Military Literature

[BnF95]

W.E.B. Griffin's novels (The Corps, Brotherhood of War) are pretty good portrayal of the human side of soldiers.

[chiquezee]

Just done with "A Bridge Too Far: The Classic History of the Greatest Battle of World War II" by Cornelius Ryan. Four-dimensions on flat paper. Colors from grey lines of texts. Excellent narration/story telling of a non-fiction by a historian/novelist.

[belisarius]

so, um, do you guys like the richard "sharkman of the delta" marcinko books? or you think he's a fraud.

i read his first four books (the first is autobigraphical, the next three are semi-fiction).

 

he writes at the eight grade level, though he's supposed to have a masteral degree and fluent in three european languages. he's a master tactician and very good in close quarters combat. he risked his life several times in vietnam; losing only one man under his command during his entire tour of duty.

 

he's basically my only source when it comes to so-called "commando" tactics. conventional soldiers (the experiinced ones that is) tend to scoff at spec-warfare, often describing it as "indoor games". during world war 2, only the british tried to develop spec war ti full budget (and it's mostly to give glamorous postings to members of the nobility who opted to enlist). the other countries preferred conventional.

[ken_2_10_nah]

Just done with "A Bridge Too Far: The Classic History of the Greatest Battle of World War II" by Cornelius Ryan. Four-dimensions on flat paper. Colors from grey lines of texts. Excellent narration/story telling of a non-fiction by a historian/novelist.

 

If you liked "Bridge Too Far" then you'll also probably like "The Longest Day" also by Cornelius Ryan..

Also, the books by Antony Beevor ("Stalngrad") and Max Hastings ("Overlord") are good.

[hellspawn]

conventional soldiers (the experiinced ones that is) tend to scoff at spec-warfare, often describing it as "indoor games". during world war 2, only the british tried to develop spec war ti full budget (and it's mostly to give glamorous postings to members of the nobility who opted to enlist). the other countries preferred conventional.

 

could you cite some examples of "conventional soldiers" scoffing at sf and sw? i was aware that this was the case a long time ago, but events have long proved the value of sf, sd, and spec-war. there's never any shortage of volunteers willing to try out for the sas (british, australian, new zealand, and rhodesian (when it was still active)). the americans are never short of troopies putting their hand up to try out for the green berets, rangers, seals, force recon, para-rescue etc. the russians never have problems filling spetsnaz, osnaz, omon, or vdv units. nearly every standing army on the f#&king planet has spec war capable troops. the main requirement for service in these units is a couple of years service as a conventional soldier, to get what's called "basic soldier skills", in other words, conventional training, up to a good level before taking the successful soldier through the arduous specialist training of sf.

 

it's true the poms had the soe in ww2, but they also had the sas, the lrdg, the royal marines commandos, the sbs and the ssrf. all these units were filled by volunteers from the regular forces, if any member of nobility passed selection, they served just as much, and faced the same dangers as the ordinary troops.

 

don't forget the yanks had the oss, the rangers, the marine raiders, merrill's marauders, the us/canadian "devil's brigade", and the 101st and 82nd airborne.

 

the germans had the fallschirmjaeger, the brandenburgers and the waffen-ss.

 

the australians had z force (remember the mel gibson movie "attack force z"?)

 

even the finns had their version of long range reconnaissance patrols during their war against the russians.

 

most "experienced" soldiers nowadays will have some form of sf training, if not service.

 

i'm not disputing the fact that conventional troops were of great importance, and still are in warfare. but sf, sd, sof, and spec-war, by their very nature of only recruiting those who pass their very rigorous criteria, will always be of limited number, and therefore will only be used for missions that will very rarely see the public informed of such.

[belisarius]

could you cite some examples of "conventional soldiers" scoffing at sf and sw? i was aware that this was the case a long time ago, but events have long proved the value of sf, sd, and spec-war.

useful in what? a hostage crisis in an embassy? snatching war criminals from their lairs? these may be significant to you but every important war has always involved at least two nationals openly trying to k*ll each other with light to heavy weapons.

 

tell me the significance of spec warfare in the following:

 

first gulf war

aghanistan invasion

iraq invasion

 

how significant?

 

tell me one commando operation in world war 2 that could have decided the outcome of the war. how about korea and vietnam?

[hellspawn]

useful in what? a hostage crisis in an embassy? snatching war criminals from their lairs? these may be significant to you but every important war has always involved at least two nationals openly trying to k*ll each other with light to heavy weapons.

 

tell me the significance of spec warfare in the following:

 

first gulf war

afghanistan invasion

iraq invasion

 

how significant?

 

tell me one commando operation in world war 2 that could have decided the outcome of the war. how about korea and vietnam?

 

while it's not up to me to fill in the gaps in your knowledge i'll give it a try.

the contribution of sf in the first conflict you mentioned is well documented. i suggest you get off your arse and find any one of several books written about the persian gulf war by actual sf veterans.

