Army is back at it in Pheonix...Urban Training, Black Helo's

Richland said:
We need to train with the resources we have here. Still someone would be complain that we are building training facilities out in the desert when we could use prefectly good cities in the US. Flying helos in a skyscraper envirornmet is critical. clearing huge buildings is complicated. It would cost billions to build a training area to simiulate this.
let's worry about something Real!
Click to expand...

So it's complicated, and something that they apparently don't have enough experience with, yet you want them to practice in the middle of our cities?

Our private buildings and public urban spaces are not "resources" for the military to commandeeer for training purposes.
 
Richland said:
We need to train with the resources we have here. Still someone would be complain that we are building training facilities out in the desert when we could use prefectly good cities in the US. Flying helos in a skyscraper envirornmet is critical. clearing huge buildings is complicated. It would cost billions to build a training area to simiulate this.
let's worry about something Real!
Click to expand...

Then don't do the training at all. I'm OK with that. You can't train for every scenario anyway.

If the choices are:
1) use cities and have troops training in the middle of daily life
2) spending billions of dollars to replicate cities
3) just not training in cities

I choose three every time and twice on Sundays.
 
new guy said:
So it's complicated, and something that they apparently don't have enough experience with, yet you want them to practice in the middle of our cities?

Our private buildings and public urban spaces are not "resources" for the military to commandeeer for training purposes.
Click to expand...

With city permission they sure are. I do think city council should probably vote on the issue.

Immediate action drills and rehearsals save countless lives on the battlefield, so yea "not have them train at all" is a stupid alternative. And FYI I have zero issue with the military conducting training evolutions in any localty as long as they have the permission from the local gov.

I really don't see any reasonable objections short of paranoid conspiracy theories.

You'd be surprised how many scenarios you can train for. We try to train for as much as possible. Its even more critical for SF units, especially since an operation in an industrialized city is increadibly realistic.

Mike

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk 2
 
Last edited:
crazymjb said:
With city permission they sure are. I do think city council should probably vote on the issue.

Immediate action drills and rehearsals save countless lives on the battlefield, so yea "not have them train at all" is a stupid alternative. And FYI I have zero issue with the military conducting training evolutions in any localty as long as they have the permission from the local gov.

I really don't see any reasonable objections short of paranoid conspiracy theories.

You'd be surprised how many scenarios you can train for. We try to train for as much as possible. Its even more critical for SF units, especially since an operation in an industrialized city is increadibly realistic.

Mike

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...

It's shitty precedent. I know where you're coming from though.
 
Not really. Giving law enforcement military equipment is a bad idea, letting the military use public or private property with permission to train for military missions is not. Our entire mwtc short one building is public land for crying out loud.

Maybe they should only fly over military airspace too [rolleyes]

Mike

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk 2
 
OK
1) What are you scared of?
2) the Military needs to oporate (In all environments on the globe) using our cities to get a realistic training environment just makes sense.
3) When some of us were kids, we would see large convoys of NG and reservist vehicles heading down highways heading to Summer Training? (and you may have thought that was neet to see. "unles you were a communist") Well that was an imprtant part of training too. convoy, long distance movements, mobilization etc. here in the good ol' USA it is all training.
 
I have yet to ever need SF to protect me from a foreign enemy and I've never seen them killing politicians. So what exactly do they need this type of training for?
 
Last I checked, US soldiers did NOT train for combat inside American cities before going over to Europe during WWII. Our guys did just fine in urban warfare, well as fine as one can in the cluster**** known as street by street fighting.

So if we did just fine for you know a real war, total war, with ROE that were barely there (unlike Vietnam and Iraq/Afghanistan) without training for city fighting (in established cities) why are they doing so now?
 
