Problem fixed. Very Good Post




 
--
 
August 11th, 2005  
5.56X45mm
 
 

Topic: Problem fixed. Very Good Post


Okay, this is a question about the possible defense of the United States against a foreign invasion, military coup, or any other possible situation.

Remember this is just for talk. Do you think that police and civilians can bolster the defense of the USA? Now most police forces have armaments to the level of a recon unit. Vehicles (Patrol Cars & Trucks), armored shock troops (SWAT, HRT, & SRT), Aerial Recon & Transport (Helicopter Unit), Marine Patrol (For those departments charged with waterways), and just your standard officer.
Now I know that most special units within the police departments can survive action with military units due to their training and issued equipment. Now, what they can mostly do is just regular infantry style warfare. But they can survive. Now that standard police officer, most have a level IIIA vest and a pistol. A shotgun, sub machinegun, or a carbine/rifle in the vehicle. And if they keep riot gear in the vehicle, they might have a Kevlar vest plus a gas mask. Also possible smoke or CS gas grenades might be within their immediately reach. As for their transport, the ever classic squad car or the SUV would be the most common.
Now in terms of weapon calibers, they use the common pistol calibers. 9mm, .40S&W, .45ACP, .38 Special, .357 Magnum, .357 Sig, and if theyíre a special tactics unit; the new 5.7X28mm cartridge. For Rifles either the 5.56X45mm, 7.62X51mm, .30-06, .270 Winchester, or 300 Winchester Magnum. Which the last three calibers mentioned would more than likely be with a bolt action rifle. And for the shotgun, the universal 12 Ga. Now the main problem with any police department if they were to work together with any other group; would be the difference in ammunition calibers and firearm types. I know of departments that use the Glock, S&W Semi-Autos and revolvers, Ruger, Sig-Sauer, Styer, FN, Beretta, and other popular pistol makers. As for rifles, there is the AR-15, Springfield M1A, Sig 550, Remington 700, Winchester M70, Ruger Mini-14, and FN 2000, and the H&K G36. As for the sub machineguns, there is the H&K MP5, FN P90, Beretta CX4 Strom Carbine (Not a sub machine but a pistol caliber carbine), Uzi, Bushmaster Carbon 15 AR Pistol, and the Colt 9mm AR-15 Carbine.
That is a major problem with them, so many different weapons and calibers. They might not be able to get possibly re-supply when needed.

Now for the civilian population, Iím limiting it to two different groups. The ďMilitiaĒ and the average gun owner. The militia type person is one that has a rifle, combat equipment, and some possible training. Now I donít want to confuse those with the standard stereotypical image of the White Power Militia member. Iím just referring to someone that is prepared incase of the SHTF (SH!T HITTING THE FAN). They would be equal in terms of equipment with a special tactics officer in a police department. Most people of this group have a rifle as theyíre main armament. Whether it be the AK-47, AK-74, CETME/G3 Clone, AR-15, FN FAL, Ruger Mini-14, Ruger Mini-30, Mauser 98, Mosin Nagant, Lee Enfield, M1 Carbine, Beretta CX4 Storm Carbine, SKS Carbine, M1 Garand, Springfield M1A, or another type of Semi-Auto or Bolt Action rifle that was either a military rifle is was built to compete within the market. Like the Kel-Tec Su-16 Carbine. Pistols are pretty much the same as that for the police departments.
The equipment would more than likely be a set of BDUs, Web Gear of some sort, and if some spend the money. A Kevlar Vest and Helmet. And the only mobile assists would be their personal vehicles. Cars, Trucks, and SUVs.
Now the same issue would happen to those that donít use military equipment. Expect they would use additional calibers for mil-slurp rifles like the 7.62X54R, 7.92X57mm, 7X57mm, 5.45X39mm, and 7.62X39mm. Only those with an AR-15 rifle and Beretta 92FS/M9 pistol could get a re-supply from the military. Same deal with the police departments. And the shotgun issue is that same.

Now for the second group, they would use their hunting firearms. Lever Actions, Bolt Actions, and Semi-Auto rifles. Anything chambered from .17 mach 2 to .45-70 Government. And pistols could be from .22LR to .45 Long Colt or .50AE. Shotguns could be either single or double barreled side-by-sides. Pump Actions, or Semi Autos. And the ammunition could be from .410 Gauge to .12 Gauge. Equipment would be little to nothing, and personal transport is the same as the other civilian group. Cars, Trucks, and SUVs. I would say that this would be about the same as the insurgency. Nothing more than a firearm and a pair of legs.



