Opinion of 'murica

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**CptJake**

Yep, that translates to manning checkpoints. They don't deal with propaganda, the civil affairs and MISO (new name for Psyops) guys handle that.

They are still responsible for POW collection points and detention centers (see Abu Graib for how well they handled that, wonder how a certain poster deconflicts that wondrous example of training and leadership in the MP force with his perceptions).

**Do_I_Not_Like_That**

CptJake wrote:
Yep, that translates to manning checkpoints. They don't deal with propaganda, the civil affairs and MISO (new name for Psyops) guys handle that.

They are still responsible for POW collection points and detention centers (see Abu Graib for how well they handled that, wonder how a certain poster deconflicts that wondrous example of training and leadership in the MP force with his perceptions).

We're going way the hell OT here

, but that same books highlights NATO's worries over Soviet special forces or paratroopers grabbing key objectives if there was an invasion. Who on the NATO side would deal with that? Surely not the MPs?

**d-usa**

cincydooley wrote:
paulson games wrote:
Kraft's American cheese aka processed yellow sludge is horrible and shouldn't exist. Dairy and amazing cheeses of all kinds is plentiful in Wisconsin aka the US's fat people preserve

God I love the specialty cheese shop that's right over the WI border. Their white cheddar is so sharp it almost melts your eye balls just smelling it, I'm drooling just thinking about it. Chicago wouldn't have the best pizza in the world without all the cheese coming down from WI, it's amazing.

I'm glad someone else appreciates the fine American cheese that do exist. Between Wisconsin, Oregon, Washington, California, and then the Upper East Coast, you can get amazing, incredibly diverse cheese in the US.

"American Cheese" is like "American Beer".

The mass produced generic "one flavor for all" crap that lines the grocery shelves everywhere is crap. But if you can't be bothered to go out and look for the good stuff that is getting more variety all the time, has more and more local producers, and can be found in more of your "normal" stores every year, then you really don't have anyone except yourself to blame for eating/drinking the nasty stuff.

**CptJake**

You do have MPs doing rear area security. You also had a(n up to) BN sized force (often dual hatted as a reserve force) pulling rear are a security/TCF duties. You could see a(n up to) company sized force at lower (say BDE) echelons.

Basically the cooks/mechanics support troops were responsible for perimeter security of their various support areas and were supposed to rehearse that task. At a certain threat level MPs would respond, at another the TCF would.

And (this is honest to God truth!), the Division Band had the METL task to secure the Division TOC and TAC and were supposed to train that task and be proficient at it (I know the guys at 1st Cav took it seriously).

Back in the days before FOBs we called this Base Cluster Security.

This has some of the older doctrine on it: http://www.nuui.com/Sections/Military/Field_Manuals/FM3-90/appe.htm

In part:

THREAT LEVELS

E-31. Threats to bases in the rear area are categorized by the three levels of defense required to counter them. Any or all levels may exist simultaneously in the rear area. Emphasis on specific base defense and security measures may depend on the anticipated threat level. A Level I threat is a small enemy force that can be defeated by CS and CSS units operating in the rear area or by the perimeter defenses established by friendly bases and base clusters. A Level I threat for a typical base consists of a squad-size unit or smaller groups of enemy soldiers, agents, or terrorists. Typical objectives for a Level I threat include supplying themselves from friendly supply stocks; disrupting friendly C2, logistics, and facilities; and interdicting friendly lines of communication (LOC).

E-32. A Level II threat is enemy activities that can be defeated by a base or base cluster augmented by a response force. A typical response force is a MP platoon; however, it can be a combat arms maneuver element. Level II threats consist of enemy special operations teams, long-range reconnaissance units, mounted or dismounted combat reconnaissance teams, and partially attritted small combat units. Typical objectives for a Level II threat include the destruction, as well as the disruption, of friendly C2 and logistics and commercial facilities, and the interdiction of friendly LOCs.

E-33. A Level III threat is beyond the defensive capability of both the base and base cluster and any local reserve or response force. It normally consists of a mobile enemy force. The friendly response to a Level III threat is a TCF. Possible objectives for a Level III threat include seizing key terrain, interfering with the movement and commitment of reserves and artillery, and destroying friendly combat forces. Its objectives could also include destroying friendly CSS facilities, supply points, command post facilities, airfields, aviation assembly areas, arming and refueling points, and interdicting LOCs and major supply routes.