Richland said:
OK
1) What are you scared of? tyrannical government that comes to fruition due to people's lack of long term thinking.
2) the Military needs to oporate (In all environments on the globe) using our cities to get a realistic training environment just makes sense. the military does not need to operate around the globe. That's a big part of the problem here, overuse of the military, which accounts for 99% of all current use.
3) When some of us were kids, we would see large convoys of NG and reservist vehicles heading down highways heading to Summer Training? (and you may have thought that was neet to see. "unles you were a communist") Well that was an imprtant part of training too. convoy, long distance movements, mobilization etc. here in the good ol' USA it is all training. You don't need to do convoy training in active cities.
Click to expand...

Some people seem to think we need the military to do lots of things. Who exactly is attacking us? Nobody.

The military in this country needs to be reigned in severely. As in a 75% minimum cut and all troops brought home.
 
crazymjb said:
Not really. Giving law enforcement military equipment is a bad idea, letting the military use public or private property with permission to train for military missions is not. Our entire mwtc short one building is public land for crying out loud.

Maybe they should only fly over military airspace too [rolleyes]

Mike

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...

Oh c'mon. You're running military training over civilian US cities. How do you think that ****ing looks?

It looks about the same as LEO slamming MRAPS down the street. Same gear, different color.
 
SF fast roping out of Blackhawks in the dead of night in a major US city fully armed and equipped for an assault is very different than a convoy of military transport trucks driving down the highway. I can't belive so many are fine with this...

It is an acclimation of the public to armed military operations in our cities. It is a risk to the public and private property. We have many training venues... live US cities are not necessary. Because we can is not an excuse.
 
Last edited:
Well first of all, we train for combat almost exckusively in the US, using already constructed off base fascilities that would cost too much to build on base is a no brainer.

As I stated earlier, an urban hostage rescue is a very realistic operation an sf unit could be tasked with.

Mike

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk 2
 
I can't believe that anyone is seriously defending this type of training in our cities. You can drop all the tinfoil hat bull$#!+ you want, but training like this is more than just tactical training--it's psychological training of the citizens to see this as totally OK and normal. It's not either of those and never will be. Do you think it's also OK to have foreign troops training with our guys on our soil? From your perspective it should just fine since they are helping to defray the costs of the training, right?
 
Last edited:
crazymjb said:
Well first of all, we train for combat almost exckusively in the US, using already constructed off base fascilities that would cost too much to build on base is a no brainer.

As I stated earlier, an urban hostage rescue is a very realistic operation an sf unit could be tasked with.

Mike

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...

There is a difference from training in the US away from the public and "training" using the public as a backdrop to your operation.

FWIW, I've never heard of FBI SRT train live in a US city where the public was present. They use other facilities, away from the public eye, if for no other reason than to not give away tactics and operational doctrine.
 
crazymjb said:
As I stated earlier, an urban hostage rescue is a very realistic operation an sf unit could be tasked with.
Click to expand...

So what? That means we should have them conducting urban war games in US cities? Sorry, not buying.

- - - Updated - - -

RE:
RLBreton said:
You can drop all the tinfoil hat bull$#!+ you want
Click to expand...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rules_for_Radicals

“Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.”
 
mav said:
There is a difference from training in the US away from the public and "training" using the public as a backdrop to your operation.

FWIW, I've never heard of FBI SRT train live in a US city where the public was present. They use other facilities, away from the public eye, if for no other reason than to not give away tactics and operational doctrine.
Click to expand...

Not to mention the many shows that were on Discovery that detailed some SF missions (that were partially declassified and occurred in the late 80 to 90s) whereby NONE of the training for the mission involved a real US city. It all involved mockups. I remember one where they got detailed information as to where the bad guys were (in a high rise no less IIRC) and had floor plans. They recreated the parts of the building where they would enter and where the BG's had the hostages to practice the rescue mission. That mission was a success BTW (Discovery wasn't showing the failed missions for obvious reasons).

I'm sorry but there is zero legitimate reason for SF to train in a US city, especially with the knowledge that they have not done so before and have had many successful ops from training in custom built environments.

Remember, we didn't train for urban warfare in US cities during WWII and our guys were able to fight successfully in the urban environments of France, The Netherlands, and Germany.
 
Some of you get it, some of you don't, I think that is where we will disagree here.

