Showing posts from August, 2017

Tactical Skills Q & A -or- Be Good at Everything or Die

In the interest of spreading useful information regarding tactics/training I wanted to relay this conversation I had with some folks from the tactical community a while back. I was asked several pointed questions which I do my best to answer below: Question 1: Of all the various training disciplines available, which one should be top of the training list right now in light of world events? Rifle training? Land Navigation? Communications? Patrolling , etc... Answer: Well, there are definitely some sacred cows on that list. It of course kind of depends on where you are as an individual with regard to the various skillsets, but lets assume you are a competent shooter with some basic fieldcraft under your belt....I would put information gathering on top. You could also label it Intel/Comms if you wanted. Why? 1. Intelligence drives the fight. Without it, you are just a bunch of armed guys in the woods. 2. Everyone can do it. Your 75 year old aunt can do it, your kid can do

Full Spectrum Training.....does it matter?

 So I know the question is out there....why is this website supposedly devoted to the study of warfare always talking about computer security and cryptocurrency? Shouldn't I just be posting articles about "improving your shot group" or the latest in "tactical accoutrements"? It essentially boils down to this: 1. As anyone who has attended my courses knows, I believe in what I call "The Heinlein Doctrine" (or the Competent Man principal). In essence, a warrior (or just a human being for that matter) must be good at everything...not just shooting, or grappling, or navigating. 2. Right now, technology is at the forefront of not just battle, but our everyday it or not. 3. Many believe that war lies in the not too far future of the western world. I believe that this war has already begun. Perhaps not the shooting part, but the IPB (Intelligence Preparation of the Battlespace) has begun in earnest in the technical space. We ignore t