ok, this is just a stupid conversational question, but I think that there are a few people here who could anser it. I talked with a guy yesterday who wore a "ranger" tag on his lapel (wearing a suit). about 50. anyway we got to talking about what rangers did, he wasn't in a ranger battalion, he was a ranger trained infantry officer. basically, he said that the rangers did direct action operations, and that as a ranger trained officer in an infantry battallion, he did the direct actions for the infantry battalion. he said, essentially, that recon troops didn't really to any direct action in the US army. I honestly wasn't sure if he was bullshitting me or not. anyway, here are my questions: 1. the way it works in the IDF, basically the people who do recon do the major "direct action operations" - the concept being that the same skills are needed to look at a bridge as are needed to blow a bridge up, essentially. it doesn't work the same way in the US military? 2. in the IDF, all infantry end up doing stuff like ambushes and so on. usually, if there is a very specific ambush or direct action, the best recon unit will do it, a lesser one will be done by a lesser recon unit, then a lesser recon unit, then a regular infantry platoon. but every infantryman will do ambushes in his service, and will certainly train for them. this guy was very dismisive of line infantrymen (even though he served as a platoon leader in a rifle company in an infantry battalion). 3. if an infantry battalian needs to do something major, in the IDF they will use the recon platoon, in a brigade strength unit they will use the recon company. this guy was pretty dismisive of the infantry battalion recon platoon - essentially saying that they were used for recon but never for direct action stuff. anyway, this is just curriosity, and I am guessing that somebody here knows the answers to this. I am not sure if this guy was a bullshitter or not.