got a bad rng and ended pyhric.
I then figured the right approach must be ambush and spent 3 hrs trying to make that work until it didn't. On these runs I did make bad which curbed my god of war complex.
Overall when I wasn't gaming I consistently made solid calls. In retrospect, I once did some reading on an Irish un Peace keeping unit that got fucked up real bad in Africa. They faced overwhelming odds and eventually were forced to surrender simply becayse they ran out of ammo. My decisions were based on the lessons I learned from that. Even when you don't have forces to spare, protect flanks. Défenses must be built, even if troops are exhausted. Dead men rest forever.
I agree that this novel was excellent. I learned a lot from it. I greatly appreciated the Arab forces fighting well. The worst lesson Americans have learned is that Arabs don't fight well.
While objectively true, this doesn't mean you can count on your opponent fucking up. it is a horrible idea to make military decisions on the assumption your enemy will make bad decisions. Like in chess, unless you are utterly fucked and have no choice, if you see that your opponent can counter your move, you don't play it. Period. This lesson pops up again and again in military history. In Ukraine, Russia has consistently been retarded. The assumption they will be retarded in a particular engagement has cost tens of thousands of Ukrainian lives, notably in the counteroffensive but in many other operations as well.
I think most right wing analysis of an American civil war suffers from this blunder as well. The libs are consistently retarded. There is a belief that in a conflict they will stay retarded. This is a very dangerous assumption. A lot of the stratagiws talked about by the right rely on left wing america acting retardedly. Its a factor to be considered, but many of the war plans RELY on the libs being retarded which is a horribly assumption. I could expand but the comment is already long.
Thank you for the recommendation. I just discovered your substack. Its excellent.
I bought and read the book when it first came out years ago. As a former fighter pilot who generally thinks he is gifted at all forms of warfare, I made decisions in that book where I died quickly and often. I kept at it until I “learned” and was finally able to achieve mission success. I thought it was a tremendous teaching tool, so much so that when I cull my library, I never get rid of that book. I keep thinking I’ll need it during the next civil war or the next rebellion against the Regime.
Overall I thought the book was quite interesting. I have one outright complaint that choosing the foward slope defense makes you do other dumb stuff like not setting up OPs or conducting patrols. With those in place and the enemy recon neutralized the foward slope might have worked, or at least worked better. Reverse slope is probably still a better idea though. There are a few gotcha moments too, like when the Hinds kill everyone when you decide to surrender, really pushing the Americans fight to the death narrative.
Having read Armies of Sand last year I do have to seriously question the ability of any Arab army, either now or when this was written, to conduct an attack like this. No one wants to underestimate their enemies, but the air assault, aggressive recon, and use of laser guided artillery via a VERY long range OP are not consistent with how conventional Arab armies have fought in the past. What does seem consistent is their attempt to drive straight at the American positions and hope to overwhelm them with numbers.
All in all a good book and I look foward To reading those authors other books.
3 lost 3 quarters of my command barley holding on until the cavalry came.
Good training exercise, wish I had kept going until I "won" on my own.
Im extra annoyed because when I got sniped I actually thought I was sending Piper on a patrol and tbh I would have been fine with that baskettballer getting plugged in the desert.
I will say I have read Clausewitz and this mindfucked me hard because he emphasizes aggressive action and taking personal risks constantly ended up getting killed alot because of an attack mindset.
Nice book review! I was inspired to find the pdf and give it a quick skim.
Overall I think I agree with you- I I came away thinking that Sergeant Piper, and really all of the regular troops, are a bunch of whining liars. Never listen to them, they have no sense of strategy or what's necessary. They just want to whine and slack off. Ignore their complains and force them to do the necessary work. Also, send them off to die while protecting yourself- your life, as the commanding officer, is worth more than the life of a mere enlisted man.
I don't know how I feel about that, overall. But I guess it works as a west-point instruction manual for newly minted lieutenants.
What a fascinating review of material (as a girl…not a gear head 😂) I wouldn’t normally have interest in. Not going to venture an attempt at it because I’d likely die horribly along with my compatriots so I’ll leave it to my imagination 😎 Still is a really interesting concept of a book!
Will definitely get the book. Though as a young new Infantry Officer with 3rd Battalion 2nd regiment 2 MarDiv we began learning how to implement a mobile defense in depth. Just the bits provided and with only 38 Marines you would want to engage the enemy in ever increasing volumes of fire. What do I have at the company level and the battalion level. For sure we would staggered out fighting positions and not be static at all. Hopefully the terrain would support us driving the amor and infantry into a canalized postion. Maybe we kill them enough to stop their advance or maybe start to displace one fire team at a time, giving some ground but buying time. If we are the pointy end of the force spear attriting the advance to weaken it only helps the main force. Have not read the spoiler so wish me luck when I get the book and the tactical problem!
Do update us what you think when you get to it!
I'd comment on your plan, but don't want to spoil anything either way.
My USMC LAI/LAR unit took friendly fire from the USAF on movement to Kuwait International Airport. The Iraqi defense of the Kuwait city airport was said to have been conducted by some of the Iraqi’s best troops.
That was great! Awesome recommendation.
Just stayed up 7h tracing through the major paths.
Died 2x, once in the 1st, once in the 2nd half.
SPOILERS:
Just
leaving
space.
...
Didn't want to disperse my firepower & my position got scouted by the airborne infiltrators.