My recon platoon used to play OPFOR and test out base and base cluster security. That was a LOT of fun!

**timetowaste85**

Wisconsin habanero pepper jack. Best cheese on the planet.

I'm not a cheese fan. I eat mozz on my pizza and Parmesan on my pasta and salads. That's really about it. And I started branching into regular pepper jack on burgers. But it always has to be on something. I can eat Wisconsin habanero pepper jack straight. So therefore...best. If a non-cheese fan goes rabid over it, you got a winner.

**Do_I_Not_Like_That**

CptJake wrote:
You do have MPs doing rear area security. You also had a(n up to) BN sized force (often dual hatted as a reserve force) pulling rear are a security/TCF duties. You could see a(n up to) company sized force at lower (say BDE) echelons.

Basically the cooks/mechanics support troops were responsible for perimeter security of their various support areas and were supposed to rehearse that task. At a certain threat level MPs would respond, at another the TCF would.

And (this is honest to God truth!), the Division Band had the METL task to secure the Division TOC and TAC and were supposed to train that task and be proficient at it (I know the guys at 1st Cav took it seriously).

Back in the days before FOBs we called this Base Cluster Security.

This has some of the older doctrine on it: http://www.nuui.com/Sections/Military/Field_Manuals/FM3-90/appe.htm

In part:

THREAT LEVELS

E-31. Threats to bases in the rear area are categorized by the three levels of defense required to counter them. Any or all levels may exist simultaneously in the rear area. Emphasis on specific base defense and security measures may depend on the anticipated threat level. A Level I threat is a small enemy force that can be defeated by CS and CSS units operating in the rear area or by the perimeter defenses established by friendly bases and base clusters. A Level I threat for a typical base consists of a squad-size unit or smaller groups of enemy soldiers, agents, or terrorists. Typical objectives for a Level I threat include supplying themselves from friendly supply stocks; disrupting friendly C2, logistics, and facilities; and interdicting friendly lines of communication (LOC).

E-32. A Level II threat is enemy activities that can be defeated by a base or base cluster augmented by a response force. A typical response force is a MP platoon; however, it can be a combat arms maneuver element. Level II threats consist of enemy special operations teams, long-range reconnaissance units, mounted or dismounted combat reconnaissance teams, and partially attritted small combat units. Typical objectives for a Level II threat include the destruction, as well as the disruption, of friendly C2 and logistics and commercial facilities, and the interdiction of friendly LOCs.

E-33. A Level III threat is beyond the defensive capability of both the base and base cluster and any local reserve or response force. It normally consists of a mobile enemy force. The friendly response to a Level III threat is a TCF. Possible objectives for a Level III threat include seizing key terrain, interfering with the movement and commitment of reserves and artillery, and destroying friendly combat forces. Its objectives could also include destroying friendly CSS facilities, supply points, command post facilities, airfields, aviation assembly areas, arming and refueling points, and interdicting LOCs and major supply routes.

My recon platoon used to play OPFOR and test out base and base cluster security. That was a LOT of fun!

So you would have been confident of dealing with Soviet special forces if you'd been serving back then?

**Frazzled**

Vetril wrote:
I do visit though, I even lived in CA for some time.

No you visited California, not America.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
CptJake wrote:
You do have MPs doing rear area security. You also had a(n up to) BN sized force (often dual hatted as a reserve force) pulling rear are a security/TCF duties. You could see a(n up to) company sized force at lower (say BDE) echelons.

Basically the cooks/mechanics support troops were responsible for perimeter security of their various support areas and were supposed to rehearse that task. At a certain threat level MPs would respond, at another the TCF would.

And (this is honest to God truth!), the Division Band had the METL task to secure the Division TOC and TAC and were supposed to train that task and be proficient at it (I know the guys at 1st Cav took it seriously).

Back in the days before FOBs we called this Base Cluster Security.

