Im dedicating this page to anybody who has any questions or suggestions for me. I’m constantly looking for topics to add, so if there is something you would like to see or think is missing here please let me know.
Keep in mind that any law enforcement related advice is simply my opinion, based on my experience and in no way should be construed as “legal advice”, I am not an attorney.
January 29, 2009 at 10:27 am
Hi Tom
Thanks for leaving a comment on my blog. I appreciate your advice, and got some ideas. I ended up getting onto a website of a US ex-Navy SEAL, who had suggestions on preparing/training for a ruck march (we call it pack march). So with you suggestions and reading his, will all help. A friend of mine also mentioned something about rubbing your feet in metho, to help toughen the skin and help it stay dry? Do you have any suggestions about avoiding blisters?
The requirement for pre-enlistment for females in AU is 10 push-ups, 50 sit-ups, & 2.4km run in 11-15min? (officer entry). I’ll aim for this first. Have started walking with weighted backpack and will increase weight and distance over period (it’s about 20kg or 44lb or more for packs). Will look at buying some boots soon, as I need to get used to wearing them and my feet are too soft. I begin specific training to prepare me for pre-enlistment within 2 weeks, so will be concentrating on upper body/core/torso strength especially as well as running. I will then start another program more specific to initial base training which is 28 days, and will be where I need to focus on specifics – ruck marches, rope climbs, running, high wire, obstacle courses, etc, etc. I’m looking at about 3-6 months for the whole process, so I’m hoping I should be well on my way as far as physical conditioning goes.
Anyway, thanks again, and always appreciative of suggestions.
Oh! In the US, are females employed in ‘direct combat’ units? They are not allowed in AU.
Ciao for now…Kerry
January 29, 2009 at 11:40 am
Hi Kerry,
When I was a soldier, the manuals for foot marching suggested treating the feet with formalin to toughen the skin (my buddy the Marine said that they just urinated on their feet…typical for the USMC
). Good moisture wicking socks and foot powder help also as its when the feet get damp and the skin soft that most blisters start. Keep aware of “hot spots’..not yet blisters but those sore “wear points” on your feet and apply moleskin to them ASAP.
As for women in combat units here…thats actually a complex question. They are not allowed in “combat arms” positions like infantry, tankers, cannon cockers etc. But they are allowed in combat support units and pilot jobs that put them in the combat zone. I was a military policeman and females have been MP’s for years…MP’s are more “field” soldiers than policemen these days (contrary to common belief), escorting convoys, guarding forward positions just behind the FEBA (forward edge of battle area) and reacting to insurgents in rear areas. American female soldiers have been getting a bit more “trigger time” these days than ever before in US military history.
As a matter of fact, a US female MP was the first woman awarded the Silver Star for combat action (another female MP got the Bronze Star) after fighting off an ambush over 4X her units size in close combat…check her out:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leigh_Ann_Hester
“Assist! Protect! Defend!HOO-AH!” (military police motto)
Tom
March 17, 2009 at 3:57 am
Hey Tom,
1st I’ll drop this quote & then I’ll ask my question:
“In its original sense, the term strategy refers to battle tactics, the science of warfare or martial arts. Considered more broadly, it can be taken to mean a method for achieving better results in all areas, for leading a victorious life of value creation.
The “strategy of the Lotus Sutra” refers to faith in the Gohonzon [object of devotion in Nichiren Buddhism, which embodies the law of nam-myho-renge-kyo]. It is faith that battle igorance & delusion, breaks through negative karma & wins without fail…”
–Daisaku Ikeda
Basically Ikeda is using the metaphor of battle strategy to everyday life & our stuggle against negative forces that threaten to get in the way of enlightenment. This struggle is also a fundamental aspect of enlightenment, since if we didn’t have to fight, we couldn’t grow.
My question is simple: can you apply (or compare) this kind of wisdom to any of your reading/s on warfare/samurai philosophy/ Clausewitz/law-enforcement &c.??
I have just found your blog & you seem to be the guy to ask. I practice Nichiren Daishonin’s Buddhism & I’m looking for parallels in other like-minded philosophies.
Thank you,
Aurelio
March 17, 2009 at 4:03 am
Message recieved. Excellent question. Give me a bit to digest and Ill follow up with my response.
Tom
March 17, 2009 at 10:17 pm
Aurelio,
I’ve given your question a bit of thought and my answer (if Im reading your question correctly) is going to be phrased similar to yours. Let me start with a couple of quotes from the “Book of Five Rings”.
and
So,to be concise. My opinion of “warriorship” as metaphor is similar in spirit to what Musashi intended when he said… “The principle of strategy is having one thing, to know ten thousand things.” The strategist (in Musashi’s definition) has the ability to see the macro in the micro and likewise he can take the smaller details and see them in the larger world. But, as Musashi further states; “The Way of the warrior does not include other Ways, such as Confucianism, Buddhism, certain traditions, artistic accomplishments and dancing. But even though these are not part of the Way, if you know the Way broadly you will see it in everything.” So just because the person pursuing spiritual goals may look at life through the “lens of the warrior” it doesn’t make him a “warrior”.
So..Yes, as a metaphor there is value in studying the “martial way” to find parallels to non-martial situations. However, I don’t believe that there is “martial arts” IN spiritualism/philosophy or vice versa.
