Previous Post
Next Post

We recently discussed the ins and outs and whys and wherefores of civilian militias. (For more perspective, check out this link.) I wouldn’t return to the subject so soon if not for this most excellent video, which A) doesn’t have anything to do with George Zimmerman and B) is the single best example of militia training I’ve ever seen. It raises the question: why not this? That said, I’m no warrior (worrier yes, but then I’m Jewish). Are these drills tactically sound?

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. This is a tactical response class for civilian contractors. I’m pretty sure I’ve seen those video posted before, it was a review or something of TR course

  2. I like how the DM toward the end puts a little piece of brush over his rifle like he’s trying to conceal it – while wearing a big red jacket.

    • I also noticed that camo job the guy did with the stick. Just think, if he’d had a few more little twigs he could’ve hidden an entire tank!

  3. I mean, if ammo conservation is no worry and you have an unlimited supply of magazines maybe. But there’s no controlled bursts with the LMGs and they’re just droppin mags on the ground. If you’re cut off or short on supplies you may not have the opportunity to go back and pick those up.

    • Same thing I was thinking, waste of ammo shooting that fast, someone should give that guy a semi-auto, it would be more effective.

      • Not to mention they crossed fields of fire like every ten seconds when they were firing. I think there’s a good chance the video was shot for recruiting purposes and they wanted it to look like Call of Duty to get young high school and college kids interested. Really their target demographic is 17-28 year old men that didn’t enlist or go ARNG so that’s not a bad strategy perhaps.

    • Its a react to far ambush.

      Ammo conservation is a rather limited priority than getting lead down range and new magazines into your weapons. You can either choose to assault or break contact. Peeling if you’re in a densely wooded area.

      Personally, I believe magazines are critical and that is why dump pouches were invented. Some schools, like Tactical Response, teach dropping the magazine because getting ammunition cycled into the weapon should be a higher priority and mag stowage.

      • When you’re fighting as a guerrilla with limited access to automatic weapons and ammo cycling ammo through your weapon becomes a bit less critical. The important thing is to control the instinct to just dump lead in the direction of the enemy. The name of the game is accurate aimed fire. That’s why the USMC still uses full length rifles and why we still emphasize individual marksmanship.

        • Thats not always the way that it is taught (especially in the Army), although I couldn’t agree more with you…

          The American “militia” should emphasize superior marksmanship.

        • To WLCE’s point, establishing fire superiority is (doctrinally) the first thing you do in responding to a far ambush.

          All that logistics stuff goes right out the window when you are trying to stay alive for the next few seconds.

        • @DJ

          That’s when you have the ability to. Training to fight as if you have a gigantic logistical support base when you are training a militia unit is idiotic. The fact of the matter is that establishing fire superiority is rather difficult when your troops are not likely to even have a basic ammunition load. So doctrine must adjust to reflect the logistical realities. If this was a regular Army or USMC unit, you would be correct. They should train to reflect the abilities they have. This is not such a unit.

        • With a near ambush you may try to assault through, but you don’t go for fire superiority with a far ambush, that’s insane. You have no clue how many enemy combatants there are or what weapons they have. First immediate reaction is to assess direction and break contact to the rear or side. In H’wood it may be macho to assault an ambush or machinegun bunker, but in reality it is foolhardy, same with a sniper. Problem with Youtube is anyone can make a video about anything whether it is good info or bad. Videos like this should be removed when they are found.

        • @ Rattler – FM 7-8

          Doctrinally, your immediate action in a far ambush is to suppress. If you don’t shoot back, immediately, you are just going to get cut to pieces.

      • It seems like reacting to a far ambush would be the LAST thing Yeager would want to bring up. Just me?

  4. This video HAD to have been made before the ammo shortage!

    That said – the key to militias are only small and trusted groups of no more than three people with no central authority. That way government infiltration is extremely hard and there’s no head of the snake to chop off.

  5. Yeah as a Marine machine gunner their automatic riflemans skills are severely lacking. The idea isn’t to shoot every bullet as fast as possible but to pprovide effective suppression for as long as possible and 75 round bursts it less than a few seconds of suppression. But 15 five round bursts could give a minute to a minute and a half of accurate fire.

  6. Meh. Not impressed. They don’t run when they should be running to cover. They bunch up way too much, especially when on the ground. Spread out, it’s not red-rover so there’s no reason to hold hands. And split those groups of 8-10 into two groups of 4-5 to envelop the enemy. Why they’re walking in the middle of the creek is a mystery. If you need the concealment, get low and crawl through it. Otherwise avoid the misery and walk beside it. And ease up on the ammo dumps, good grief. If I was fighting one of them I’d just wait 5 seconds till the guy emptied his mag and while he’s running up to me while reloading, shoot him.

