Lt. Colonel Grossman - Ranger Regt or Ranger Qual?

[Silverback]

From memory...He has only claimed being Ranger Qual'd..

[ma91c1an]

Ranger school graduate.

His books are interesting. I do not consider them biblical. They are more... unique, than anything else. No one else has written about these subjects in quite the same way before him, and that is his real claim to fame, in my opinion.

Depending on your background, and on your own experiences, you may or may not find Grossman valuable. Some guys find him nearly unreadable.

I think that the real thing that Grossman did, more than anything else, is he brought certain subjects out into the open, and he discussed them in broad daylight.

In my experience, cops seem to love him. I understand that he does a lot of work with police departments.

[BadMuther]

I don't agree with everything he says...especially his numbers on how many people in combat won't shoot AT an enemy even though someone is trying to kill them.

J

[ma91c1an]

I don't agree with everything he says...especially his numbers on how many people in combat won't shoot AT an enemy even though someone is trying to kill them.

J

Well, one of the things that Grossman discusses is prior research on this issue.

And I have to say, that when you are talking about conventional units, units that do not have the luxury of putting as many rounds down-range in training before deployment as Ranger battalions, then you can understand Grossman's statements within a proper context. And I mean a proper historical context.

The difference in training baseline between Ranger battalions and conventional battalions used to be massive. During my era, 2d Bat fired more rounds in a quarter than the entire 9th ID in a year. We were the only unit on Ft. Lewis that did live-fire movement-to-contact drills at fire team and squad level. It would not surprise me if the bi-coastal Ranger battalions during that era were the only units Army-wide (excepting CAG) using live ammo like that. I can still remember doing squad live-fire immediate action drills when I was a private. No one else on Ft. Lewis did that at that time.

I do not believe that contemporary infantry units deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan suffer the same paucity as the historical 9th ID. The Ranger mission has changed, for one thing. The boys probably put more rounds down-range than ever before, and that probably exerts an upward pressure on current conventional units, many of which are commanded by former Bat boys, and are often seeded with former Ranger Bat NCO's. There is no doubt that conventional Infantry units deploying to the 'box are prepared to a much better and higher standard than ever before, and that standard owes much to training methodologies that were worked out by the modern-era Ranger Regiment.

My point is this: when you are talking about historical statistics, which were the only ones available to Grossman, his argument had as much validity as his data. I saw a unit of the 82d Airborne get utterly and fatally pinned down by a lone Cuban sniper on Grenada. I mean, one guy pinned down an entire Airborne Infantry company. They did not maneuver. They just hid. And I think that they lost two or three guys, one of whom I believe was the company commander. It has been a long time, so my memory is suspect on this. But that incident really stuck in my mind for a long time afterward. It really made the point for me that snipers can be extremely effective, particularly when they are interdicting poorly-trained units (and that unit was poorly trained, I do not care what anyone says, I saw what they did and what they did not do). I can also tell you that no Cuban snipers pinned us down. We killed those fucks.

It takes balls to get your head up from behind cover, to seek a specific target when you can feel the air from enemy bullets moving past your face, and to then take deliberate, aimed shots. It is not a trivial exercise, as anyone who has actually been in a fire fight can tell you. So I do not dismiss Grossman's comments in this regard out of hand. I can believe them when we are talking about poorly-trained, and poorly-prepared units.

[Bravo57]

Why does it matter if he (Grossman) has ever killed anyone before?

This threw me for a loop as well. Please explain.

[PocketKings]

I read both of his books and like his POV. He takes killing and applies critical thought to the process, which alone is unique. I thing Magic Man is on to something - today's military (at the line level) seems to have broken through that barrier of the past regarding most of the guys not firing in combat. Grossman even discusses this in his later articles. He thinks it's a societal thing as well as the Army's improved training. I can't disagree with either. But, I think the creation of the 75th and the dissemination of those NCOs into regular units has a BIG part of this advent. It's no secret that Batt guys go to line units and become the de facto SMEs on a lot of the 'real' training. In fact, I can name 10-15 NCOs in my units in the 82d and 101st that grew up in the 75th and took that knowledge directly to our units and changed how we did things.

