Anyone want to tell me their plan?

I have no idea what your "personal" experience may be...but affirmative
I'm a former Air Force officer...and you're the one making assumptions "pal"...

In the Air Force, typically the enlisted send the officers off to combat..
Virtually all combat rated pilots are officers...certain combat aircraft, like
AC-130s have enlisted on their crews, but all aircraft commanders are officers
combat or otherwise in the USAF.

I was combat support, and I was exposed to the same risks involved with tactical
airlift as any enlisted or lower ranking officer I was responsible for.

In terms of direct ground combat...
A junior officer may not be as knowledgable as a Sergeant with years of service...
but you'd better believe they are there on the frontlines.

From what I've read in here Ignorance is Bliss was never an NCO, just junior enlisted.

 

I respect the officers in the Air Force who fly combat missions, but I never served in the Air Force. In the Army and Marines, generally, the enlisted men do most of the fighting and dying; but you do have some junior grade officers who are also out on the front lines as well and occasionally you will see field grade officers out there, but not very often from my experience.

 

In my Marine Corps Infantry experience the most competent guys generally tended to be the middle NCOs (senior E-4s to junior E-6s) and junior officers (O-2 to O-3). These guys all joined after 9/11 and tended to have 2+ deployments under their belts and in some cases 4 or 5. They weren't brainwashed by garrison life and were raised in an enviornment where getting guys home alive was more important than following the letter of the law. I found that Staff NCOs (senior E-6s+) tended to be a bit disconnected with the wars and tried to live in the post-war garrison life mindset. All that said, there is no real "standard" and I ran into great guys from all ranks, though I didn't have much exposure to anything above O-5.

For some reason people love to perpetuate the myth that junior officers are incompetent. During previous wars where training lasted little more than a few months, this might have been true. Today, at least in the Marine Corps, getting selected for OCS is very competitive and even the most junior 2nd Lieutenant deploying overseas will have at least one year of very intense training under his belt. New Infantry officers today know that they'll be going into combat and are surronded by other officers, SNCOs, NCOs, and even junior enlisted who have combat experience. Even the most arrogant 22 year old 2nd Lieutenant learns some humility pretty quickly, more often than not at the hands of his company commander or XO.

I spent a little more half my enlistment as an NCO, but my experience in Infantry is likely different than other branches/jobs.

 

Best officers I had were prior enlisted. These officers knew their place as an officer and a leader, but because they had prior enlisted experience, it helped them to be good and effective as leaders.

 

The two best officers I knew were from the Academy and ROTC with no prior experience. The worst was a prior SNCO. I met plenty in between though. Officers need to have a very different leadership style than enlisted. It can be hard for some priors to make the adjustments.

 

Two best officers I had was prior enlisted and an ROTC grad. However, out of the two, the prior enlisted officer was the best. He did a good job of setting the example and being a leader. An officer is supposed to set the example and lead from the front. This prior enlisted officer did exactly that. The ROTC grad also had good leadership, but he didn't always lead from the front quite as much as the prior enlisted officer I had (though he did a good job leading from the front most of the time and earning the respect of his men). But, both were good officers. Personally, I think battlefield commissions should be brought back as well.

 

Battlefield commissions for those enlisted men who have proven to be effective, smart, cool, calm, courageous and demonstrated leadership qualities while under fire on the battlefield. I think in those particular circumstances, a battlefield commission for an enlisted man who has demonstrated those qualities under fire on the battlefield should be offered a battlefield commission. Competence in leadership during wartime is especially important.

 

Things I'd take.

1) Guns and ammo.
2) Radios.
3) Food and water.
4) Clothing.
5) Medical supplies.
6) Shelter.

(I'd really like to have that thermal imaging technology, but I cannot go without those other things)

Strategy.

1. Designate the unit as "Battalion One", of which I am the Commanding Officer.
2. Appoint my battalion staff, designate them "Command Element"; thirty men should be sufficient.
3. Divide the remaining 470 troops into two Companies of 235 men each, Alpha and Bravo.
4. Appoint a Commanding Officer and an Executive Officer to head up each company (four men), allotting them each ten men to staff their command element (twenty total).
5. The remaining 446 men will constitute eight platoons of fifty-five men each, four platoons being allotted to each company.
6. Each platoon will consist of four squads of thirteen men (a squad leader and three four-man fire-teams), a platoon commander, a radio man, and a platoon guide.
7. The remaining six men will constitute a medic element that is divided equally amongst companies Alpha and Bravo.
8. Establish a Battalion Command and Control Center and establish perimeter security along with a watch-list.
9. Designate our area of operations as "AO Charlie", to consist of the 360 degree line of sight from the location of the Battalion Command and Control Center.
10. Cut AO Charlie into equal halves, designating each half as Sector 1 and Sector 2.
11. Designate Sector 1 as Alpha Company's area of operations and Sector 2 as Bravo Company's area of operations.
12. Issue the following operational directives to my company commanders:

• Operations cycle for each platoon will consist of four two day rotations manned by a single squad each.
• The four rotations of two days will consist of the following elements: Two patrol elements, one security element, and one quick reaction force.
• The order of rotation will be as follows: Patrol, security, QRF, patrol.

13. Direct my company commanders to begin reconnoitering the outlying areas in accordance with my operational directives, looking for enemy positions and scouts while seeking to identify prospective outposts and listening posts.

Once this has been accomplished, the rest of the operation's strategy would be contingent upon the circumstances that arise in the implementation of the initial strategy. I would assume that my elite troops would eventually locate, close with, and destroy the enemy largely of their own volition, but I'm not sure that it would take less than three months given the size of the area of operations.

 

Not necessary. If you have elite combat troops, guns, and ammo, all you need to do is find them and shoot their asses.

 

In that case, I have a better idea.

1. Gather the men.
2. Find out which man has the most seniority.
3. Put him charge.
4. Rat-f*ck the MREs and listen to my IPOD for three months.

 

5. Sleep for no less than 18 hours a day.

 

You don't need boots on the ground for this operation.

Deploy a U-2 reconnaissance aircraft to the area of interest equipped with a SYERS 2, multi-spectral sensor, which includes infrared imagery at high resolution.
Send the image intel compiled by the recon aircraft to analysts to determine where this under-ice base is located. Even slight temperature differentials
will stand out in an arctic environment.

Once the under-ice base is located deploy a B-2 loaded out with an RNEP bomb.

"Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator" ...about 10 x the size of what was dropped on Hiroshima.

Buh bye bad guys....courtesy of the United States Air Force.

 

There's no cut and dry formula for what makes a competent officer.

Mustangs with prior enlisted service is not a guarantee any more than an Academy graduate.

Experience may vary, as experience varies throughout the services.
Bearing in mind that typically only about 8 - 12% of the total armed forces is actually
involved in the combat arms...seems the conversation is geared more towards
combat leadership and that is not something I have direct experience with.

You did bring up an excellent point earlier, in that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan
have produced a different sort of junior grade officership. I read that
over 40 Academy graduates have been KIA in those operations, and as a percentage junior officers have suffered
more casualties than in any other prior conflict the U.S. has been involved in, from WWII on.
Combat, to these young officers, is not something to be avoided.

 

That goes without saying...

 

What if there are civilains? What if the enemy force is spread out all over the place? What if they have Stingers? Who's gonna go in and count all the bodies afterwards? A single person can always hide from aircraft/drones. The only way aircraft alone would work is if after bombing them they surrendered.

Back to the old "Boots on the ground vs. aircraft" argument.