  7. The camera man has big clangers. A couple of the instructors must have really good insurance. These guys have a bit of ammo at their disposal.
    I agree with above, too many people. OpSec…

  8. Too mich gear and they dont blend in. A drone strike waiting to happen. The group in this video might do well in a total govt collapse but would be useless in a fight against the govt. A few guys who can grab a cache of small arms and home made explosives, engage a “heavy force” and disappear back into the local population before heavy firepower like arty or air can come into play is where its at.

  9. I was interested once in joining a local group some years ago, but it was very rigid and the 2 old guys that ran it were “my way or the highway” types. Watching this above video, I see a LOT of guys too close together letting loose a LOT of ammo in multiple directions. Frankly I’m too old, to fat and too crippled up to run around in the woods like these guys, and I’m not sure I’d feel all that safe out there with them. I’m not too sure I’d want them in my neighborhood either. Folks that cover their faces don’t inspire my trust, make me think that my stuff might become their stuff if the SHTF.

      • That could very well be the case, but I’ve been places where the folks cover their faces to make it harder to identify them from the store surveillance video while they are bashing in the head of the clerk and stealing cigarettes, so it hits me a little different than other folks maybe.

    • You’re right joe, I’ll be donning my ghillie suit and disapper into my established AO. I have a years worth of caches and will refit from the dead. Let’s all remember, if it’s DHS, ATF, ATS, FEMA, IRS, or most police forces … that come for us, they act like gangbangers. The stand in the open like their body armor is a force field, shoot dozens of rounds without hitting shit, and will not follow you into “uninhabitable terrain” especially if they have to do it on foot. Good one or two man teams can effectively take out dozens of enemy a day.

  10. They are training to overwhelm a larger adversary through fire power, the tactics they are using are those developed by SEAL Assaulters, their muzzle discipline is good except for the guy in prone that had his muzzle sticking straight up to avoid sweeping the man in front (probably SOP) this would have drawn hostile fire to his position. Has no one noted that these were live fire demos and no one got shot?
    The film making was very good, camera work and editing was professional the ST was OK. This is a well trained and well funded group.

    • Ok so even if they overwhelm say a poorly trained guard unit…then get droned. If you really want to train a group of people to have a fighting chance against a tyrannical government takeover they need to be trained in unconventional warfare, hit and run etc. It worked pretty well for the VC and those fighting us in the stan and Iraq. So long as you keep the local population on your side, you can and will outlast your enemy.

      In Iraq the bad guys screwed up and made the same mistake US forces made on the way in, they caused too many civilian casualties then began to terrorize the local populace thus turning the public against them.

      • The Iraqi insurgency was done in when Iraqis turned on each other for sectarian reasons (Sunni vs Shia). In classic divide-and-conquer, we supported the sect (Shia) that was willing to play ball with us at the time.

        • This is going off topic, but when exactly was the insurgency done in? I’m not bashing the military; they made great progress, but There was still an armed insurgency when are boys were pulled out. The minute are troops left any good our presence may have brought was for nothing. Afghanistan is going to be the same story.

  11. Looks like fun if you’ve got a bloated ammo budget.

    If you’re going to do the militia thing, one of the most important things was left to the last couple of seconds of video, medic duty. Come to think of it, that could come in handy in a million situations that don’t involve another Civil War.

  12. Are these drills tactically sound? For what purpose? Militia training for what scenario?

    It appeared to be contractors training. I can’t think of why militia would be training to assault targets in large fields in this day and time. That makes you a drone target.

    To say it is tactically sound, we would need to know what the purpose of the drill is.

    • The purpose of the drill(s) is to simulate engaging an opponent’s position using fast dynamic and overwhelming use of (live) fire superiority. To neutralize resistance through the use of one or more units and to be able to withdraw under fire while maintaining suppressive fire on the enemy

      • To be fair, they are not exactly training for asymmetric warfare. They are moving in tight formations and training for scenarios where they have a firepower advantage. As the defender in asymetic warfare, you will never have a firepower advantage unless you are the one setting the ambush. (And often not even then.) Those guys need far better training in their field craft and movement drils. They also need to train how they plan to fight and with the same gear. Wearing bright and easily identifiable gear instead of cammo may help the range safety, but a $20 pack of glow worms would handle that and allow them to get used to moving in their field gear.

