The U.S. Army has only one armored cavalry regiment left, and it is scheduled to be converted to one of the new UA (units of action) brigades next year. That event has triggered a debate in the army over whether the traditional concept of, "fighting for information" is still valid. This approach involves using small units of tanks and other armored vehicles to fight your way into enemy territory, grab prisoners, documents or whatever, and bring it back. Along with your observations, photographs or whatever, you get a good sense of what the enemy is up to. The technique was developed by the Germans during World War II, and adopted by the other armies by the end of the war. The alternative, which is more frequently used, is called "sneak and peek". This means UAVs, aircraft and people on the ground who stay out of the way and just watch...
A grievous error, because that is not the only tactical purpose of "light cavalry". Going back to the time of Napoleon, military units were ordered in a way similar to the pieces on a chessboard. Napoleon had some generals who were masters of this "military unit chess", and were able to optimize the use of each "piece" to amazing effect in both the capture of an enemy army at Ulm, and the subsequent battle of Austerlitz, perhaps the greatest maneuver battle ever fought, Napoleon's single army defeating four enemy armies. For you chess players out there, the effect might be to similar to trading in your rooks and knights for four more bishops. On the surface it looks powerful, but if your enemy discovers a flaw in your maneuver, you are defenseless. N.B.: the Soviets ruthlessly adhered to this concept, with such things as designing helicopters to perform the functions of heavy cavalry, and even integrating NBC war to fit this Napoleonic scheme. |