Elite troops

[Alan Meyer]

It seems that all of the combatants in the war had elite infantry
units. In the U.S. these included paratroopers, rangers and,
arguably, marines. The Germans had paratroopers and SS. The
Russians had Guards units, and so on.

These elite units were generally selected for the toughest
assignments, where exceptional courage and skill might be needed,
for example in river crossings, attacks on hard targets, do or
die defenses, and so on.

In many cases, these units consisted of entirely of volunteers.
In at least some cases, the men were specially picked from other
forces or screened in other ways. In at least one case, the
Russians, it is my understanding that the Guards units were so
declared not because they were constituted as elite units, but
because they had earned distinction in battle.

My question is, could "ordinary" men, not professional soldiers,
not men in the prime of their youth, not physically superior to
other soldiers, not hand picked gung-ho men who volunteered, be
made by leadership, training, experience, and similar factors
into elite soldiers?

The Russian example makes me think that they could.

Any opinions?

Alan

[Bill]

Post by Alan Meyer
My question is, could "ordinary" men, not professional soldiers,
not men in the prime of their youth, not physically superior to
other soldiers, not hand picked gung-ho men who volunteered, be
made by leadership, training, experience, and similar factors
into elite soldiers?
The Russian example makes me think that they could.
Any opinions?

Chindits...

[Don Phillipson]

Post by Bill

Post by Alan Meyer
My question is, could "ordinary" men, not professional soldiers,
not men in the prime of their youth, not physically superior to
other soldiers, not hand picked gung-ho men who volunteered, be
made by leadership, training, experience, and similar factors
into elite soldiers?

British generals were familiar with the concept of elite troops,
perhaps because of their strong regimental tradition, so we can
tell from published memoirs that most commanders deplored
the idea of elite units. They thought any unit could be trained
to perform at an elite level, given appropriate leadership by
sergeants and officers. This was the problem: there were not
enough suitable NCOs and officers to turn every unite into
elite troops.

Post by Bill
Chindits...

Not a good example.
1. Chindit columns were indeed formed from ordinary
regiments given special training.
2. The Chindit idea required (a) effective support and
supply by air, (b) in order to keep light infantry troops in
rapid motion, (c) for a limited time (say 3 months or 100
days.) In time all three requirements failed. Air supply
was constrained by the weather, Chindit columns were
ordered by HQ to undertake set-piece battles and sieges,
and they were kept in the field far longer than the Chindit
idea envisaged, until exhausted.

[Alan Meyer]

On 08/19/2014 11:54 PM, Don Phillipson wrote:
...

Post by Don Phillipson

Post by Bill
Chindits...

Not a good example.
1. Chindit columns were indeed formed from ordinary
regiments given special training.
2. The Chindit idea required (a) effective support and
supply by air, (b) in order to keep light infantry troops in
rapid motion, (c) for a limited time (say 3 months or 100
days.) In time all three requirements failed. Air supply
was constrained by the weather, Chindit columns were
ordered by HQ to undertake set-piece battles and sieges,
and they were kept in the field far longer than the Chindit
idea envisaged, until exhausted.

Chindits might still be a good example of an elite unit formed from an
ordinary one. At any rate, they did fight heroically under extremely
difficult circumstances.

The example brings up an interesting point. The Chindits, like the
Russians at Stalingrad, had no real choice but to fight on no matter
what. Surrender was a pretty dismal option and withdrawal was impractical.

Both Japanese and Americans on the Pacific islands also at least
perceived themselves to have few options. Each seems to have regarded
the enemy as savages against whom there was no option but to kill or be
killed.

Alan

[Don Phillipson]

Post by Alan Meyer
Chindits might still be a good example of an elite unit formed from an
ordinary one. At any rate, they did fight heroically under extremely
difficult circumstances.

This would be a nonstandard use of "elite unit." The usual
meaning is a military formation so trained that it excels in
more than one battle or campaign. (Chindit forces were
kept in the field until incapable of further combat, and then
dispersed.)