Training for what? Really? you train for everything even in peacetime, training is never irrelevant. Traditional warfare training, desert training, mountain training, MOUT training, cold weather training. Training, training, training. All combat arms do is train train train. Shooting targets is maybe 1% of military training. You train so when you fight a war mission accomplishment comes at the lowest cost in terms of lives, time, and money. That is why we train. What the US is doing globally may as well be irrelevant to whether or not we are training. As far as our global military deployment I do think it needs to be reigned in, but that doesn't negate that our forces must be constantly training.

Too bad we don't have any unoccupied cities and skyscrapers, or I'd say yes, they should be training there, not in active cities. If you guys wanna pay for a multibillion/trillion dollar MOUT facility the size of Miami or Phoenix go ahead. I'd rather not.

As far as same equipment, different color... Um how about completely different scenario with a completely different purpose. I don't object to the police going door to door with AR15s in full kit with Humvees because humvees and rifles are scary, I object to police imposing this idea on residents that they should be allowed to search their homes, "asking" while decked out like they are going to war, complete with live ammo. Blackhawks aren't landing in peoples yards and having crews tell them they need to search their house as part of this training exercise. They are using designated facilities with permission. They aren't imposing on anyone's private lives.

If SF can get BETTER training in other environments than they should. Period. I'm glad you're basing your knowledge of a discovery channel show, that's solid. When they have more time to plan for missions (like OBL) they build full scale mock-ups and everything WHEN PRACTICAL. The thing is teams, SOAR, etc greatly benefit from non-specific situation training, and that can save lives.

As far as WWII and our training... yea we won, if we had better training back home I'm sure we could have reduced casualty numbers. But 10-20-30% more war dead no big deal, right.

We aren't talking full scale invasions and patrolling of neighborhoods, we are talking smaller training ops involving specialized units. This is honestly probably more training for pilots than anyone else on maneuver and vehicle identification.

Mike
 
Last edited:
crazymjb said:
Some of you get it, some of you don't, I think that is where we will disagree here.

Training for what? Really? you train for everything even in peacetime, training is never irrelevant. Traditional warfare training, desert training, mountain training, MOUT training, cold weather training. Training, training, training. All combat arms do is train train train. Shooting targets is maybe 1% of military training. You train so when you fight a war mission accomplishment comes at the lowest cost in terms of lives, time, and money. That is why we train. What the US is doing globally may as well be irrelevant to whether or not we are training. As far as our global military deployment I do think it needs to be reigned in, but that doesn't negate that our forces must be constantly training.

Too bad we don't have any unoccupied cities and skyscrapers, or I'd say yes, they should be training there, not in active cities. If you guys wanna pay for a multibillion/trillion dollar MOUT facility the size of Miami or Phoenix go ahead. I'd rather not.

As far as same equipment, different color... Um how about completely different scenario with a completely different purpose. I don't object to the police going door to door with AR15s in full kit with Humvees because humvees and rifles are scary, I object to police imposing this idea on residents that they should be allowed to search their homes, "asking" while decked out like they are going to war, complete with live ammo. Blackhawks aren't landing in peoples yards and having crews tell them they need to search their house as part of this training exercise. They are using designated facilities with permission. They aren't imposing on anyone's private lives.

Mike
Click to expand...

That's my point. There's plenty of training to do that doesn't involve mixing with normal life. So much in fact no one man can learn it all. So why keep add things?

There is no need for this specific type of training.
 
xtry51 said:
That's my point. There's plenty of training to do that doesn't involve mixing with normal life. So much in fact no one man can learn it all. So why keep add things?

There is no need for this specific type of training.
Click to expand...

Oh I'm sorry were you involved in hostage rescue operations in major built-up cities following helo insertions? I don't know like a hotel that largely panders to Americans in Dubai perhaps? This is an incredibly realistic scenario and I'd be surprised if we don't see a hostage situation in a foreign city by radicals in our lifetime.

"There is no need for this specific type of training" sounds a lot like "there is no need for a civilian to own an AR15," it's baseless and spoken by the ignorant.

