The genesis of the article is comments that I see on my blog posts and elsewhere from individuals who, to a certain extent, reject small unit tactics as a means for post-collapse survival and prefer to plan to operate as a ‘lone wolf.’ I see comments such as ‘I’ll be going hunting’ and criticism of small unit tactics on the basis of them being ‘for the military’.
Ok, so let’s take that at face value and examine some tactical considerations for such an operator. Let’s envision a post-collapse scenario where a father is protecting his family at a hidden retreat. I am going to put this in the woods/country rather than urban, just to make the article shorter and because that is where most retreats are located, but many of the considerations will apply across tactical environments.
Imagine that in your area there is an active paramilitary marauder gang who thus poses a clear and present threat to your retreat and family. They are conducting active operations in your area of operations (AO) and you therefore decide that the best approach for the tactical self-defense of your family is an active defense. Such an active defense will mean going out and disrupting the operations of this group in such a way that they will be deterred from operating in your area. Otherwise known as goin’ huntin’!
Your primary concern is stealth and concealment. If you are going away from your retreat you need to consider how that retreat is defended in your absence, and what will happen if you do not come back. The best defense of that retreat will be avoidance by concealment. Perhaps if you do deter the gang from your area you are also defending your retreat by preventing the enemy from moving in your direction and discovering your family/stash.
We are going to talk about a lone operator. Many of the disadvantages faced by a lone operator can be overcome by moving at a minimum in a pair, like a sniper team. But this is going to be a purist article, it is going to be about a ‘lone wolf’.
h/t Matt Bracken