[The Horny Goat]

Post by Bill

Post by Alan Meyer
My question is, could "ordinary" men, not professional soldiers,
not men in the prime of their youth, not physically superior to
other soldiers, not hand picked gung-ho men who volunteered, be
made by leadership, training, experience, and similar factors
into elite soldiers?
The Russian example makes me think that they could.
Any opinions?

Chindits...

In the Red Army "Guards" units were formed by giving troops that had
already distinguished themselves extra equipment - typically the first
production of more powerful weapons such as later marks of the T-34.

At no time were green troops ever designated Guards. This is in stark
contrast to both Germany (I'm thinking primarily of SS units) and
British Guards units where t here was an experienced cadre but lots of
newer troops.

My point is that the Russian Guards units WERE ordinary men who
self-"picked" themselves by surviving warfare - they learned or they
died.

[ADPUF]

Post by The Horny Goat
In the Red Army "Guards" units were formed by giving troops
that had already distinguished themselves extra equipment -
typically the first production of more powerful weapons such
as later marks of the T-34.
At no time were green troops ever designated Guards. This is
in stark contrast to both Germany (I'm thinking primarily of
SS units) and British Guards units where t here was an
experienced cadre but lots of newer troops.
My point is that the Russian Guards units WERE ordinary men
who self-"picked" themselves by surviving warfare - they
learned or they died.

However the dead had to be replaced.

Maybe replacements were experienced soldiers from other units
rather than new "green" soldiers?

[Paul F Austin]

Post by ADPUF

Post by The Horny Goat
In the Red Army "Guards" units were formed by giving troops
that had already distinguished themselves extra equipment -
typically the first production of more powerful weapons such
as later marks of the T-34.
At no time were green troops ever designated Guards. This is
in stark contrast to both Germany (I'm thinking primarily of
SS units) and British Guards units where t here was an
experienced cadre but lots of newer troops.
My point is that the Russian Guards units WERE ordinary men
who self-"picked" themselves by surviving warfare - they
learned or they died.

However the dead had to be replaced.
Maybe replacements were experienced soldiers from other units
rather than new "green" soldiers?

In the English regimental system, in peacetime, each regiment had a
particular geographical area from which it raised its troops. Did that
apply to the Guards regiments? It's unlike during (modern) wartime that
replacements came through the same system.

Paul

[Bill]

On Sun, 24 Aug 2014 14:07:38 -0400, Paul F Austin

Post by Paul F Austin

Post by ADPUF

Post by The Horny Goat
In the Red Army "Guards" units were formed by giving troops
that had already distinguished themselves extra equipment -
typically the first production of more powerful weapons such
as later marks of the T-34.
At no time were green troops ever designated Guards. This is
in stark contrast to both Germany (I'm thinking primarily of
SS units) and British Guards units where t here was an
experienced cadre but lots of newer troops.
My point is that the Russian Guards units WERE ordinary men
who self-"picked" themselves by surviving warfare - they
learned or they died.

However the dead had to be replaced.
Maybe replacements were experienced soldiers from other units
rather than new "green" soldiers?

In the English regimental system, in peacetime, each regiment had a
particular geographical area from which it raised its troops. Did that
apply to the Guards regiments? It's unlike during (modern) wartime that
replacements came through the same system.

It is certainly the case with the Scots, Irish and Welsh guards
regiments.

Not sure about the two senior regiments of foot guards.

[The Horny Goat]

Post by Bill

Post by Paul F Austin
In the English regimental system, in peacetime, each regiment had a
particular geographical area from which it raised its troops. Did that
apply to the Guards regiments? It's unlike during (modern) wartime that
replacements came through the same system.

It is certainly the case with the Scots, Irish and Welsh guards
regiments.
Not sure about the two senior regiments of foot guards.

Well yes and no - the Scots, Irish and Welsh guards recruited from
Scotland, Ireland and Wales each of which is a far larger catchment
area than Yorkshire, Lancashire, Cornwall etc.