This has some of the older doctrine on it: http://www.nuui.com/Sections/Military/Field_Manuals/FM3-90/appe.htm

In part:

THREAT LEVELS

E-31. Threats to bases in the rear area are categorized by the three levels of defense required to counter them. Any or all levels may exist simultaneously in the rear area. Emphasis on specific base defense and security measures may depend on the anticipated threat level. A Level I threat is a small enemy force that can be defeated by CS and CSS units operating in the rear area or by the perimeter defenses established by friendly bases and base clusters. A Level I threat for a typical base consists of a squad-size unit or smaller groups of enemy soldiers, agents, or terrorists. Typical objectives for a Level I threat include supplying themselves from friendly supply stocks; disrupting friendly C2, logistics, and facilities; and interdicting friendly lines of communication (LOC).

E-32. A Level II threat is enemy activities that can be defeated by a base or base cluster augmented by a response force. A typical response force is a MP platoon; however, it can be a combat arms maneuver element. Level II threats consist of enemy special operations teams, long-range reconnaissance units, mounted or dismounted combat reconnaissance teams, and partially attritted small combat units. Typical objectives for a Level II threat include the destruction, as well as the disruption, of friendly C2 and logistics and commercial facilities, and the interdiction of friendly LOCs.

E-33. A Level III threat is beyond the defensive capability of both the base and base cluster and any local reserve or response force. It normally consists of a mobile enemy force. The friendly response to a Level III threat is a TCF. Possible objectives for a Level III threat include seizing key terrain, interfering with the movement and commitment of reserves and artillery, and destroying friendly combat forces. Its objectives could also include destroying friendly CSS facilities, supply points, command post facilities, airfields, aviation assembly areas, arming and refueling points, and interdicting LOCs and major supply routes.

My recon platoon used to play OPFOR and test out base and base cluster security. That was a LOT of fun!

So you would have been confident of dealing with Soviet special forces if you'd been serving back then?

If it was USA vs. USSR that wasn't the problem. All those hard metal containers coming in from low orbit would have been the problem.

**timetowaste85**

Just like Canada is America's hat, California is our taint. It's definitely not an accurate depiction of the rest of the country.

**Frazzled**

That makes Missouri our belly button. Comes see the World's largest ball of Lint!

**Vetril**

Frazzled wrote:
Vetril wrote:
I do visit though, I even lived in CA for some time.

No you visited California, not America.

But... But...

**cincydooley**

My favorite American cheeses:

Rogue Creamery - Caveman Blue and Smokey Blue
Cypress Grove - Chèvre Humboldt Fog
Cowgirl Creamery - Mt. Tam
Upland Cheeses - Pleasant Ridge Reserve

All super tasty.

**Jihadin**

CptJake wrote:
You do have MPs doing rear area security. You also had a(n up to) BN sized force (often dual hatted as a reserve force) pulling rear are a security/TCF duties. You could see a(n up to) company sized force at lower (say BDE) echelons.

Basically the cooks/mechanics support troops were responsible for perimeter security of their various support areas and were supposed to rehearse that task. At a certain threat level MPs would respond, at another the TCF would.

And (this is honest to God truth!), the Division Band had the METL task to secure the Division TOC and TAC and were supposed to train that task and be proficient at it (I know the guys at 1st Cav took it seriously).

Back in the days before FOBs we called this Base Cluster Security.

This has some of the older doctrine on it: http://www.nuui.com/Sections/Military/Field_Manuals/FM3-90/appe.htm

In part:

THREAT LEVELS

E-31. Threats to bases in the rear area are categorized by the three levels of defense required to counter them. Any or all levels may exist simultaneously in the rear area. Emphasis on specific base defense and security measures may depend on the anticipated threat level. A Level I threat is a small enemy force that can be defeated by CS and CSS units operating in the rear area or by the perimeter defenses established by friendly bases and base clusters. A Level I threat for a typical base consists of a squad-size unit or smaller groups of enemy soldiers, agents, or terrorists. Typical objectives for a Level I threat include supplying themselves from friendly supply stocks; disrupting friendly C2, logistics, and facilities; and interdicting friendly lines of communication (LOC).

E-32. A Level II threat is enemy activities that can be defeated by a base or base cluster augmented by a response force. A typical response force is a MP platoon; however, it can be a combat arms maneuver element. Level II threats consist of enemy special operations teams, long-range reconnaissance units, mounted or dismounted combat reconnaissance teams, and partially attritted small combat units. Typical objectives for a Level II threat include the destruction, as well as the disruption, of friendly C2 and logistics and commercial facilities, and the interdiction of friendly LOCs.

