Change the End. Lewis "Lou" Young (Mark Taylor) died

Yes and no, Bart.

OTR bounding mines are often fitted with a variable trigger mech which allows the attachment of different triggers -- force trigger, tripwire, or command det. are most common.

However, what Sam explained was that this model (which may be entirely fictional, but still feasible) was popular precisely because it was a lure mine. Initial target triggers an on/off pressure activation and leaves them with the dilemma of trying to rescue the initial target. Its more than an attrition APM, it's a psychological blow where you either leave your mate to die or you know that more people died than necessary (it's a tactic that's been used for centuries in warfare). Also effective -- you have a better chance of killing the enemy's bomb techs as they'd be the ones who try to disarm the mine. This is similar to a sniper wounding but not killing a target in the battlefield and holding fire until a medic appears, thus directly degrading a unit's combat effectiveness.

Most importantly, though, is that in the course of the story, we find out the criminal who set it was well-versed in these munitions AND had made very specific alterations to suit his purpose -- including spoiling the factory-set make-safe features.

I don't view it as a technical error in the slightest. Merely an unlikely convergence of possibilities and an indication that the man who set the mine was deliberate in his desire to inflict pain and suffering.

---

Not that I disagree that, ultimately, it made for better drama anyway.

I'm just a part-time war geek. From Sun Tzu to Schwarzkopf, I used to love ingesting it in all its forms. What can I say? I enjoy the drama/tragedy of war. Plus: "War is wrong but the toys are cool."

LOL Bart, all good. I enjoy exploring all facets.

...but I'm gonna disagree with you again.

"True Bounding mines" is what I meant by OTR -- Off The Rack. While the pressure plate thing is Hollywood, it comes from art imitating life imitating art imitating ... etc. The lure mine has been used but is something which is frowned upon by Western doctrines. Again, it's a rare occurrence which would only be emulated by the most shrewd and callous of APM techs. This includes Yugoslavia and isolated instances in the Middle East -- although in some reported cases it's been theorized that it is actually a misfire which is actually a faulty on-pressure trigger. Nonetheless, given the parameters of the story in One Wrong Move, it's entirely plausible the fellow, a Westerner weened on movie/TV tropes, would construct something as ruthless as a pressure-disengaged trigger. I agree it is very unlikely but hardly impossible. I'm totally with you on typical tactics by average people. I just make a distinction between what is normal and what is possible.

I forget the inventor's name but during WWII he, among others, offered that some anti-personal mines should be pressure-disengage triggers in order to kill the key personnel who often walked behind vehicles, including comms, medical, and command units. It's an idea as old as the invention of the mine, just not one in wide circulation as deployment standards changed during the Cold War.

Insurgency and the fight against it has, however, returned many of the old land war techniques of WWII and, understandably, some "blood and guts" practices have returned to prominence. When it's not about nuclear subs, fighter jets, and Hellfire missiles, old ground-pounder tactics still apply.

As for the sniper tactic (and I stress I learned this before Saving Private Ryan and Enemy At The Gates), it's absolutely not just a suicide technique. It's another tactic employed to great advantage in the Battle of Stalingrad. However, it's most famous for that Saving Private Ryan scene, which was indicative of the staggered retreat of the Germans. Thus it became popularized as a 'suicide technique' because of the conditions of the Nazi snipers who were left behind to slow the enemy at the cost of their lives. And, of course, its inherent drama makes it tempting for screenwriters. But it's been reported since the invention of the sniper -- circa the late 1700s. (The term "sniper" was coined in the 1800s according the interwebz, but the became defined earlier than that, thanks to the British Army and the American revolutionaries).

However, it's just another tool in the arsenal of any trained sniper. It's far less effective these days, when facing an enemy with modern gear, but against under-equipped and under-trained troops, it's still a valid option.

One thing I learned in talking to ... certain people: No tool and no tactic is better than the others, especially in sniping. The best soldier (sniper) is the one who knows which tool or tactic to employ in each situation. Become locked down in routine or by-the-book methodology and you might as well surrender or suicide.

And the problem we have in thinking what's "normal" often comes from our research which is vastly one-sided at times. We focus on the training our troops receive and take that as rote or, worse, "best". It's the tactics of the soldier who is not trained/restricted by Western conventions which are often disregarded. Take a look into South American cartels and their mercenaries, as well as many of the African hotspots, especially Somalia. You'll find that tactics differ the world over -- as does their effectiveness.

The rules (training) are in place for good reasons, but more important than learning the rules is learning WHY they're there so that you know WHEN to break them. Soldiers need, need, need that rigorous training to overcome the human instincts which they're born with. I won't argue with that. But the exceptional soldier is able to rise even farther beyond that in order to think creatively (or "laterally" as I've heard used) and overcome situations beyond what they've been prepared to face. It's these exceptional individuals who often comprise the elite forces units

...and I'm digressing.

...and, also, I am slightly depressed with the realization of how much attention I've paid to the art of killing.

(and I realize not naming my present-day sources is rather hollow but there ain't nothing I can do about that)

My head is currently overpopulated, sorry.

Heck, I didn't even know those stacks of old Soldier of Fortune and Defense & Diplomacy magazines were still in there. One day I might write about the two most memorable sources of WWII stories. They were both women. And they were both German.

They exist only in my head now. I think.