Talk:Light infantry

message: Perhaps a merger into the infantry page, where light infantry is described in adition to other types?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.189.50.25 (talk) 03:29, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Light Infantry is distinct both in military history and in contemporary orders of battle. Even in the mid to late 1800's when governments attempted to abolish the role of light infantry because rifles became ubiquitous; it was found to be such a distinct and required role that it soon re-emerged. For example in the American civil war both sides quickly figured out they needed light infantry screening forces and created specific formations by 1862. At that point it had only been about 8 years since light infantry skirmishers had been disbanded. In World War 1 the character of trench warfare meant skirmishing could not be done. However light infantry came right back in World War 2 and has been a thing in every war since. Outcast95 (talk) 22:04, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

message: Definition of light infantry by Australian Army, 2008:
"A standing organisation of Infantry that lacks organic transport assets but has additional equipment to that in mechanised and motorised infantry units."
source: LWD 3-3-7
--Lastdingo (talk) 23:47, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Australian Definition 

message: Not all Rifle Regiments were Light Infantry and vice versa.  Could someone please modify the system so 'Rifle Regiment' goes straight to 'Rifleman' rather than Light Infantry?Foofbun (talk) 06:21, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Rifle Regiment should be a separate article

message: First the chart is wrong. Light Infantry soldiers are routinely packing 70-90 pounds in Iraq and Afghanistan, and Mortarmen have weighed in at 170 pounds of gear. As well 10 liters is way too much water to be drinking unless it's 105+ degrees out. Finally the point that says it's disputed in the chart, 25 miles a day is correct. The 101st actually does a 101 mile road march in 4 days every so often. Sorry if the formatting is bad, this is my first post on Wikipedia, and I don't really have time now to corroborate this with news articles or anything. I promise not to change anything until I figure some things out around here, and find some sources to cite.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.121.32.4 (talk) 03:47, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The whole chart is bogus. It's from some commercial "military bikes" website, not a reliable source. It's snazzy but that's no reason to keep it. I'll remove it. TomPointTwo (talk) 04:38, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

text: Kevin12xd (talk) (contribs) 23:53, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chart 

message: I've removed a section on the training of light infantry in the modern period. It cited no sources and seems to have been written by a non-native speaker, to the point where I unfortunately couldn't make out what was being said at all. I'll hopefully get around to replacing it with something else in the next few weeks, but as it was it was not a positive contribution to the encyclopedia. JeanLackE (talk) 20:55, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  History/Modern/Training 

message: I'm updating the US section to be more like the British section. Right now planned updates are going to include airmobile fighting in Vietnam, planned responses in the cold war, and contemporary use of light forces in the War on Terror era.Outcast95 (talk) 22:08, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, looking at the article, the top section could use an update for the last 20 years or so too. Outcast95 (talk) 22:09, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  United States Updates