March 20, 2009 at 4:14 pm
Tom,
…thank you for the qwick/intellegent reply. I will be working on a presentation on this subject within the next few days & I’ll get back to you with a response soon.
Thank you
p.s. …no Clausewitz connections?
March 20, 2009 at 10:14 pm
Well..I look at Clausewitz in the same vein as The Art of War, The Book of Five Rings, The USMC Maneuver Warfare Manual, Machiavelli and other books/authors. The authors wrote those works for specific applications, but their “universal truths” made them easily appropriated as “life guides”. Not that there is anything inherently wrong in that.
In Chaos Theory and Fractals there is the phenomena where patterns can be seen all along the spectrum of scale. If you look as a small rock through high magnification it can look like the side of a mountain. Human capillaries can look like plant structures, and so on. I think that something similar to the same phenomena can be seen in what we are discussing.
Of course the issue of “war as a metaphor for life” is of similar nature. Just because some of the patterns may appear similar doesn’t necessarily make them one and the same.
April 1, 2009 at 4:22 pm
Tom,
…thanks & yes I have a delayed response, but I’ve been juggling other stuff too.
I see your point. However, these “philosophies” can be used for other means, say self-help, business, religious crossover &c. & that is unavoidable. And I do see that they should be valued in-&-of-themselves, for what they were intended & they are…isn’t Clausewitz still used at West Point?–to help train future military leaders.
Basically I wanted to find a connection & I did find some great Clausewitz quotes for my presentation.
I have posted it on my blog, please take a look:
http://aureliomadrid.wordpress.com/2009/04/01/strategy-of-the-lotus-sutra-notes/
(cut-n-paste link into browser)
…& again thank you for the help, meanwhile, I’ll keep an eye on your blog.
Aurelio
September 16, 2009 at 3:16 am
It says “ask me” so I’ll put it in question form:
How did you know to start w/ the Tactical Preschool stuff for those of us who weren’t on the pointy end when we did our time? Anyway, some of it’s basic, some of it’s “why didn’t I think of that” but thanks.
September 16, 2009 at 3:25 am
The idea came to me after a discussion with a buddy. We were talking about how most of this “high speed” stuff is really just a combination of pretty simple principles.
While the tactical industry seems to thrive on selling the latest “secret technique” or training principle, its my opinion that the fundamentals are where its really at.
September 25, 2009 at 9:53 pm
I love your Tactical Preschool! I posted this question at THR, but would be particularly interested in your analysis:
When is a fully automatic firearm tactically advantageous?
AFAIK a select-fire gun, if available, would always be preferred to a semi-auto gun because when ammunition and conditions permit you would always prefer to deliver three-round bursts to a target you’re trying to put down than a single round with each trigger pull. (Of course, if ammo is limited or precision is required you would stick to single-shot mode.) Following this argument, everyone who carries a Glock 17, for example, would absolutely rather carry a Glock 18 if they had the option. And training and tactics for self-defense would make liberal use of its full-auto mode.
AFAIK, the only other purpose for a full-auto weapon is to lay down suppressive fire to support advancing or retreating. But this is not a tactic that would normally be attempted with a fully-automatic version of any current civilian-legal firearm. Rather, this role is ideally met with “squad” automatic weapons – i.e., rifles that sport one or more of the following features: (1) shoot from an open bolt; (2) accept drum magazines or linked ammunition; (3) allow for rapid barrel changes. Also, suppressive fire would never be tactically expedient unless the shooter had both a copious supply of ammunition and a rifle with the aforementioned features.
Are these assessments correct? Am I missing any other reasons for full-auto firearms (of course, other than the fact that they are a hoot to shoot and a great way to burn up spare ammo)?
September 26, 2009 at 12:00 am
You pretty much got it.
The bulk of my experience with “full auto” weapons were with crew served weapon systems in the military: M60 (yes Im getting OLD), M2, MK19 etc. The M16A2 I trained with only had semi and burst fire.
IMO. The MG’s main advantage is the ability to “deny” large areas to your opponent. Streets, openings, avenues of approach and defensive sectors can be placed under fire without having to aim at individual targets.
In military applications you are typically distributing automatic fire in bursts vs. continuous fire unless it’s SHTF time and you are on your FPL (Final Protective Line) or you are laying down grazing fire in a defensive sector.
Basic techniques may involve firing 6-8 round bursts…observing the impact of your rounds..then adjust fire till you are on target. Once your beaten zone is where you want it you may then “open up” with longer strings of fire. Or you may have a sector “laid in” with a tripod mounted MG. Then you just hold the trigger down and traverse between your limiting stakes.
In military application you could be using MG’s to support maneuver operations like advances (attacks) or retreats. You could be using them in a defensive position to cover a sector of fire, you may be tasked to cover obstacles such as wire, target groups of enemy in your sector, etc. You can also use them to engage “point targets” like vehicles, bunkers, buildings and the like.
My experience with “hand sized automatics” is predominantly with the MP5 sub-machinegun as a tactical officer. As you stated. The major advantage with this weapon is that you can “serve” your opponent with as many rounds as necessary to stop the threat. You quickly learn how to measure out bursts and seldom would you ever really “hose down” a target with a long stream of fire. And rarely (if ever) would you just kick down a door and spray the entire room like you see in some Hollywood films.
Currently, the trend in many US tactical teams is the adoption of compact carbine rifles such as the M4 with a shortened barrel. All the compactness of a sub-gun but in rifle calibers.