Are there are any armies that still field combat cavalry?

And, of course, Mongolian tankmen :)
Spoiler :
x_198eb535.jpg
 
The Janjaweed?
 
Though it's worth noting that these aren't cavalry in the romantic sense, in that they plan on charging on horseback to disrupt formations. These units are dragoons, who utilize animals as low-tech transport, but do their fighting on foot.

Those SF guys on horseback were working with Northern Alliance horse cavalry. The Northern Alliance mounted a successful charge against dug-in taliban defensive positions during the battle of mazar-i-sharif. (And no, that does not make those 18-series guys Cav ;) )

Mobby said:
Yup, and they still wear Cavalry caps and spurs, although today their mounts are tanks and APCs, but not horses.
It's called a Cav Hat :cowboy:
 
Those SF guys on horseback were working with Northern Alliance horse cavalry. The Northern Alliance mounted a successful charge against dug-in taliban defensive positions during the battle of mazar-i-sharif. (And no, that does not make those 18-series guys Cav ;) )

And presumably it worked? I knew the taliban forces had a propensity for poor discipline and cohesion, but I feel like that should not have worked.

Bayonets I can kind of see, but not horses.
 
The Northern Alliance mounted a successful charge against dug-in taliban defensive positions during the battle of mazar-i-sharif.

Hmmm, after reading it more carefully I'm not sure if they actually ever clashed in close-combat.

I think it was more like moving on horseback, looking for targets (dug-in defensive positions in this case) and then calling air support to destroy them. :p

So more like "horse archers" than close-combat cavalry. :p

I knew the taliban forces had a propensity for poor discipline and cohesion

I don't think they do / did. At least not all of them. Because there is in fact no such thing like one "taliban forces".

Bayonets I can kind of see, but not horses.

Why?
 
Domen said:
Hmmm, after reading it more carefully I'm not sure if they actually ever clashed in close-combat.

I think it was more like moving on horseback, looking for targets (dug-in defensive positions in this case) and then calling air support to destroy them. :p

So more like "horse archers" than close-combat cavalry. :p

They actually did charge a defensive position while under fire and overran it. You can find a detailed account in "Horse Soldiers: The Extraordinary Story of a Band of U.S. Soldiers Who Rode to Victory in Afghanistan" by Doug Stanton. A good summary can be found at http://www.indepthinfo.com/afghanistan/horse-soldiers.htm

Here is a less detailed account i found while browsing:
At Bai Beche the crucial breakthrough occurred by accident. A Green Beret told one of Dostum’s lieutenants to get his horses ready for action while they got aircraft into position. This was misinterpreted as a signal to charge. The men of ODA 595 watched in disbelief as 250 horsemen galloped straight at a Taliban position a mile away that was about to be bombed. They were convinced that a “friendly fire” catastrophe was about to occur. No one would ever have intentionally ordered a cavalry charge in such close proximity with an air strike. But it worked out better than anyone could have expected. One of the Green Berets recalled: “Three or four bombs hit right in the middle of the enemy position. Almost immediately after the bombs exploded, the horses swept across the objective — the enemy was so shell-shocked. I could see the horses blasting out the other side. It was the finest sight I ever saw. The men were thrilled; they were so happy. It wasn’t done perfectly, but it will never be forgotten.
 
I don't think they do / did. At least not all of them. Because there is in fact no such thing like one "taliban forces".

Well, no, they're various militias assigned to the Taliban forces. Though to hear American veterans tell it, they're not exactly great at small unit tactics and field discipline. Better than the Iraqi militias, but not great.


Well, a bayonet charge is probably going to take place over a much smaller distance than a cavalry charge. There's a lot more surprise involved.
 
they're various militias assigned to the Taliban forces.

Except they don't even call themselves "the Taliban forces".

There's a lot more surprise involved.

Depends on circumstances. But there can be also a lot of surprise involved from a mounted charge.

Plus the fact that on horseback you move much faster than when running with a bayonet.
 
The US 10th Mountain Division is trained in using pack mules for mountainous terrain, but they rarely use them.
 
Except they don't even call themselves "the Taliban forces".

I'm sure they don't, but that's still what they are. I can switch to Taliban-aligned forces if that makes you feel better.


Depends on circumstances. But there can be also a lot of surprise involved from a mounted charge.

Plus the fact that on horseback you move much faster than when running with a bayonet.

Sure, but a horse/camel is a big target, and in order for you to get it into a run you need far more space, and that space needs to be fairly open. You can bayonet charge someone across an alleyway.
 
Surely some peak oil pervert ought to come in here and post that what goes around comes around and future war will once again require pure horsepower. Just, wait for it.
 
ahh , the removal of Usame's climb to fame where he is kinda only "reported" to have led a charge to a hilltop held by Russians . War in Afghanistan works so much with bribes , are we sure the Talib had not already surrendered ?

this is not a questioning of the valor of those people in the field that day . ı hear this for the first time , that's all .

Chinese%20cavalry%20on%20'anti-terrorism'%20manuvers.jpg


Chinese%20soldier%20and%20his%20horse%20prepare%20to%20participate%20in%20exercises%20during%20a%20nuclear%20test.jpg

the images are what ı found when searching about the Chinese testing in nuclear blasts with the second pic totally relevant , while the first is reported to be modern day training for COIN .
 
Back
Top Bottom