 

as for the afghanistan, we'll start with the russian campaign and how spetsnaz troops were first in to kabul and were responsible for the capture of the presidential palace and the execution of afghan president hafizullah amin. the current afghan campaign has seen several well documented reports and photographs of american, canadian, australian, new zealand and british sf troops in action both militarily and in "hearts and minds" operations.

 

the current situation in iraq, due to it's ongoing nature, is still being determined. but as is always the case, sf involvement will be revealed when the time is right. interestingly, i expect more stories from private contractors, majority of whom are either sf veterans, sf trained, or the police equivalent of sf, to come out. and yes, these contractors are playing a very significant role in iraq.

 

as for ww2, you might want to read up on otto skorzeny and operation oak. the battle of crete and the role of the fallschirmjaeger; david stirling and the sas; the lrdg; the oss; and i'll stop at the telemark sabotage where norwegian commandos, trained by the british soe, disrupted the nazi nuclear program.

 

the korean war: check out michael e.haas' book "in the devil's shadow:u.n. special operations during the korean war"

 

the vietnam war. if you're still not aware of the role of sf troops in this conflict, from the initial french involvement to the final american pull out then you're a bigger dumb arse then i originally thought.

[belisarius]

while it's not up to me to fill in the gaps in your knowledge i'll give it a try.

the contribution of sf in the first conflict you mentioned is well documented. i suggest you get off your arse and find any one of several books written about the persian gulf war by actual sf veterans.

sorry, yopu meant "significant involvement", not crucial contribution. what won the gulf war was immediate negation of iraqi air power, continuous bombing of republican guard positions, eventual destruction of the latter through a full-scale land assault.

 

as for the afghanistan, we'll start with the russian campaign and how spetsnaz troops were first in to kabul and were responsible for the capture of the presidential palace and the execution of afghan president hafizullah amin. the current afghan campaign has seen several well documented reports and photographs of american, canadian, australian, new zealand and british sf troops in action both militarily and in "hearts and minds" operations.

very good. so the spec warriors captured the palace. but i'm pretty sure the occupation (which was the only real psitive achievement the soviets made) was done through a full-scale conventional campaign.

 

as for ww2, you might want to read up on otto skorzeny and operation oak. the battle of crete and the role of the fallschirmjaeger; david stirling and the sas; the lrdg; the oss; and i'll stop at the telemark sabotage where norwegian commandos, trained by the british soe, disrupted the nazi nuclear program.

read nearly every book available about skorzeny. gran sasso, battle of the bulge, the remagen bridge --all minor, of no significance to the outcome of the war, or even a major battle.

 

the korean war: check out michael e.haas' book "in the devil's shadow:u.n. special operations during the korean war"

read that. now read also "soldier" about how special operations during the korean war was genrally lousy and merely brought about the deaths of several expensively trained american soldiers.

 

the vietnam war. if you're still not aware of the role of sf troops in this conflict, from the initial french involvement to the final american pull out then you're a bigger dumb arse then i originally thought.

the green beret, the five fingers, operation phoenix, all that jazz. none of them came close to influencing the outcome of the fiasco.

 

slowly realizing that some people are better-read than you?

[Guest freyja]

band of brothers => stephen ambrose

[Sweet Introvert]

Belisarius and Hellspawn, keep on the topic please.

 

For those who are into history, Admiral Samuel Morrison wrote a pretty good account on the War in the Pacific during WWII.

[Dr_PepPeR]

Just finished reading the last few posts in the LOTR thread that segued into a discussion about homosexual military units. I was reminded of the book "Gurkha!" where the author documented several incidents of British officers using their Gurkha orderlies for comfort. From what the author wrote, most of the Gurkhas involved did so willingly, such was their respect for their officers.

[hellspawn]

Just finished reading the last few posts in the LOTR thread that segued into a discussion about homosexual military units. I was reminded of the book "Gurkha!" where the author documented several incidents of British officers using their Gurkha orderlies for comfort. From what the author wrote, most of the Gurkhas involved did so willingly, such was their respect for their officers.

 

i've got a copy of that. a really good read about one of the most misunderstood fighting units in the world. as i said before in another post, i've worked with gurkhas before, and i will say outright, again: they are the best soldiers in the whole f#&king universe, bar none.

 

i've also just finished "killer elite" about the most secret unit in the american military known as "the activity". despite the macho posturings of a well known coward here, special forces and special operations forces do a lot more then most armchair commando-after the fact experts will ever read about.

 

oh yeah, to what's his f#&k, who told me to stay on topic...f#&king make me.

[belisarius]

gurkhas? not so interested in them. their style of warfare is too conventional (although some wrote of nice exploits by guys armed with kuhkris during the falklands war).

 

i'm researching more about the dreaded german shock troops. the guys who, at normandy, were described by an american general to be "the best troops i've ever seen and if they had the same logistics we had, they'd walk over us all the way to new york."

[buntot]

any books that described battle tactics from the persian-greek wars to the naval battles of world war 2? i personally would like to read actual tank battles...

[ken_2_10_nah]

If you like tank battles try any of Leo Kessler's books on Panzer Battalion Wotan.. or Harold Coyle's Team Yankee