[Bill]

Post by The Horny Goat

Post by Bill

Post by Paul F Austin
In the English regimental system, in peacetime, each regiment had a
particular geographical area from which it raised its troops. Did that
apply to the Guards regiments? It's unlike during (modern) wartime that
replacements came through the same system.

It is certainly the case with the Scots, Irish and Welsh guards
regiments.
Not sure about the two senior regiments of foot guards.

Well yes and no - the Scots, Irish and Welsh guards recruited from
Scotland, Ireland and Wales each of which is a far larger catchment
area than Yorkshire, Lancashire, Cornwall etc.

In reality Yorkshire has about the same population as Scotland and
Ireland and about twice that of Wales.

[Michael Emrys]

Post by Bill
In reality Yorkshire has about the same population as Scotland and
Ireland and about twice that of Wales.

Was that true in, say, the first half of the 20th. century? I ask
because I don't know.

Michael

[Stephen Graham]

Post by Michael Emrys

Post by Bill
In reality Yorkshire has about the same population as Scotland and
Ireland and about twice that of Wales.

Was that true in, say, the first half of the 20th. century? I ask
because I don't know.

Yorkshire has always been the largest historic county in England and has
had the population to go with that. The exact numbers have varied with
population growth but the ratios have remained approximately the same.
So Yorkshire generally has around three-quarters of the population of
Scotland and about one-third more than Wales. With respect to Ireland,
it really depends on what you mean by "Ireland". Northern Ireland has a
population a bit less than Wales. The entire island has about one-third
more population than Yorkshire.

[Don Phillipson]

Post by Paul F Austin
In the English regimental system, in peacetime, each regiment had a
particular geographical area from which it raised its troops. Did that
apply to the Guards regiments? It's unlike during (modern) wartime that
replacements came through the same system.

The English regimental system was organized more around
permanent training depots than the counties for which most
were named. The Welsh, Scots and Irish Guards did
indeed try to recruit fellow-nationals, but the Coldstream and
Grenadier Guards had no particular geographical connection,
and neither did most cavalry regiments, although all had their
own depots. The five Guards infantry regiments had a
single regimental depot at Caterham (west of London, like
Aldershot and Sandhurst.)

[Paul F Austin]

Post by Don Phillipson

Post by Paul F Austin
In the English regimental system, in peacetime, each regiment had a
particular geographical area from which it raised its troops. Did that
apply to the Guards regiments? It's unlike during (modern) wartime that
replacements came through the same system.

The English regimental system was organized more around
permanent training depots than the counties for which most
were named. The Welsh, Scots and Irish Guards did
indeed try to recruit fellow-nationals, but the Coldstream and
Grenadier Guards had no particular geographical connection,
and neither did most cavalry regiments, although all had their
own depots. The five Guards infantry regiments had a
single regimental depot at Caterham (west of London, like
Aldershot and Sandhurst.)

Thank you.
Paul

[John Szalay]

Post by Alan Meyer
My question is, could "ordinary" men, not professional soldiers,
not men in the prime of their youth, not physically superior to
other soldiers, not hand picked gung-ho men who volunteered, be
made by leadership, training, experience, and similar factors
into elite soldiers?
The Russian example makes me think that they could.
Any opinions?
Alan

IHMO:
proper leadership and good training, can produce what
could be considered "elite troops"
that requires hand picking personnel that can respond to the training.
during that training, weeding out those that do not measure up.

John

[a425couple]

Post by John Szalay

Post by Alan Meyer
My question is, could "ordinary" men, not professional soldiers,
not men in the prime of their youth, not physically superior to
other soldiers, not hand picked gung-ho men who volunteered, be
made by leadership, training, experience, and similar factors
into elite soldiers?

proper leadership and good training, can produce what
could be considered "elite troops"
that requires hand picking personnel that can respond to the training.
during that training, weeding out those that do not measure up.

I very much agree with John that leadership and training are
extremely important, but also wish to add 2 'extra helpers'.

