Pakistan Army, more battlefield experienced soldiers

[blain2]

Sorry but I'll dare to disagree. I don't know what kind of idiot trains the soldiers to "stand" guard their hilltop posts besides a fluttering flag. I, as a civilian know that a person standing on a hill top stands out like a sore thumb and presents himself as an easy target for snipers, standing in hostile weather also tires the soldiers and drains their energy faster while carrying that heavy rifle, ammo and accessories.

Why can't they guard it while lying down (as in shooting position), dressed incamo, with bi or tri pod mounted long range precission rifles and heavy machine guns and aided bwith field bino's or spotting scopes?

Why do they have to be inside or beside their mud/stone build posts, which are an easy target for RPG?

Bravery does not mean stupidity. First priority should be protection of soldiers, only well protected soldiers are able to achieve assigned targets, which is protection of a post, position, building, asset, or whatever.

When positions are built up, there is an assessment done of the threat or the direction/s that the threat comes from. The troops figure out when there is activity by the other side and work around such things. Standing outside of a post, that too at a height means that the troops are confident that they are safe from the small arms range of the enemy. After all they are bringing in press so they know that the area in which they are operating is pacified to a certain extent. If such is not the case, they are close enough to their positions to take cover.

Secondly, sangars (made of rocks available in the terrain) provide adequate protection, although not 100% against a grenade projectile such as the RPG. You have to grant that these folks understand the threat level and do respond accordingly. You cannot be in a prone position when you have the height to your advantage and can observe better via your 360 line of sight. To an observer, these things may look basic, but those that are operating have a much better appreciation of the threat to their lives and react accordingly. There is nothing brave about this. As soon as a round is taken, these chaps will go behind cover. But hunkered down in an environment where the movement of the enemy during daytime is very limited probably does not make tactical sense to them.

Lastly, the experience being gained here is that of operating in a Low intensity conflict which is different from force on force type engagements. It is a good experience and in this day and age, armies need to have both types, specially if they are faced with both such threats.

 

[Thorough Pro]

When you get too confident, you get ***-kicked as in the case of GHQ, Mehran, and Kamra, both pretty secure locations, far away from even "low-intensity" conflict, secure behind walls, check posts and what not.

When you take cover, that means you are under attack and in defensive position becaus eyour enemy is clever enough to camouflage itself and has the advantage of surprising you. If you were not a fool to expose yourself as an easy target, and were hiding from possible enemy than it would be the enemy who gets surprised and runs for cover. And by the way how is he supposed to notice movement if the enemy uses sniper fire from 500 yards away?

In most of the bank roberries, guards are the first ones to get shot you know why? because they don't know who might be a robber, but robbers know who the guard is.

If you already have the height advantage, what additioinal advantage would you gain by raising your eyes 6 feet above the ground? even if you are lying flat at a height, you would always be in an advantegous position, why lose that advantage? why change your strength into your weakness?

And the most important thing is not being feeling secure or confident, its your training, it's following the SOP, it's your reflex, it's your natural reactioon, it's your mind-set, it's what you would do in real situation, it's the difference between a novice and a pro.

Standing outside of a post, that too at a height means that the troops are confident that they are safe from the small arms range of the enemy.

they are close enough to their positions to take cover.

You cannot be in a prone position when you have the height to your advantage and can observe better via your 360 line of sight.

 

[blain2]

When you get too confident, you get ***-kicked as in the case of GHQ, Mehran, and Kamra, both pretty secure locations, far away from even "low-intensity" conflict, secure behind walls, check posts and what not.

Two different types of operations. In the FATA, its kinetic operations where the Army is actively going, taking over positions and pacifying the area by fighting and flushing out the militants. The GHQ, Mehran and Kamra cases were reactive situations (much easier to attack and very hard to defend against). I am not sure if this is an issue of over confidence, rather just understanding the threat appropriately and that would apply in both cases. Perhaps its not on the mark yet when it comes to defending static positions in built up areas.

When you take cover, that means you are under attack and in defensive position becaus eyour enemy is clever enough to camouflage itself and has the advantage of surprising you. If you were not a fool to expose yourself as an easy target, and were hiding from possible enemy than it would be the enemy who gets surprised and runs for cover. And by the way how is he supposed to notice movement if the enemy uses sniper fire from 500 yards away?

After you see the area, you get some understanding of how the enemy operates. There is heli support available in the area. The TTP elements use the night time to launch their attacks. At day time, the Army is also that much more ready to observe and respond. The enemy does fire with sniper rifles etc. But that does not mean that the enemy is everywhere. The Army also knows that if someone is traveling on foot to get to a position to launch an attack on them, he won't move during the day or fire a round here and there to give up his position in daylight. These tactical nuances are not lost to the troops or even the Taliban cadre. If they have not been attacked for some time at a position and are bringing the press to take photos and visit, the site and the visit has been cleared after the area was deemed to be somewhat secure.

In most of the bank roberries, guards are the first ones to get shot you know why? because they don't know who might be a robber, but robbers know who the guard is.

Again, the context is totally different. We are comparing apples to oranges here with regards to the situation that the troops are facing in the FATA and those who are responsible for guarding static locations in built up areas.

If you already have the height advantage, what additioinal advantage would you gain by raising your eyes 6 feet above the ground? even if you are lying flat at a height, you would always be in an advantegous position, why lose that advantage? why change your strength into your weakness?

You have to see it to understand. Height advantage does not mean that you are standing on the edge of the mountain top all the time exposed to direct fire. These are ranges where in many cases, the peak has a flat terrain over which an entire section can set up. Not all the troops are standing on the edge of the height exposed to the possibility of fire from around. Why would the troops not in the direct line of fire need to go prone? After all they are humans too and need to get up, stretch, walk around. Maybe the photo that you have seen has a guard standing in front of the command post which perhaps is in the rear. I mean there are a ton of things that could go on including the possibility of a very cocky, over confident soldier standing guard not caring about the threat to his life, but I do not think such is the case.

And the most important thing is not being feeling secure or confident, its your training, it's following the SOP, it's your reflex, it's your natural reactioon, it's your mind-set, it's what you would do in real situation, it's the difference between a novice and a pro.

You are right. Training and SOPs are definitely there but the issue goes back to having operated in an environment for some time and understanding the type of threat and the risks in that area. The troops adapt so do the TTP cadres.

 

[A1Kaid]

Concerning the meaning: I understand that the thread is not only about training but also about real war situation when there is heavy enemy fire, you see your comrades dying, you are ordered to carry on the assault and you capture the enemy's positions. Taliban are one of the fiercest enemy possible on the earth (ask NATO about it) that Pakistan army is fighting with . I think that was the intention of the thread. The thread's not about comparison with India or state of preparation of Indian forces: this much about any comment on understanding the meaning.

Thank you great post and contribution you're right that is the point of this thread.

 

[A1Kaid]

What do other Pakistani members think about this?

 

[Alfa-Fighter]

Depends on area to Area, In jungle warfare, learn from Vietnam, in High attitude mountain warfare learn from Chinese/ India,

I dont think Taliban is that much as you are making out , any self-killing attack is always do more damages anyway.

Learn from Israeli, how they deal with Palestine /Hizb.