Now what Iím getting at is what do you think each group can do and how would they use their resources. Subjects like this always interest me and I know that some other people must think about it too.
August 12th, 2005  
AJChenMPH
 
 
I think it would depend on how quickly tactics could be learned and if a chain of command could be established. If rank can be quickly established based on experience and/or other criteria, and rank is followed, you might be able to do something. Once that's been established, and if tactics can be taught, then that's your basic Army right there. After all, what you're describing is essentially what happened during the American Revolution.
August 12th, 2005  
ISLANDFOX
 
I think that the population of a country could put up a major fight against an occupying force (maybe not to so much of an extent during the initial invasion, but definitely after occupation or at least after a period of time after enemy troops entering the country). We've seen this many times in history, and I don't live in the US, but I know that in NZ there's allot of places for locals to hide, group, stock supplys, whatever, and guerilla warfare can overwhelm, or at the very least be a major thorn in the side of, a far larger military fighting force. In a country in the US, where far more superior weapons can be bought far easier than most other countries, it'd be even more so.
Imagine what 10 average guys with even just sub-par hunting rifles, perhaps some low grade pistols, and a decent knowledge of basic combat and some explosives could do.
There's no doubt that you could wreak havoc, to some extent at least, but the only question is; how many people are truly willing to put their lives on the line?
A sufficiently determined and motivated civilian population could definitely be a major advantage to a defending country.

The police? I don't know- there's no history I am aware of where police have made a notable difference. I'm sure they have, but in the majority of cases police aren't going to be targeting enemy forces- they'll either be policing civilians or just doing whatever the hell else everyone else is doing.

It all depends, of course, on the scale of the invasion. How many land forces are there? How well equipped are they, and do they have air support? Is naval, or even missile, based combat going to play a role? Are they deep into the country and cities, or being held at a distance by defending forces? Depending on the stage, scale, and development of the invasion, the civilians and police could play extremely different roles.
--
August 12th, 2005  
03USMC
 
 
As far as LE assisting the Military. The ROE's are different the tactics are different. Even the tactics of a tactical team making entry are different from an Infantry fire team conducting MOUT Operations. Unless you had a strong makeup of former Infantry in a particular Dept. then your learning tactics all over again.

IMO the best use for LE would be as a rear area PMO type force multiplier. That could free up MP units to move forward and conduct LI type ops in support of the Forward manuver elements.

The idea that LE has more Veterans in it is both right and wrong. Yes there are alot of vets but then you have to look at their former MOS. I'll use some from my dept.

USMC Infantry- 1, USMC Motor T- 1, USMC Arty-1, USAF Security Forces-1, USN Electronics Tech-1 USN Gunners Mate -1 US Army Air Defense-1, US Army Infantry-1

So even the vets would require some level of basic infantry training.
August 22nd, 2005  
FULLMETALJACKET
 
 
I believe that we could withstand an invasion. not to get off subject, but i heard somewhere that switzerland or however you spell it actually trains civilians? someone back this fact up please?
August 22nd, 2005  
ozmilman
 
Yeah mate, i think i heard about that Switzerland thing too, or maybe it was Finland. Not sure.

Now, in this thread, we would have to assume that America's allies are incapacitated, because for the most part i think the American government would prefer life to go on as normal and not have a bunch of wannabe Rambos running around making a mess of their carefully planned tactics - they would rather have highly trained allies such as Australia, Britain, New Zealand etc coming over to it's aid. But let's just say, for argument's sake, that we have our own problems and we've told our allies to sod off.

For the basic armed civvie, it's not gonna be as easy as grabbing some guns, going up into the mountains, painting their faces, calling themselves the Wolverines and trying to fight back the commies - because they would not be trained enough to conceal themselves for long enough, and not many people know how to build a defendable base (which my mates and i are actually planning to do for some paintball games).

There would have to be someone running the show, someone powerful or charismatic who knows what they're doing and can teach the other civvies how to do things properly. Now, unlike most other countries, Americans have access to every little bit of hardware that they could want, which means that one guy might have enough guns and ammo to adequately arm a small cell for a reasonable amount of time - but the biggest thing would be food and supplies. They would have to fend for themselves for the most part and probably raid the canned section of the supermarkets. But what makes them even more unreliable is the unpredictable nature of civvies. The army has a pecking order, but a militia organized by untrained idiots is gonna have backstabbing and all that kinda crap, which is likely to hurt their efforts if they ever see battle.

The best shot for a militia cell to survive is for it to be gathered up as quickly as possible by local authorities and handed over to the nearest Army Reserve or National Guard (Weekend Warrior types) battallion and be temporarily inducted as an infantryman, supplied with food, extra ammo if it can be found, and told that they are now subject to military justice if they fail to obey orders. They wouldn't have to do anything too advanced, so i think they would have the best chance of surviving like this.

I agree with above about the cops just policing the public - they would probably be able to get militia people to the reserve units or national guard.

Rich.
August 23rd, 2005  
Italian Guy
 
 
About the Switzerland training civilians thing: http://www.securityacademy.com/engli...20training.htm
August 24th, 2005  
ozmilman
 
Ahh, cool...

Come on people, this is a good thread, very interesting. Like Johnny Five used to say - NEED MORE INPUT.

Rich.
August 24th, 2005  
Toyuzu
 
I suspect an invasion in the U.S. might become similar to Viet Nam, only with the tables turned, so to speak. The majority of Americans who would join the fight would be the out-doors types who have weapons, know the territory and would be able to survive almost indefinitely while mounting small-scale attacks.

There is still a great deal of very formidable terrain here, and us "rednecks" know it pretty well.
August 24th, 2005  
ozmilman
 
Haha, yeah i didn't think of that man, that's a very good analogy. Nobody knows their home better than the person who owns the home right? You'd have to be crazy to try and invade America anyway, but it's a thought that has to be taken into consideration.

Rich.