Infantry Combat Equipment (non-firearm): Vests, Body Armor, NVGs, etc.

bsdnf

Junior Member
Registered Member
In Iraq and Afghanistan, conventional US combat arms units usually served as battlespace owners. Their job was to hold and secure territory. Some of that obviously entailed clearing out insurgents, but such operations usually occured during the day.

Generally speaking, the only units that went out at night on a regular basis (i.e. at least a couple times a week) with the expectation of making contact were JSOC strike teams chasing HVTs. CJSOTF units conducted offensive night operations too, but not with the same frequency.

Though none of that obviously stopped indigenous forces from picking a fight with US forces at night.

- - - - - - -

While the US is generally speaking ahead of the rest of the world in night combat, that advantage does not mean every American infantryman is reasonably trained and prepared to fight at night.

In all fairness, much, if not most of "owning the night" are founded upon CAS and ISR capabilities provided by airborne assets, as well as surgical strike capabilities that can be deployed at night with relative ease and frequency.
"Conventional US combat arms units usually served as battlespace owners" is a euphemism, the reality is conventional troops in Afghan difficult to operate oustside the base even during the day, after 2006. Restrepo and The Hornet's Nest both document the plight of US infantry well. After 2010, only SOF is capable of conducting attack missions at night, conventional units are basically stuck in bases and outposts, pretend they still control the surrounding area. The situation of the US troops in Iraq during the same period was not much better.
 
Last edited:

zyklon

Junior Member
Registered Member
"Conventional US combat arms units usually served as battlespace owners" is a euphemism, the reality is conventional troops in Afghan difficult to operate oustside the base even during the day, after 2006.

The amount of security US battlespace owners achieved in Afghanistan varied over time and space.

Much of it depended on whether the local warlords and tribal leaders, at any given moment, preferred the US backed government in Kabul or a faction thereof, the Taliban or a faction thereof, or some other alternative.

Inevitably, the US got tired of trying to buy off certain Afghan elites while trying to blow up other Afghan elites, and just left the country.

Restrepo and The Hornet's Nest both document the plight of US infantry well.

One thing to keep in mind is that while documentaries like Restrepo and The Hornet's Nest can be reasonably accurate, they're inevitably snapshots captured by journalists drawn to the most exciting parts of Afghanistan.

While these parts offered compelling stories, they were inevitably also some of the most violent, contested and inhospitable corners of Afghanistan, and were not representative of the country or the conflict at large.

To put it succinctly: fighting against US forces were usually visibly less intense, in most of Afghanistan, than what these documentaries captured, and that was sufficient to convince Uncle Sam to call it quits after ~20 years.

After 2010, only SOF is capable of conducting attack missions at night, conventional units are basically stuck in bases and outposts, pretend they still control the surrounding area. The situation of the US troops in Iraq during the same period was not much better.

The other thing is that the American public does not have much of an appetite for military casualties.

As a result, US commanders are relatively risk averse, and tend to avoid relatively riskier ground operations unless they're granted a host of CAS, ISR and CASEVAC assets to mitigate would be threats and address potential contingencies.

However, there were only so many F-16s, AH-64s, MQ-9s and so on and so forth to go around in Afghanistan; and a disproportionate amount of those assets went to JSOC strike teams that primarily conducted manhunting operations at night.

Inevitably, between the limited pre-deployment night training, and a lack of consistent access to requisite airborne assets, conventional US forces in Afghanistan rarely exited the wire to pick fights after sunset.
 

zlixOS

New Member
Registered Member
It's still pretty untenable any argument that the US is not the world leader in night vision technology and night combat experience and doctrine. China does not have much knowledge in producing gen 3 NV, nor does it the experience of using it against a real foe to ideally obtain surprise.

Sometimes I don't like when this forum glazes --- it provides little but circlejerk. The PLA is behind the US Army in night-fighting, and thus must develop its technologies and refine its tactics to first attain parity, then secure dominance.

It's not anti-PLA to understand that the PLA is not infallible, and that it lags behind the armies of the West in certain areas, and that it has overtaken in others, and that all technologies and all ideas of all areas of all branches must be improved to obtain complete broadband battlefield dominance and secure the legitimacy of a Sino-nation. All we can hope for is for all to be fixed and more to be improved.
 
Top