E-33. A Level III threat is beyond the defensive capability of both the base and base cluster and any local reserve or response force. It normally consists of a mobile enemy force. The friendly response to a Level III threat is a TCF. Possible objectives for a Level III threat include seizing key terrain, interfering with the movement and commitment of reserves and artillery, and destroying friendly combat forces. Its objectives could also include destroying friendly CSS facilities, supply points, command post facilities, airfields, aviation assembly areas, arming and refueling points, and interdicting LOCs and major supply routes.

My recon platoon used to play OPFOR and test out base and base cluster security. That was a LOT of fun!

Besides ones Primary MOS and some who might have secondary and third MOS skill set. Everyone pretty much know the basics of soldiering. Every week there's SGT Time to go over soldier tasking.

So in a transportation unit (Trucks) you might have a reclass from another MOS, say infantry, Artillery, or somewhere else. The unit gains a new driver(s) plus also skill sets not commonly used in their situation. Every troop, NCO, Officer wear many "hats" and have assign "Lanes" they deal with

Edit

We're still OT being the US Military is a very different animal compare to all other military
We train to doctrine and standards but once bullets flys we improvise and take initiative

**timetowaste85**

There are not enough votes for "love it" in here. I think some of you boys are suffering from not enough freedom.

Don't make me request the Captain America selfie.

**Supertony51**

Vash108 wrote:
Born and raised here. I love America, but an some stuff needs to change. We are in 2015 and the people running it still live in 1950. A bunch of old White people who are afraid of change, and instead of embrace it they fight it every chance they get.

I am not sure if I would stay if I had the chance to leave.

I was with you until the whole "white men" thing.

You do realize that Black Men voted overwhelming against gay marriage right?

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Iron_Captain wrote:
I strongly dislike America as a state. It is hard to find a state whose foreign policies I disagree more with. I always disliked them, but I think the russophobia that became much more prominent in American media since 2014 pushed me to hate.
I could start an entire rant here about how the US is evil and everything it did wrong, but I don't think anyone is interested. You can just read it on the internet anyway, my reasons are pretty much the same as those of most Russians.

But once you take their self-righteousness away, I quite like Americans as a people. They are funny and crazy (both in good and in bad ways). They are open, optimistic and have a great sense of humour. Even American politics seem like a comedy show. At least, that is how they present it on the Dutch news, where they only show the crazy parts.

A Russian doesn't like our Foreign Policy.

Better go Crimea River

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Formosa wrote:
I see the us imploding within the next 50 years if they don't resolve the race problems they are having, and then taking The world with them, seriosly, it looks like your headed for your 3rd civil war.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Not that Britain's any different, how many have we had? 5/6?

I think we have some major issues going on right now regarding race, and yes It wouldn't surprise to see some sort of major insurrection within the next 20 years or so.

However with that being said, the EU nations have some serious race problems going on right now as well.

**dusara217**

Da Boss wrote:
I'll accept that. Though I also think you'd have to kill pretty much everyone involved or you're going to have trouble down the line from the survivors. And by down the line I mean years or decades later. Something like that would not be forgotten.

MEh, we just need to pull a Vlad the Impaler, and this'll all be a lot easier.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Race issues? In the US? Pretty sure the only people making a stink over race is the black people in the ghettos, I've never heard of anybody else doing it - not white trash, my hillbilly family, rich white/black/Asian/brown people, normal black people, Mexicans, or anybody else but poor black people.

**Dreadclaw69**

namiel wrote:
you must be in chicago

Indiana

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Formosa wrote:
I plan on touching a lot of American boob when I get there, British accent and military uniform, sorted.

Because wearing the uniform of a foreign country off a military base is always such a good idea...

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
My point was this: during the cold war, the US military trained to fight the WARSAW pact nations in Europe, but ended up in Vietnam, and was unprepared for it,

and now, they're training for unconventional war in the ME, but Russia and China are on the rise, which would be a conventional war

I'm confused

Isn't the old saying that every army is always fighting the last war?

**Iron_Captain**

Supertony51 wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Iron_Captain wrote:
I strongly dislike America as a state. It is hard to find a state whose foreign policies I disagree more with. I always disliked them, but I think the russophobia that became much more prominent in American media since 2014 pushed me to hate.
I could start an entire rant here about how the US is evil and everything it did wrong, but I don't think anyone is interested. You can just read it on the internet anyway, my reasons are pretty much the same as those of most Russians.