      • I am no navy seal but it would seem to me this tactic would work if SHTF and you have roving bands of poorly trained bandits. I don’t see this working against professionally trained armies like the US Army or Marine core.

        • The problem is tht they are making rookie tactical mistakes where a single lucky SOB with a grenade can rare out their whole unit. Minimum spacing boys minimum spacing.

  13. Not horrible training, but I don’t see myself signing up anytime soon. I’m not quick to jump on the militia bandwagon. Too many fake tabs, medals, and embellished accomplishments out there.


  15. RF not blasting this like Travis Haley dynamic shooting course recently?

    Looks like it could be fun and intense. Not sure how legit this all is.. Mot being former military. I remain skeptical.

      • Indeed, think about what you said and take it to the logical extreme. Let’s say they were training to fight like 18th century line infantry… How do you think that would work for them?

        • Ew. Then doesn’t the medic now have to run through the same hail of bullets that just mowed the troop down, to get to him? Is there some “rule of warfare” that nobody shoots the medic, that everybody honors?

          Oh, wait. He doesn’t run, he belly-crawls. Never mind.

          War is bad, m’kay? So if they start one on us, let’s win it forthwith! Hey, maybe that’d be the time “we” could call in all our favors from NATO, and see if Russia and China want to jump on the bandwagon! “Uh, you know that “mutual” part of that mutual defense pact? We’re ousting the tyrant. Wanna join in the fun? But it better not last long; we can’t afford to take much more of a beating.”

          And even the US military – they’ve sworn an oath to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” But then would a Junta then go home quietly and let everybody get on with their business? Hopefully, the new President would order them to go home and stay on standby.

          We could create World Peace I! All “we” need to do is sane up.

  16. Theyre training, which automatically makes them steps ahead of most gun owners right off the bat.

    I see a couple of issues as far as too close intervals, not moving fast enough, lack of dynamic covering fires (meaning coordination between individual automatics in order to conserve ammunition, but maintain the constant stream of lead on enemy positions), although those issues can be tightened up with more training and familiarity with the people you work beside.

    Being ambushed in a open field would be bad. no doubt about it.

    I have a vision of what North American guerrillas will look like and they would not be wearing the same equipment as those men.

    They would be equipped with a load carrying belt or ammunition bandoleer/shoulder pouch, no plate carriers, and no helmets. Perhaps a concealable plate carrier. Emphasis on being light. Within weeks of the first shots being fired, those with huge plate carriers, anything on the legs, massive quantities of MOLLE pouches, and ridiculous high end ARs will be abandoning all of that BS for simplicity and light weight. Its not too late to change your loadout 😉

  17. All I can think of seeing this is Waco and Ruby Ridge. In a face-on military confrontation, we’d lose our asses. This is why our revolutionary fathers were guerillas.

    Hide behind trees and snipe; learn to make Molotov cocktails; “improvise” some “explosive devices” (toe poppers, anyone?) Fight dirty, for heaven’s sakes! But as has been mentioned, a surgical drone strike or a tank or a cluster bomb or some flamethrowers would take these guys out in a heartbeat, so to speak.

    Frankly, they look more like they’re playing splatball than preparing for the real SHTF.

    • While we did use guerrilla warfare during the American Revolution in certain battles like early on after Concord and Lexington and the Saratoga campaign, but much of the war was fought using conventional European military tactics and it wasn’t until our Continental Army became a disciplined military force under the instruction of Baron von Steuben at Valley Forge and the addition of the French Navy to counteract the British Fleets’ blockading ports all along the coastline, did we truly have the necessary force to win the war for our independence.

      • Hmmm. Very good points. But I wonder, when the SHTF and it’s individual liberty against the federal storm troopers, who will come to our rescue?

        Damn. That is a dilemma.

        I wonder if we could talk Penn Jillette into running for president?

        • Due to the nature of our form of government, LE and Military and the fact that our citizens swear allegiance to the Constitution of the United States instead of a single individual or party, one would have to speculate that our forces would be divided between those who hold those oaths sacred and those who do not. I think the only ones who would come to our aid would be ourselves.

          I think the greater concern in this hypothetical scenario is opportunists taking advantage of such a conflict much like the second Sino-Japanese War. There is no shortage of enemies to our great nation and how such a scenario plays out could go any number of ways. Ways I’m sure, many a think-tank has analyzed. Ways I pray we never see, both for our nation’s sake and for our children’s sake.