#1 perhaps "prime of their youth" is not needed, however
once you get past age 30, 40, and esp 50, it gets tougher
in many ways. It takes longer to get in good condition.
It is harder to get them AS motivated.
#2 any longer time working together as a unit really helps.
You want to maximize teamwork, and willing to be brave
(or sacrifice) in front of their 'real family'.

[Alan Meyer]

On 08/20/2014 06:25 PM, a425couple wrote:

...

#2 any longer time working together as a unit really helps. You want to
maximize teamwork, and willing to be brave (or sacrifice) in front of
their 'real family'.

An interesting point that also brings up a related point. Just as love
of one's comrades is a motivator, so too is hatred of the enemy.

It appears to me that this is a theme running through American memoirs
I've read of both the Pacific and of Italy. Many soldiers wrote about
going into the war wondering if they could kill someone but, after
months of combat and watching their friends die, they were eager to kill
the enemy. I recall one comment in Atkinson's book about Italy in which
a soldier saw every dead German as a step closer to going home.

In R.V. Burgin's memoir _Islands of the Damned_, he talks about a night
when a Japanese infiltrator attempted to jump into his foxhole. He
speared the man on his bayonet and then pulled the trigger five times.
After the war he once saw a group of orientals drive by in a car in the
U.S. All the old hatreds that he thought he had left behind rose up in him.

Some men were broken by intense combat. In others, the emotions built
up and seemed to have run hot and high.

Alan

[Paul F Austin]

Post by Alan Meyer
It seems that all of the combatants in the war had elite infantry
units. In the U.S. these included paratroopers, rangers and,
arguably, marines. The Germans had paratroopers and SS. The
Russians had Guards units, and so on.
These elite units were generally selected for the toughest
assignments, where exceptional courage and skill might be needed,
for example in river crossings, attacks on hard targets, do or
die defenses, and so on.
In many cases, these units consisted of entirely of volunteers.
In at least some cases, the men were specially picked from other
forces or screened in other ways. In at least one case, the
Russians, it is my understanding that the Guards units were so
declared not because they were constituted as elite units, but
because they had earned distinction in battle.
My question is, could "ordinary" men, not professional soldiers,
not men in the prime of their youth, not physically superior to
other soldiers, not hand picked gung-ho men who volunteered, be
made by leadership, training, experience, and similar factors
into elite soldiers?
The Russian example makes me think that they could.
Any opinions?

One thing that distinguishes the US elite units (even the Marines) is
that they were comparatively lightly armed compared to leg infantry
units. The number of organic heavy weapons (machine guns, mortars and
organic artillery) was much smaller. When paratrooper (German or Allied)
met leg infantry (not rear-area troops), well things tended to turn all
pear shaped.

Paul

[Haydn]

Post by Alan Meyer
My question is, could "ordinary" men, not professional soldiers,
not men in the prime of their youth, not physically superior to
other soldiers, not hand picked gung-ho men who volunteered, be
made by leadership, training, experience, and similar factors
into elite soldiers?

The Italian Savoy Grenadiers, a branch of the Sardinian Grenadiers, were
neither professional soldiers nor gung-ho volunteers, just draft, like
all infantry except paratroopers and commandos. The British faced them
at Keren, East Africa. A British writer rated them on a level with
German paratroopers and Japanese first line shock troops, which is some
praise.

However, regimental traditions counted for something with them -
Sardinian Grenadiers were the Duke of Savoy's Guards, established 1659 -
and though not exactly hand-picked, they were quality human material.

That ordinary men can be turned into elite troops is demonstrated by
going just a little bit OT, historically. After crowning himself
Emperor, Napoleon raised his 111th Line Infantry regiment (actually by
merging the remnants of some old Royal Sardinian regiments, tough stuff)
with draft men from Piedmont. Ordinary men through and through being
called up year after year from their villages, hamlets and farmsteads
until the fall of the Empire. The regiment became sort of an elite,
taking part in most every major Napoleonic campaign and gaining an elite
halo just by its deeds, achievements and heroically suffered hardship.

Haydn