[Ranger Bill]

I read "On Killing" and found the title much more interesting than the reading. He makes a good intellectual arguement, but most of his information is based on big wars, where large infantry units engaged and much artillery was used on both sides and caused most of the casualties. I doubt the same level of non-shooting exits or is even possible in small unit, more personal fights.

[Silverback]

It takes balls to get your head up from behind cover, to seek a specific target when you can feel the air from enemy bullets moving past your face, and to then take deliberate, aimed shots. It is not a trivial exercise, as anyone who has actually been in a fire fight can tell you. So I do not dismiss Grossman's comments in this regard out of hand. I can believe them when we are talking about poorly-trained, and poorly-prepared units.

You have a valid point, but rather than compare units to discuss Grossman's theory I think it is more valuable to view the changes in training as a take away. The number of rounds fired is not nearly as important as the conditions under which they are fired.

When I read On killing I could not help but be awed by his grasp of the advancement in training techniques when related to the increase of a Soldiers ability to "Kill the enemy". There is a direct link from the earliest study of non-firing rates and subsequent training being conducted during that era. When you flash forward (by era) you can see the training develop which in turn increased firing rates, which surpassed 80% during the Vietnam conflict.

I found some of his theories especially helpful when I had to kick start my platoon for the invasion of Iraq. As some of you may know that I was assigned as a PSG (to a 16 member platoon) in December of 2002 with a subsequent combat deployment in March 2003. We did not have a lot of time to prepare and we had to move from 16 to 41 Paratroopers all the while training for combat.

I especially focused on his theory of inoculation against stress. It was something we all had been subjected to, but I feel that Grossman was the first person that actually spelled it out and it made sense to me. As an example, rather than conduct a static qualification range I planned my qualification range to be somewhat dynamic and I attempted to include external stressors into my scheme of maneuver.

First change was each firing mound was occupied by a fire team. The fire team leader would be present and providing "proximity of authority". The fire team as whole would provide distraction (Soldiers will never pass up an opportunity to fuck with their buddies). I also felt that this would provide the group absolution experienced during an actual fire fight and subsequent deaths that may be a result of the firing.

Second change was firing positions. I threw out the Fox hole position and there was no way I would allow my Soldiers (while in a dominant tactical position) to purposefully fight from their bellies (So prone unsupported was out). Instead I had concurrent training being conducted that taught the kneeling, modified kneeling, sitting and standing positions.

Third change was that there was no "fixed position". I would make the team (and shooter) shift 1-2 positions left or right to engage their second iteration of targets.

This is a cliff notes version of what took place on one day of training during a 30 day training deployment to Germany. We culminated with Squad live fires (Battle drill 1). Given the pace at which we trying to prepare the unit it was hectic to say the least.

I am not proud of this fact but it has to be discussed. I mentally broke a rifleman and a medic during this period. The rifleman actually urinated on himself due to the stress of the training. He was later identified as having mental problems. The Medic (a good dude and a body builder type) got broken during some IV training I had my platoon conduct. That was another training event that I modified.

During our non-firing times at the squad range, I put my platoon in a building turned out all lights (Germany in December so I didn't need to do anything about windows). I had the medic give IV's in Nods with the ENTIRE platoon circled around him screaming. I kept the medic but he finally broke down after we returned and he realized he could not keep up with me road marching, which resulted in a tearful heart felt plea for me to "let him return to the medical platoon".

So if he did nothing else, Grossman helped me understand what needed to be done to prepare my platoon for Combat.

As a post script, Grossman discussed how certain training methods create a short cut for a trigger puller bypassing what he claims is the natural resistance to kill another person. I think PTSD is a byproduct of creating this short-cut.

[Silverback]

If a Ranger platoon of volunteers had two guys break, what would happen in your average National Guard company.

It wasn't a Ranger platoon, it was a Platoon from the 173d Airborne.

[Ranger Bill]

Silverback - good training.

[dbmtrman]

I have read On Killing and On Combat. I have heard him speak on two occasions. I got to talk with him for a while during one of the breaks, and identified myself as a 1st Batter. He is a great speaker and if you ever get the chance, you should go. He is very entertaining and motivating. Makes you want to go out and Kill something when it is done. LOL Seriously though. He is a great speaker and has many valid points about human nature in a life or death situation. He identified himself as a Ranger School Graduate, and that I believe he was a company commander in the 82nd.