Then wanted speed more than stealth & chose the wrong LZ.
Ya the second mission you actually have to look at the map and mentally calculate how far the distances are.
I'd just been out for a hike, so I thought "3 clicks at night vs. a hot landing against potential opposition? That's seems an obvious choice"... but that was just my thought process, didn't have an prior education or experience in anything of the sort
No put yourself at the top of the mountains during winter, sleeping in the snow and getting shot at.
PS to my last post that time amd place at 3/2 was in winter of 1979. Iran was on the table….
Battle of Ortona, eh? Have you ever been to your national cemetery there?
My first run I tried to game it and very quickly died. I figured the quote about simple plans was foreshadow and usually in games you are rewarded for personal initiative. I chose forward defense and personally scouted. Died.
Second run I tried to choose sound decisions. Slope defense made sense to me. Artillery is a bitch. The ambush seemed risky. Even if nothing went terribly wrong, I'd have to successfully plug 4 gaps. Any mistakes and armor would get through. I made good calls. Did not search for Piper, kept the OP etc. got a bad rng and ended pyhric.
I then figured the right approach must be ambush and spent 3 hrs trying to make that work until it didn't. On these runs I did make bad which curbed my god of war complex.
Overall when I wasn't gaming I consistently made solid calls. In retrospect, I once did some reading on an Irish un Peace keeping unit that got fucked up real bad in Africa. They faced overwhelming odds and eventually were forced to surrender simply becayse they ran out of ammo. My decisions were based on the lessons I learned from that. Even when you don't have forces to spare, protect flanks. Défenses must be built, even if troops are exhausted. Dead men rest forever.
I agree that this novel was excellent. I learned a lot from it. I greatly appreciated the Arab forces fighting well. The worst lesson Americans have learned is that Arabs don't fight well.
While objectively true, this doesn't mean you can count on your opponent fucking up. it is a horrible idea to make military decisions on the assumption your enemy will make bad decisions. Like in chess, unless you are utterly fucked and have no choice, if you see that your opponent can counter your move, you don't play it. Period. This lesson pops up again and again in military history. In Ukraine, Russia has consistently been retarded. The assumption they will be retarded in a particular engagement has cost tens of thousands of Ukrainian lives, notably in the counteroffensive but in many other operations as well.
I think most right wing analysis of an American civil war suffers from this blunder as well. The libs are consistently retarded. There is a belief that in a conflict they will stay retarded. This is a very dangerous assumption. A lot of the stratagiws talked about by the right rely on left wing america acting retardedly. Its a factor to be considered, but many of the war plans RELY on the libs being retarded which is a horribly assumption. I could expand but the comment is already long.
Thank you for the recommendation. I just discovered your substack. Its excellent.
I bought and read the book when it first came out years ago. As a former fighter pilot who generally thinks he is gifted at all forms of warfare, I made decisions in that book where I died quickly and often. I kept at it until I “learned” and was finally able to achieve mission success. I thought it was a tremendous teaching tool, so much so that when I cull my library, I never get rid of that book. I keep thinking I’ll need it during the next civil war or the next rebellion against the Regime.
Overall I thought the book was quite interesting. I have one outright complaint that choosing the foward slope defense makes you do other dumb stuff like not setting up OPs or conducting patrols. With those in place and the enemy recon neutralized the foward slope might have worked, or at least worked better. Reverse slope is probably still a better idea though. There are a few gotcha moments too, like when the Hinds kill everyone when you decide to surrender, really pushing the Americans fight to the death narrative.
Having read Armies of Sand last year I do have to seriously question the ability of any Arab army, either now or when this was written, to conduct an attack like this. No one wants to underestimate their enemies, but the air assault, aggressive recon, and use of laser guided artillery via a VERY long range OP are not consistent with how conventional Arab armies have fought in the past. What does seem consistent is their attempt to drive straight at the American positions and hope to overwhelm them with numbers.
All in all a good book and I look foward To reading those authors other books.
Well 3 runs and I
1 got sniped while glassing the ditch
2 destroyed in detail in the trails
3 lost 3 quarters of my command barley holding on until the cavalry came.
Good training exercise, wish I had kept going until I "won" on my own.
Im extra annoyed because when I got sniped I actually thought I was sending Piper on a patrol and tbh I would have been fine with that baskettballer getting plugged in the desert.
I will say I have read Clausewitz and this mindfucked me hard because he emphasizes aggressive action and taking personal risks constantly ended up getting killed alot because of an attack mindset.
Nice book review! I was inspired to find the pdf and give it a quick skim.
Overall I think I agree with you- I I came away thinking that Sergeant Piper, and really all of the regular troops, are a bunch of whining liars. Never listen to them, they have no sense of strategy or what's necessary. They just want to whine and slack off. Ignore their complains and force them to do the necessary work. Also, send them off to die while protecting yourself- your life, as the commanding officer, is worth more than the life of a mere enlisted man.
I don't know how I feel about that, overall. But I guess it works as a west-point instruction manual for newly minted lieutenants.
What a fascinating review of material (as a girl…not a gear head 😂) I wouldn’t normally have interest in. Not going to venture an attempt at it because I’d likely die horribly along with my compatriots so I’ll leave it to my imagination 😎 Still is a really interesting concept of a book!
I will be buying this book soon. Thanks for the review.