Project Gecko

“Be a man go dynamic!”

…Sounds great. Still doesn’t explain the problem.

Everybody is arguing deliberate versus dynamic entry, but I think that conversation often starts too late. As of how you enter a room will always solve everything.

To me…thee more important question is: what are the conditions when we arrive at the problem? Rarely you will hear arguments about that. 🧐

Are we superior to the opponent? Did we manage to set conditions in our favor prior to the hit? Do we have surprise, initiative, information? Or are those advantages already deteriorating and somebody on the other side is simply waiting for the problem to appear at the door?

How we approach a room has a lot to do with what happened before we ever reached it.

And even when favorable conditions were created, they are not permanent. Once an operation begins, surprise deteriorates. Initiative can shift. What was true at the level of the structure may no longer be true at the level of the next room. Surprise becomes increasingly local.

That is part of what tactics are supposed to deal with: the deterioration of conditions.

This is why I think the obsession with deliberate versus dynamic misses something important. People are arguing about the tool before defining the problem.

The operator still has to detect, identify and produce an appropriate response to another human being. That inherently puts him in a reactive process. The video is a very simple example of that reality: the operator enters, and a fraction of a second later he is already hit.

At that point, arguing whether he should have moved slower or faster around the doorway is not necessarily the leading question.

The leading question is: what conditions did we actually manage to create in our favor before asking a person to solve that problem?

Methods matter. But methods without context quickly become slogans.

#projectgecko #cqb #tactical