Content warning for the video in the link.

It shows a Syrian shoot a TOW-missile against a group of perhaps 15 soldiers standing together. It explodes perfectly on target, and the obvious conclusion that most died. https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/hvqizp/fsa_fighters_score_a_direct_hit_on_a_group_of/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf

The TOW is an anti tank weapon but can be used against other vehicles as well. @Rebel44CZ keeps track of these statistics with around 45% of videos showing the target as a non vehicle. These are mostly bunkers, buildings, and groups of soldiers.

Why does it matter?

It’s an innovation that is coming not from Lockheed, but from a bunch of Syrians.

Jump back to the early-mid phases of the Syrian war, and as videos start to proliferate, something stuck out to me: lots of videos show insurgents firing against, well, humans

The notable thing was the accuracy - even with Matulykas, infamously hard to aim even remotely accurately with. (There are some good articles from a few years back on this).

But the accuracy is what shows the usefulness of it: suddenly all these groups have precision munitions.

Lots of money have been spent on Excalibur and other smart munitions for artillery and mortars, and have proven to be very popular with users.

But Syria didn’t have these. They did have a bunch of ATGMs though. And they turned them into a very accurate and effective tool.

“The natives are acting up again” could be one response, but that misses the point: they don’t have reliable artillery or CAS, much less accurate if they do. Of course a 155 shell has a bigger effect than a TOW, but that requires three things:

1, having the damn artillery in the first place. 2, being able to place the shell where you want it. 3, logistics to supply the artillery with the required munition.

What do you do if all three are missing, or you only have one of the three?

You can go the US Army’s traditional approach, and rely on the Air Force to provide the firepower. This requires you to have air platforms, which in turn require a huge logistics footprint and structure behind that whole force to do.

You could go the Syrian Gov approach, and drop barrel bombs (solving logistics) from helicopters (solving the platform), but mostly hit civilian areas and hospitals (because accuracy is grossly lacking).

But if you don’t have artillery and CAS, you can go to what you have that can provide reliable and accurate fire support. Coincidentally the TOWs are light and fit well with the light infantry/mobility enabled force that the Syrian groups are.

To take the point further: a military force needs to have firepower to succeed. Accurate such is even more helpful. If you don’t have your own or enough firepower from artillery or CAS, are lacking in logistics, or both, perhaps look at other options?

Buy other forms of support, but the Syrians showed another alternative, that isn’t mutually exclusive. To provide and push down large amounts of ATGMs to infantry units - providing both long range and accurate precision guided munitions.

Combine with small UAVs, light mobility vehicles, now light infantry becomes a threat. Several Georgians have commented to me that the most important support they have gotten since 2008 are the American Javelin missiles. Pretty telling.

If you stuck around this long, worth noting that it’s not just in Syria this happened; eastern Ukraine has seen a similar and I presume separate innovation. In the absence of alternatives, ATGMs proved their use beyond tanks in two conflicts and within 5 years.