Does the infantry have a future?

#2
It's always essential to have the good old conventional infantry fighters. Here in Egypt, the main reason why we cannot beat jihadists is that we do not have quality infantry fighters. Everybody who willingly signs up for the army here ends choosing a career where they can ensure themselves a speciality that will be useful after leaving the army. For example, in the navy here almost no one chooses to be a Navy SEAL because once they're out they are jobless. Instead, they all prefer to work on ships! Now, Egypt is left with an army that lacks quality infantry fighters and you see the result in Sinai. There have been only about 1000-2000 militants in Sinai and it took the army 5 years to overcome the obstacle. I don't even believe they have won the war but that's what they're saying. As for the future soldier aspect, I still believe you will need the house to house searches and destroy because in my opinion, that's what wins wars. An airstrike/drone will pave the way for a swift, cost less (life wise) and easy victory but will never win the war on its own. 'Stan is the best proof of that.
 
#3
My honest opinion would be that people unnecessarily put too much faith in these machines (wet themselves silly i say). I have some arguments in support for that.
For all we know there could be a virtual wall as to how much we could achieve with robots, for all we know they might never progress past artificial intelligence which operates on mechanical knowledge(which is notoriously bad in dynamic situations as it fails to adapt), then there is the fact that much of the modern machinery operates on thermal imagery, which has its limits,
https://www.oathkeepers.org/defeating-drones-how-to-build-a-thermal-evasion-suit/
interesting article that, a point to be considered that barely literate afghan militiamen put an extra blanket over themselves to evade american multi million drones, i am sure that someone with more education and need can top that.
Then there is the hearts and minds strategy, case in point would be that american drones in afghanistan couldnt do half as much damage as the Brits did in malay to the communists(re: the malayan emergency).
Then there is the argument that of the technological race, as in one builds something the other builds something to top it off and even the most advanced technology is susceptible to hacking, sure you can use them against the afghani militiamen to somewhat of an affect but against a technologically sound adversary? can you trust them enough that they wont get hacked and turn their guns on friendlies? i wouldnt and no one should
The phrase that the greatest weapon is the human mind is true and nothing can top that beast, nothing beats good old fashioned human ingenuity and experience(afghani militiamen and blankets).
The grunt isnt going anywhere i say
 
#4
Simply, however great the technology you will always need boots on the ground. First in support of technology or taking the main role when as is bound to happen technology fails. Finally mopping up after the use of technology. The need is a permanent requisite and I have reduced the case to its simplicity.
 

Joseph Cosgrove

Moderator
Legionnaire
#6
Let's look at where the conflicts are in the world today. Imagine NW Africa which has not greatly evolved over the past century, and this is not a cheap dig, being patrolled by robots. Or should I say automated vehicles. What would happen when one of the Million dollar machines breaks down? Send in a mechanic (AETT 1) ? Kids with a klash are as dangerous as adults.
 

SnafuSmite

Active Member
#7
In a large scale conventional war, EMPs would render most technology useless, a targeted first strike with EMPs could decimate an army's capacity wage war, no radios, no satellites, lasers, drones, you name it. Boots will always be a necessity.
 
#8
In the future, will we still need trafic wardens ? They can be replaced by video surveillance, on board mouchards /computers that transmits your speed instantly (and where you park and for how long)
In the future, will we still have need for pass port control?
Or will we all be 'micro chipped', and a walk thru portail before accès to the depature lounge
No need to pay wages and pensions to robots and other hi tech stuff (+ they never go on strike)
One thing for sure, employment is going to be more rare
Jeeze, even cows are milked by robots nowadays

An intresting article in th L' usine nouvelle
about the french armys intrest in new technologie
 
Last edited:
#9
Source : Generation NT (GNT)
The french army will deploy large robots (1 ton approx) on Opex (2021)
Mainly in support of Infantery troupes
See Milrem Robotics (Estonian)
By 2030, shall see the 2 nd generation of robots. Equiped with more Artificiel Intelligence and weaponary
 

dusaboss

Hyper Active Member
#11
https://www.military.com/daily-news...ke-grunts-more-lethal.html?ESRC=todayinmil.sm

US army are increasing basics for infantry by 2 months, interesting article.
Good for them. Depending on what they train them for, but from what I read they training some old school shit wich which are really close to useless on modern battlefields.

Anyway, any training is better than no training. Every bullet fired means to a soldiers preparation. Unfortunately army is very rigid organization so sometimes soldiers getting drill which is not correspondent to active battlefields.

I don't know, I never was a soldier, but that I think that situation is often in that direction. Especially when comes to regular infantry units.
 

USMCRET

Active Member
#12
Infantry in the near future is a must I am sorry. During Desert Storm we pounded the shit out of the Iraqi forces occupying Kuwait for six weeks. I am talking wave after wave of B52 strikes, 155 Howitzers, Mortars and more. When we rolled in they were like roaches coming out of holes in the desert, after all that pounding 24/7 for 7 weeks. The earth felt as if am earthquake happened every B52 carpet bombing run.

We had a saying in the Corps, no one ever surrenders to a US Air Force plane at 30,000 feet.

I do see exoskeletons coming to reduce the load and burden on war fighters, it’s been tested for a while now and it is coming
 

dusaboss

Hyper Active Member
#13
I

We had a saying in the Corps, no one ever surrenders to a US Air Force plane at 30,000 feet.
We did. (Serbia) :). OK not surrender, but accepted US conditions.


Infantry in the near future is a must I am sorry. During Desert Storm we pounded the shit out of the Iraqi forces occupying Kuwait for six weeks. I am talking wave after wave of B52 strikes, 155 Howitzers, Mortars and more. When we rolled in they were like roaches coming out of holes in the desert, after all that pounding 24/7 for 7 weeks. The earth felt as if am earthquake happened every B52 carpet bombing run.
Much different than second Iraq war which still ain't over. Because it's hard to tell who is enemy and who ally. Also there is many "door to door" combat.
 
#14
how many Infantry soldiers still learn the good old bayonet? i bet some Armies of the world don´t teach it now. Old film with the SLR but still tought in the British army. Instructor is a mad Jock…. bet it´s Papillon...haha

 
#15
Basic training should be, in my opinion, a continous matter and for the duration of the initial contract (5 years for the Legion)
Stage/course to course. .."perfectionnement"
Regiments awaiting deployment. Composed of Cadres /Staff and lower ranks, capoeaux chefs and caporaux with 5 plus
 
#19
Memory is fading, Jonny
Trying to remember the last time i done a Matilda. ..Mary ? Check! Maggie? Check! Ma non? Check! Maybell? Check! Maurean? Double check!....Matilda?
Post it ! "things to do"
 

USMCRET

Active Member
#20
We did. (Serbia) :). OK not surrender, but accepted US conditions.




Much different than second Iraq war which still ain't over. Because it's hard to tell who is enemy and who ally. Also there is many "door to door" combat.
Very true Disaboss they use the civilian population, Mosques, schools, and civilian population.
 

Most viewed threads of the week

Top