          History is so important both in regards to where we came from and were we may go and yet so few Americans really have a grasp of it. (not say you, just in general).

    • A successful guerrilla war is always in cycles.

      The initial uprising > guerrilla/UW/Insurgency > A conventional military operating in lieu of guerillas/insurgents/AW assets > eventual overthrow of regime with conventional forces

      The American revolution was like this. A good video on youtube is this

      A excellent book that details this cycle is “Patriot Dawn: The Resistance Rises” by Max Velocity. I recommend everybody read this book, as it is one of the most detailed novels about guerilla warfare/infantry-level tactics in existence.

  18. Did my post go in the bit bucket? I wonder what the keywords are that got it filtered.

    I tried to say, Waco. Ruby Ridge. In a face-to-face military confrontation, our guys wouldn’t have a chance. That’s why our revolutionary fathers were guerillas.

    We need to learn to fight dirty. Snipe from behind trees. Stock up on Molotov Cocktails. “Improvise” some “Explosive Devices.” Anybody ever heard of “toe poppers?”

    The guys in the vid look more like they’re playing splatball than prepping for any realistic SHTF scenario.

  19. i’d rather not spend my weekends hanging out with a bunch of white nationalist mall ninjas.

    The guys in the vid have a grab bag of AR’s and AK’s. They, as a group, need to pick one and stick with it.

  20. It may be the curse and nature of the militia beast but I see a mixture of weapons that are not mag and ammo compatable. You’re low on ammo for your AR and your buddy is packing an AK, makes resupply difficult.

    I don’t have a lot of faith in militias. RF is a Jew, no secret there, and a power vacuum developes during civil turmoil and a skinhead militia decides to take advantage of the moment. We don’t have to look far in very recent history to see the trouble caused by militias.

    Militias would be cool if they were all about overthrowing a corrupt government. But I worry that a lot of them just want to become the new corrupt government.

  21. I’ve seen Marines do worse.

    The biggest nit I would pick was the guy walking backwards on their patrol in the beginning. I prefer that if they are rear guard that they not walk backwards. It’s too easy to trip and fall if you walk backwards. I had a SAW gunner do trip while walking backwards and, because of other dumb mistakes like having his finger on the trigger and the weapon off safe, he nearly cut down the rest of his fire team as he fell.

  22. Boys with toys, looks like good fun. I’m nervous enough about muzzle discipline with my kids, a group this big gives me the willies. That said, I wish more affordable civilian firearms and tactical training was available. I’m all for militias, especially if it can be an argument to downsize the standing military. And if those militias can refrain from bombing Federal buildings, sniping abortion providers, forming polygamist cults that force 14 year-old girls to marry old men, etc. Seriously, I’d love to see mainstream civilian training in basic tactics and group firearms safety that ordinary OFWGs, moms, etc. could use. As a bonus, it could be totally fun! Paintball, anyone?

  23. This film doesn’t show ‘militia training.’ It’s training to beat down a small criminal or terrorist unit that has attacked a white-collar convoy or building location. The high rate of fire and emphasis on moving in and then out seems unexceptional. The tactics assume air superiority or no opponent air. The mix of weapons, I would think, is for training. Two hours later everyone switches, so that people can learn to work with what is available for, or provided to, security contractors. Militias can’t function as these guys are. They’d be tracked down immediately and financially broke in two days.

    • Pretty much this, good against a group of poorly trained looters, terrorists or whatever. Useless against an enemy with drones.

      All things being equal though, the US is a lot bigger than the ‘Stan or Iraq, it would be very very expensive to have widespread armed drone coverage across the CONUS.

      • ” it would be very very expensive to have widespread armed drone coverage across the CONUS.”

        Expensive for you and me. Lucrative for the drone contractor.

  24. That looked like a fun game to play. I would play that game. I would not confuse it with reality.

    I’d think it was even more fun if it was force-on-force with paintball or airsoft or simunitions.

  25. Anything I mention has been already mentioned ad nausium, but these are my thoughts…
    1. Rear security is balls. As a former 03 in the USMC, we never didn’t have eyes on our rear. Usually that means the last two guys in the patrol take turns. Sucks, but I disagree with the Marine who mentioned guy in the rear turning around being the problem. I thought the problem was a lack of communication between the last two guys in the patrol leaving gaps in coverage.

    2. Patrols are very tight. I’m going to assume if it’s a react to an ambush that the enemy has frags. Most frags have a killing radius of +/- 5m with a wounding radius extending about +/-10m beyond that. Even if you close dispersion, you should open up the dispersion laterally so you don’t get a squad snuffed out by one bad guy chucking a frag.

