Indirect Fires Modernization Project - C3/M777 Replacement

[GR66]

Very fair question.

It may be the coward in me. I am not a fan of the close fight. I figure that evens up the odds too much and brings it down to my muscle versus his.

Personally I would prefer to stand well out of his range while killing as many of his buddies as possible and him.

....

Thses two developments have been in the works for 100 years and today they have reached a stage that they have rendered the rifle battle irrelevant. Rifles are still critical for crowd control but militarily they are only useful as personal defence weapons.

The Americans have bombed the hell out of Iran. How much Iranian territory have they taken? Has the bombing compelled Iran to give in to US demands?

I'm very much in favour of autonomous systems and cheaper precision fires, but ultimately you need boots on the ground (and their irrelevant rifles) to take and hold territory in order to actually decide a conflict. Ukraine/Russia is case and point. They have both become quite effective at using ranged weapons at all scales to strike each other but the front lines have barely moved and no military resolution to the conflict is in sight.

You may not be a fan of the close fight, but wars are not won by just slinging arrows at each other.

 

[Kirkhill]

The Americans have bombed the hell out of Iran. How much Iranian territory have they taken? Has the bombing compelled Iran to give in to US demands?

I'm very much in favour of autonomous systems and cheaper precision fires, but ultimately you need boots on the ground (and their irrelevant rifles) to take and hold territory in order to actually decide a conflict. Ukraine/Russia is case and point. They have both become quite effective at using ranged weapons at all scales to strike each other but the front lines have barely moved and no military resolution to the conflict is in sight.

You may not be a fan of the close fight, but wars are not won by just slinging arrows at each other.

I will continue slinging arrows for as long as there are targets that will oppose the insertion of close combat forces.

I do not say that there is no need for the rifleman with a personal defence weapon. I agree that they are the ultimate expression of control over a population.

But launching close combat troops into an opposed environment when it isn't necessary borders on the criminal.

And do you really want to insert good troops into a hostile population?

The difference between inserting a bomb or a brigade is the length of time the effect endures. But both effects are time limited. The effect of the brigade only lasts as long as it is sustained in place. And every brigade in history has eventually returned home.