Mike
 
crazymjb said:
Oh I'm sorry were you involved in hostage rescue operations in major built-up cities following helo insertions? I don't know like a hotel that largely panders to Americans in Dubai perhaps? This is an incredibly realistic scenario and I'd be surprised if we don't see a hostage situation in a foreign city by radicals in our lifetime.

"There is no need for this specific type of training" sounds a lot like "there is no need for a civilian to own an AR15," it's baseless and spoken by the ignorant.

Mike
Click to expand...

It's my opinion the military's job does not and should not include hostage rescuing. The military's job is to fight full scale, declared wars. Period. No other use.

Your last paragraph is really pointless and without merit. The two are not anyway related. A private party or business who wants to voluntarily engage in commerce of being mercenaries or train themselves for situations they personally see fit with their own time and resources is not the same as a national army paid for by my tax dollars.
 
Last edited:
Again, agree to disagree. I have no problem with our military being in charge of hostage rescues overseas. They have proven to handle it quite well. Special operations have their purpose... so if you want to keep going with the full scale wars position, "taking out a military leader or leaders" in a heavily built up urban environment.

My last paragraph is fine thank you. There is a huge disconnect with reality in your statement that "there is no need for this type of training." That's incorrect.

Your tax dollars? Hostage rescue and SF using already existent private and public facilities is probably the best use of your tax dollars by the DOD in the last 2 decades.

We simply won't agree on this. That said, I think your logic is flawed.

Mike
 
xtry51,

Do you think we need to maintain a military capability to evacuate American tourists, diplomats and business people from overseas during a time of crisis?
 
My only thinking is how much training can be done in a residential environment where you still have civilian people around who are not part of the exercise? Unless they Are they flying into a abandoned area.

And would it not be better for them to use a large unpopulated area where it could be set up to mimic a real situation like a hostile shooting back then just flying around a downtown area with actual civilians around?

Also wouldent you want special training to be a bit hush hush, especially if its to be used on a foreign enemy
 
gearjunky13 said:
My only thinking is how much training can be done in a residential environment where you still have civilian people around who are not part of the exercise? Unless they Are they flying into a abandoned area.

And would it not be better for them to use a large unpopulated area where it could be set up to mimic a real situation like a hostile shooting back then just flying around a downtown area with actual civilians around?

Also wouldent you want special training to be a bit hush hush, especially if its to be used on a foreign enemy
Click to expand...

We don't have the full details of the training do we? As I said, I imagine it is largely for the pilots, and probably basic insertions (again I imagine largely for the pilots).

No MOUT town exists on the scale of a major city.

Mike
 
crazymjb said:
Again, agree to disagree. I have no problem with our military being in charge of hostage rescues overseas. They have proven to handle it quite well. Special operations have their purpose... so if you want to keep going with the full scale wars position, "taking out a military leader or leaders" in a heavily built up urban environment.

My last paragraph is fine thank you. There is a huge disconnect with reality in your statement that "there is no need for this type of training." That's incorrect.

Your tax dollars? Hostage rescue and SF using already existent private and public facilities is probably the best use of your tax dollars by the DOD in the last 2 decades.

We simply won't agree on this. That said, I think your logic is flawed.

Mike
Click to expand...

I simply see no reason a national army needs to be worrying itself about saving hostages. That's not what an army is for.
 

Similar threads

Maine gets close to implementing 3 Day Wait Period and makes it illegal to do Paramilitary Training in the State
4 5 6
Replies
151
Views
4K
rogersmithiii
R
Groton is next in line
2
Replies
37
Views
1K
Asaltweapon
Asaltweapon
16 deputies injured in explosion during SWAT training at California FBI facility
Replies
5
Views
228
Mellero47
Mellero47
Going back to carrying p320x
Replies
8
Views
287
IPSC_DRL
IPSC_DRL
Why is it called a talo edition
2
Replies
48
Views
1K
Taipan01
Taipan01
Back
Top Bottom