    3. That tiny piece of shrub on the .50 made me LOL. If you really think you need that tiny piece of shrub is doing anything aside from distracting you from your primary job, then you have another thing coming. If you really want to break up the outline of your weapon, cammo taping the weapon might be a better solution. All the SS’s I ever knew in the USMC used to paint their own cammie patterns onto their weapons.

    4. Aside from that, I didn’t hate the drills. The one thing that I really didn’t like was the lack of verbal commands between team members. When the squads were doing peels, I didn’t notice any shouts. Kind of dangerous if you decide you want to move if SHTF and the guy behind you doesn’t get the memo.

    5. I’ve seen it done in combat, but I’m really not a fan of training men to shoot on top of each other. Same logic. Bottom man who is prone decides to stand up for some reason in front of the man who is shooting over him from kneeling or standing positions, he’s going to get wasted….

    • Yes, you definitely need to keep your eyes on your rear, but I’m not comfortable with him walking such a distance backwards without seeing where he was going. It’s a small nit to pick, I admit, but it’s one that I have a bad experience with.

      • The way we did it was the rear two men would turn around every now and then to check what was going on behind us.

        Sort of like a trailing ‘point’ team. Two men checking the rear. Not just one.

        It would be good if EVERYONE did that as well. Not all the time, but about every five minutes or so, to see if there’s been a break in contact in the patrol.

        Had that happen on a movement to a night live fire.

        Damned XVIII Airborne Corps deputy commander inserted himself and his walking antenna farm into my platoon, behind my RTO.

        When he stopped to do something, all of my platoon behind him stopped.

        I looked back, as I do ever few minutes and saw NOTHING behind my RTO.

        I halted my platoon. Went back and found four RTOs around a guy in the dark. Asked “Who the HELL are YOU? You just caused a break in contact during this movement.”

        Went back, grabbed the squad leader and dragged him and the rest of my platoon through the general’s gaggle.

        Didn’t find out who he was until the next day.

        No reprimand. Nor any apology. But my company commander was rather bemused.

    • It seemed pretty obvious to me, but no one else has said it. The main thing wrong with this group in the video is that they don’t have any diversity. What makes America’s Army strong is their diversity, and they use their diversity to make America’s Army a stronger, more adaptive force. Don’t believe me:

      Unless and until this “fighting force” on the video gets some females and some people of different backgrounds, races and cultures they aren’t going to be a strong team.

  26. What’s Wrong (If Anything) With This Picture: Militia Edition

    They are burning up truckloads of ammo that I could be stockpiling.

  27. TL:DR and I don’t blame you. Longer than I intended and I’m sure I made some mistakes. Oh well.

    My analysis from start to finish. Some scenarios are hard to figure out, like near vs far ambush. The video doesn’t spell out what the scenario is supposed to be, or whether vehicles placed are supposed to be normal vehicles or representative of some type of cover (something that will stop bullets) or concealment (something that will hide you but won’t stop bullets). It is also hard to tell if there are other members involved that are not on camera. I will use terms like “team” and “squad”. In the US Army Infantry a buddy team is composed of two men, a team is composed of four men, one of whom is the team leader. A squad is composed of two teams and one squad leader for nine men. These numbers can be adjusted up or down to fulfill needs based on the number of men actually available. Please bear with me.

    From 0:13 to 0:25, this looks like a squad size (9 men) element. They are too bunched up together and should be more spread out in their “360”.

    From 0:33 to 1:07 this appears to be a team (4 men) size element? There were times that it appeared as though all four were moving at once. They should be moving in bounding “buddy” teams. With one pair providing cover fire for the other pair as they moved. Or bounding within the buddy team with one buddy covering the other buddy in one pair, and vice versa in the other pair. They should be in the prone firing position when stopped and firing towards the target. Situational awareness is good, but they seemed too concerned with communicating with each other when they should be engaging the target. Once they got on line into a position to assault through they did, but they spent crucial seconds sitting there, not firing (one of them completely exposed on the knee) before doing so. The assault through to the target looked OK.

