From: Virgil
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 19:31:06 -0600

It's not a conventional war but it's what's we call OOTW (Operations Other
Than War) something units like the 82d ABN, 10th Mountain, 101st, Rangers
and SF have been training to operate in since I was in the active Army. In
terms of patrolling, convoys, security sweeps, setting up ambushes in areas
where insurgents set up IEDs, MOUNT (urban combat), etc., the Army's
developed some good skills.

Which is exactly why I think we need more SF, more Rangers, more
engineers, more MPs, and more support units. A straightforward infantry
division like the 1st, 3rd, or 4th are not as well-suited to OOTW.

That's a good point about the differences between conventional and
peacekeeping/nation building. I agree we couldn't conduct three concurrent
operations like that today.

I think in some respects combat is easier than peacekeeping. There are
many more dynamics to consider in peacekeeping operations like
political, religious, economic, social and so on that are not prime
considerations during combat operations. I personally think that we
suck at peacekeeping. We could learn a lot from the Brits, Canadians,
and others who have much more experience at it than we do.

And I totally agree that we couldn't handle another peacekeeping
operation. Nob, on the other hand, thinks we can handle three or more.