But once you take their self-righteousness away, I quite like Americans as a people. They are funny and crazy (both in good and in bad ways). They are open, optimistic and have a great sense of humour. Even American politics seem like a comedy show. At least, that is how they present it on the Dutch news, where they only show the crazy parts.

A Russian doesn't like our Foreign Policy.

Better go Crimea River

What now, American, couldn't resist Putin in a pun? Ukraine yet?

**Vaktathi**

Iron_Captain wrote:
Supertony51 wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Iron_Captain wrote:
I strongly dislike America as a state. It is hard to find a state whose foreign policies I disagree more with. I always disliked them, but I think the russophobia that became much more prominent in American media since 2014 pushed me to hate.
I could start an entire rant here about how the US is evil and everything it did wrong, but I don't think anyone is interested. You can just read it on the internet anyway, my reasons are pretty much the same as those of most Russians.

But once you take their self-righteousness away, I quite like Americans as a people. They are funny and crazy (both in good and in bad ways). They are open, optimistic and have a great sense of humour. Even American politics seem like a comedy show. At least, that is how they present it on the Dutch news, where they only show the crazy parts.

A Russian doesn't like our Foreign Policy.

Better go Crimea River
What now, American, couldn't resist Putin in a pun? Ukraine yet?

Well played...

**Strombones**

Voted love it for BBQ.

But hate our hypocrisy.

Lots of good people here in the states just like everywhere else.

Now I wanna go down under and see how they BBQ it.

edit: queue Angry Boys theme.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Swastakowey wrote:
namiel wrote:
Does new Zealand BBQ beef?

Sausages, steak, pork, onion, bacon, tomato, kebabs, chicken, beef, hash browns, and well... Probably easier to list what we don't BBQ: Deserts and bread. Oh and some Salads we don't BBQ...

Address please?

**jasper76**

Plenty to like , plenty to dislike. All things considered, I'm glad I was born in the USA in a time and place with plentiful food and water and some amount of freedom and opportunity. There are certainly less hospitable numbers to draw in the birthplace lottery.

I don't think I'm constitutionally capable of loving a nation state, per se. Sort of does not compute. So I voted Like.

**Jihadin**

I grew up and a great time frame
MTV going Live
Superman movies on the big screen
Star Wars on the big screen
Star Trek on the big screen
Rabbit ears
4' spaghetti telephone cords stretch 10'
Saturday morning cartoon
Three channels that comes in excellent using rabbit ears
Cell phone making an appearance
Internet taking off
Pentium chip coming and computer systems going to public market
Watching live TV one of the moon landing
Watching American POW's coming home from Vietnam
Heavy Metal taking off\
Birth of Rap
Breakdance
Footloose
Yoo-hoo's
etc etc etc

**easysauce**

d-usa wrote:
cincydooley wrote:
paulson games wrote:
Kraft's American cheese aka processed yellow sludge is horrible and shouldn't exist. Dairy and amazing cheeses of all kinds is plentiful in Wisconsin aka the US's fat people preserve

God I love the specialty cheese shop that's right over the WI border. Their white cheddar is so sharp it almost melts your eye balls just smelling it, I'm drooling just thinking about it. Chicago wouldn't have the best pizza in the world without all the cheese coming down from WI, it's amazing.

I'm glad someone else appreciates the fine American cheese that do exist. Between Wisconsin, Oregon, Washington, California, and then the Upper East Coast, you can get amazing, incredibly diverse cheese in the US.

"American Cheese" is like "American Beer".

The mass produced generic "one flavor for all" crap that lines the grocery shelves everywhere is crap. But if you can't be bothered to go out and look for the good stuff that is getting more variety all the time, has more and more local producers, and can be found in more of your "normal" stores every year, then you really don't have anyone except yourself to blame for eating/drinking the nasty stuff.

its also another one of those "American inventions" that Canadians actually invented!

like basket ball, or my favorite, the Garand!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_L._Kraft

dont worry, processed cheese tasted awful even back then!

local dairys tend to do a really good job if you can get to one, nothing like a nice bit o cheese!