    From 1:08 to 1:28 they appeared to be in what is called a staggered column formation. In open terrain like that they should have been in what is called a “V” formation. Think of a flock of geese with one at the head, radiating to the sides and back in a V with the point at the front. This gives the best compromise in terms of firepower. All squad members can fire to the front or rear, and about half can fire to either side. This is better than staggered column in open terrain where only two can fire to the front or rear, while half can fire to either side. In an infantry squad you would normally do team wedges, and the squad leader would position the wedges as he sees appropriate. With the teams in file, one in front of the other. The teams offset, one team behind and to the right or left. Or the teams on line, with each team parallel to the other. Upon further reflection I’m inclined to think the scenario was supposed to be on a constricted road? That’s the only reason I can see for them being in a staggered column formation. Anyways. They appeared to take contact from the front. On first contact they all get in the prone except for the lead man. Why is he still on the knee? Everyone should be down. Those that can should be suppressing the the target. Once down you can move! Find the best cover and concealment if it’s available. You do not have to stay in the exact place you initially dropped down. This squad decided to withdraw. They used suppressive fire from two men at a time to accomplish this. This is where knowing the exact scenario would help. If they were on constricted terrain, there is not much they could have done. If they had the space available they should have spread out so that they could provide maximum firepower to the front while other members retreated or provided minimal cover to the sides and rear.

    From 1:35 1:52 to they appeared to be moving a squad from one position of cover to another. The initial base of cover fire should be established prior to movement. Guy on the knee is problematic. He is pretty exposed and should be in the prone. He doesn’t have any cover anyways so why not get down? If you do need to kneel over a prone shooter, you need to have some kind of system of communication set up prior so that the man in the prone doesn’t rise up in front of your muzzle. This is where training as a team and establishing a SOP comes in to play. Once others get across they should set up their own base of fire, which they did.

    From 1:53 to 2:45 the squad seemed to all be on line suppressing the target and then they all just stopped firing for many seconds before assaulting through. Keep firing! This is where you need one leader to direct all the men. Everyone should continue to suppress the target until the leader gives the command to assault through. You should really only stop firing while you are in the process of getting up. Then you assault through while staying on line by using your peripheral vision to keep from getting to far ahead or behind of your squad or team.

    From 3:09 to 3:14 why are you crawling single file in an open field? spread the fuck out! Enough said.

    From 3:15 to 3:36. One thing I was told yeas ago was that you should cross terrain features and not follow them. The reason being is that is way in which the enemy will expect you to travel since it is easier. Of course I do not know their scenario in this exercise. They may have been hidden but they also couldn’t see out very well. All the men were down in the creek and between the land and grass I doubt they could see much beyond their immediate surroundings. Useful if you have another element observing and providing cover, but tough if you are discovered in the middle and have to fight your way out alone.

    From 3:36 to 4:03 they appear to be doing an on line assault through an objective. The only thing I have to say is to try to stay on line so that you don’t get too far ahead or behind. This is where a leader comes in to play to keep things somewhat organized. One guy here got a little behind and was in danger of shooting one of his own while another in front started to cross over in front of those behind him. The shooters in back stopped firing while he crossed over, but that shouldn’t have happened to begin with.

    From 4:22 to 4:32 they are shooting at crap in the night. Enough said.

    From 4:33 to 4:55 they seem to be on line and suppressing a target while moving said line laterally. I understand what they are doing and only want to add that if they are getting a high volume of effective fire in return they should be crawling instead of standing up and running.

    From 4;56 to 5:26. Is this the same scene from earlier? Or the same scenario with a different group? Spread out! Those guys in back could spread out and provide more covering fire for their withdrawal.

    I gave up on the rest of it. I will say that you should consider earplugs instead of the cans for everything short of the Barrett. Cans can get in the way of getting a proper sight picture depending on how and where you place your cheek on the stock. I have been told that it is recommended to use double ear protection for the Barrett, but not a M2 .50 cal machine gun. Go figure. BTW, what is that rifle at 6:20ish? It looks like a .50 cal but not like the one Barrett I got to fire once.

    • John, that was VERY educational, at least to me. Thanks for taking the time to write out that review of the video. Makes much more sense to me now. Probably because I have zero military experience. What little tactics I have learned over the years came from living in places like the south side of Chicago, the Philippines, New York City, Philadelphia, etc. Thanks again! Most appreciated!

  28. RF, what happened to my comment? I don’t see it posted. Was it too long? Well I’m not going to try to rewrite it, that took some time for me to do and I don’t want to watch the video again. Just curious because I put some thought into it for the benefit of your readers.

  29. There are a lot of commenters who seem to think they know a whole lot about combat and insurgency, but really don’t know jack. Want to be a guerilla tactics expert, join the army and go to SFAS. Jesus H Christ.

  30. Is there really no better way to move up on a target than to just stand up and walk through an open field ignoring available cover hoping you get them before they get you.

    • TO: mike
      RE: Heh

      Is there really no better way to move up on a target than to just stand up and walk through an open field ignoring available cover hoping you get them before they get you. — mike

      It depends on the situation.

      Is the objective occupied or not?

      If occupied, can you lay down suppressive fire that will keep ALL their heads down until you overrun it?

      If so, do so.

      If not, used fire and movement or fire and maneuver.




      [She loves the infantry, but she’s rotten to the Corps.]

  31. It looks to me as they are doing everything WRONG, never fight out in a big open field, no cover, no camo! never move on big open trail! both times they could have used the tree line to move in , same for river too open again, no unit controls , no unit formations , and they were too close to each other, they are going to be shooting each other,, let the bad guys come to you and hit they hard before they find you ,(and be dug in with good cover and camo… these guys are going to take a lot KIA.

  32. TO: All
    RE: Good God Almight!

    Where to begin!!!!

    I only watched a couple of minutes of this video and had at least a half-hour’s writing up any critique.

    What a gaggle. I was reminded of John Wayne’s Green Berets where everyone was so clustered together—for cinematic effect—that one grenade would take out half of the extras. Here, one grenade would take out their entire team.

    Security sucked as they all lay out in the middle of the road: flank and rear security should have been dispersed into the trees up and down and behind the rest of the team. The team itself should have been in the trees instead of lying down in the road.

    Hope someone points this thread out to those characters.


    P.S. If the camera can see more than one of you, you’re WRONG!

    • Chuck(le):
      “P.S. If the camera can see more than one of you, you’re WRONG!”

      If the camera can see more than one of me, somebody’s had a few too many! 😉

      • GEN. Robert e. Lee lost the Civil War at the battle of Gettysburg, because he sent his men to cross a big open field, He was never able to recover this lost of his best men..The Human wave mind set, and the same for the fire power mind set. All this does is get lots of troops killed. The Germans toward the end of WW2 were able to hold up whole armies of Russians and American/British for days with just a few snipers ,,,they learned too late….

        • Sigh. I was sniping at the “sees more than one of you” part. Sees more than one of me??? Is it a trick with mirrors?

          Get it?

          I know he meant “more than one member of your squad,” but was going for a little comic relief. I’m “funny” that way. 😉

          I hope no one was seriously injured by my verbal indiscretion.

      • Good snark.

        Reminds me of that scene in Tombstone with Val drunk as a skunk telling his opponent in the bar that he’s got TWO GUNS. One for each of them.

  33. TO: All
    RE: An Additional Thought

    Perhaps they were doing this in order to make a movie to provide ‘basics’ to newbies. Being out in the open. Gaggled together. Just to demonstrate various things in a film.

    Doing it properly would be nigh impossible to video for training purposes.

    Call it Tactics 101. Later, when the newbies are out in the field, they can be taught proper dispersal, use of cover and concealment, proper movement techniques, crossing linear danger areas, setting up an Objective Rally Point, Observation/Listening Posts, etc., etc., etc…..

    Good training has to begin somewhere, and videographic representation is a good start. But how to video a good team in operation is difficult in closed terrain.


    [A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained in arms, is the best most natural defense of a free country. ]

  34. the amount of freindly fires during our paintball games are small, mind you they are moving targets firing back, but they would make me rethink how close they are together and shooting past each other with live fire. id say a good paintball fight would teach these guys alot more especialy some ammo conservation. throwing lead down range could end badly if you dont repel or neutralize them just as fast, which in a paintball fight is almost never( thinking live fire would be even harder). in todays world it would be all about suprise and hit & run tactics

  35. I just have a feeling this is a cool promo video. I’m sure there was a lot of setting up for shots and be. Ppl can pick them apart on every little thing but remember two things training is about learning, not about already knowing, and I’m sure they had a debrief and went over things you keyboard commandos missed.

  36. Makes for good entertainment and a recruiting shot for Call to Duty. Sadly these guys would be slaughtered of they ran up against a well hidden guerrilla force. Too many stack ups and bodyguard police tactics. we often forget that militias have limited resources and aren’t meant to take and hold ground. Too expensive. Fire and move , fire and move.One shot can halt a troop movement for hours, buying time to move some more.Don’t get me wrong, I militias are great and it is fun to stack and sweep buildings and shit like that but remember, shoot and move with speed and cover. Be mobile all the time. SWAT and DHS hit squads hate it when their foe is on the move. Cause great confusion all the time. Be safe, brothers.

  37. Consistent error, same here as it was when I was going through the Infantry School at Ft. Benning 40 years ago: Bunching up. LOUSY dispersion on patrols and while firing at a presumed target. One grenade (lethal radius 5 meters) would kill or injure most of the group, and a machine gun/claymore ambush would have turned them into hamburger in 30 seconds. SPREAD OUT, especially in open terrain. Take a look at some of the videos of GIs moving through open terrain in WWII in Europe – at least 5 yards between each soldier. You aren’t part of Pickett’s Charge at Gettysburg anymore.

    Remember, those rifles you are carrying have an effective range of at least 400 meters – you don’t have to be on top of your buddy to provide fire support. Sure, staying close together gives you a warm fuzzy feeling of togetherness, but it is crummy tactics.

  38. So, the overall consensus would be Militias are mainly Body Bag Occupants in waiting…that does seem to fit right in with the general History of American Militias. What would define “A well regulated Militia…” then?
    Doesn’t the demonstrated inadequacies of “Militias” kind of nullify the stated premise of the Second Amendment?
    Before anyone goes off their stick…I am just posing the questions that came to mind after watching the video and while reading the comments…not trolling. Same questions came to mind in the earlier post of some months ago that, I think, was prompted by The Discovery or History Channel TV show that reviewed several “Militia” groups across the Country and basically let them show us how laughable they were.

    • The true history is that the STATE oversaw the training , most officers were ex- combat vets. who saw that training was done correctly, each member had to meet standards , they had to keep rifle, ammo, and gear ,, most used the long rifle and were sharp shooters , and lots shooting contests. the problems were the local farmers,etc. who would come out for a battle but were untrained.

      • Since it’s necessary that the Militia be well-regulated, the RotPtKaBA empowers the people to regulate them, i.e., ensure that they behave appropriately. In other words, keep them from getting “out of line.” For example, if some storm trooper comes to toss your house looking for “subversive literature,” you can say “<rack a round> hold it right there, Bucko!”

        And “Free State” doesn’t necessarily mean state as a political or geographic entity, it could mean a condition or state of being: “He’s in a state of suspended animation.” Or “we live in a state of Freedom;” a Free State. And we have a right to keep it that way.

  39. one thing to consider, is if things went to pot, there would likely be a pretty fair number of vets who would bolster the individual militias in this country, as well as a lot of us old guys who would supply them. I can lie in wait in ambush for hours or days, I don’t much care, but running and gunning is for the younger guys. I keep thinking of Mel Gibson’s Patriot movie. think small, shoot small, always from concealment. If you want guerrilla tactics, refer to Nathan Bedford Forrest.

    • Now you got the point, hit from the rear, hit on a holiday, hit in a snow storm.. never repeat were and what you do…..

  40. I still believe the tactics/strategies outlined in John Ross’ book, “Unintended Consequences” would be more effective and less costly overall to the cause. Take out the usurpers of liberty one by one in hotels, restaurants, alleys, restrooms etc. so their colleagues can then think about their own fate should they fail to change course and start to honor their oaths of fidelity to the US Constitution/BoRs.

    “An ideal form of government is democracy tempered with assassination.” – Voltaire

    We’re far enough along the road to totalitarianism already that, in my opinion, the assassinations should commence immediately.

    • Diamondback couldn’t finish his post because he is being waterboarded somewhere by a special team from Homeland Security. Seriously though. I have been telling people for years that all methods of communications are being fed into massive databases where purposefully designed algorithms are spitting out tiered lists of people that will be disappeared the second that the ruling elite truly feel our breath down their scrawny necks. Share information, not intentions. This is no joke. If you don’t think this is a real threat, then you clearly do not grasp how pervasive and advanced these technologies are. Carry on….


    seriously, you guys should be reading John Mosby’s blog, a former SF guy writing the “how-to” of training indigenous forces. He is also an excellent teacher and offers classes to people who need them (and we all do).
    AARs here:
    and here:
    *note- will take you a while to read through all of it and get up to date, but it’s worth the time- and the classes he teaches are way more squared away than the video in this article.

  42. Who ever is teaching these people in the video has no clue of small unit tactics or guerrilla warfare. Total lack of ammunition conservation, terrible camouflage, poor use (no use) of cover and concealment, poor execution of breaking contact using the australian peelback. When breaking contact you should NEVER have a lull in fire and the guy to your rear needs to be firing in a safe direction so you can pass to the rear.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here