PDA

View Full Version : FBI's HRT and others...


WhiskeyBoarder
08-30-2006, 21:31
First, allow this minor disclaimer: a previous thread (http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3435)on this board brought the following questions and comments to mind. Understanding that this subject may have been discussed before, a search was done beforehand. All that being said, I obviously found nothing to satisfy my queries so I pose the following.

The thread mentioned above spoke about a terrorist hostage situation taking place within a school. It seemed that throughout the replies in the thread, the consensus was that the FBI’s HRT was not the most appropriate response (speaking hypothetically, of course, that we could use the military as first responders) to this sort of situation. This raised a huge question in my mind. Worse, it raised a cloud of doubt as well.

Let me continue. I tried to follow all of your responses to see exactly why the HRT would not do well in this situation. The closest I could come to a detailed response was something to the effect that the HRT “civilians” did not commit to the same oath that service men did and that they may not be so willing to give their life or make appropriate sacrifices. This makes sense… however…

This is a HOSTAGE RESPONSE unit. I mean, really, shouldn’t they contain the apex of qualifications needed to deal with exactly this situation? I ask this question understanding fully the company that I now find myself engaged. Being former military myself, I trust in the military’s elite units before most others. I also understand the pride that everyone here has for their military units. But if we can set that aside for a second, for the sake of an honest assessment, I must ask: what exactly makes the FBI’s HRT so inferior to a military unit in reference to responding to a domestic terrorist incident? All my respect and awe for each and every professional on this site aside, shouldn’t the HRT be exactly suited for a situation like the one described in the thread above… maybe even more so then the military’s best? I would think that it has to be admitted that domestic affairs aren’t the military’s specialty and, therefore, leaves room for another agency to do better.

Allow me to conclude with a few points. First, I understand that many of you may know a lot about government agencies and their specialized units organized for this sort of situation and I totally understand if you do not want to divulge what might be seen as their weaknesses (in defense of an argument as to why the military would be better suited for such duty). I can see completely how this can be a security issue. Also, I want you all to know that I ask all of the preceding for more then just reasons of passing interest. I was a former soldier and fairly successful as one. Now I am a student and probably more successful at that ;) Point being, I am studying Arabic and Mid-East culture so as to have every opportunity to be at the cutting edge of American defense upon my graduation. I want every organization, unit, and opportunity open to me. So to hear that a unit like the FBI’s HRT would fail so miserably at exactly what seems to be their job is highly disappointing given the effort that I am putting into myself to attain employment as such. If any one chooses to deviate into even greater conversation about other government CT units (other then military- although, if upon graduation, this is the most cutting edge then that option is still there for me too), that would be greatly appreciated as well.

Wow… this sure got lengthy. Gentlemen… Ladies… Thank you for your time, and I look forward to the replies.

Trip_Wire (RIP)
08-30-2006, 21:59
I don't know what gave you the idea that the military would be better in a response to a domestic terroist incident, since in most cases the military would be prohibited from taking action a what amounts to a domestic crime, because of the Posse

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_Comitatus_Act

The State, Sheriff and/or local police department could also be involved, as long as it was in their jurisdiction, the FBI, would take the lead role due to it being a terrorist situation.

The only military that would be prepared to respond to such a case, would be Delta or now days better known as the 'Unit' due to TV.

BTW: Have you ever checked out how many local LE Officers and FBI Agents give their live up to "Protect and Serve," the people of the United States? I think you should check those stats out before making statements like, the one below!

"a detailed response was something to the effect that the HRT “civilians” did not commit to the same oath that service men did and that they may not be so willing to give their life or make appropriate sacrifices. This makes sense."

Well it sure as hell doen't make sense to me to me! May I also suggest tha you use your goggle finger a little more before making statements, like you have here.

Have a VERY SF Day!

WhiskeyBoarder
08-30-2006, 22:15
***
I don't know what gave you the idea that the military would be better in a response to a domestic terroist incident, since in most cases the military would be prohibited from taking action a what amounts to a domestic crime, because of the Posse
***



Mea Culpa…

Somewhere in my original post, I used the word “hypothetically.” I think that your response is completely based on not seeing on this word used.

I, like most informed people that visit a board such as this, understand that the US military can not be the first responder to such a situation. However, in the thread that I originally referred to, it was made clear that, given the opportunity, the US military’s best trained would out perform the HRT in clearing up this particular predicament.

All of which brought me to my main question, I guess: Why do the people with great military accomplishments seem to look down upon other highly trained, albeit non-military, agencies? If it is warranted then so be it. I am not here to argue because, for the little that I know, the military is better trained then most non-military tactical units. But, being that I have a world of opportunities before me, it sort of baffles me when I hear agencies made to sound inferior to those in the military. I was under the impression that, with the great resources of, say, the CIA or the FBI that they could create one hell of a specialized unit (especially given the small numbers that such a unit would demand). Now I just want their capabilities and weaknesses expanded upon- especially in this particular situation (a terrorist initiated hostage situation) as it is something that I find particularly interesting.

Thanks for the quick response, but I think you missed my point in ways…

The Reaper
08-30-2006, 22:23
We will not participate in a food fight here and slander Federal HRT organizations, nor discuss their TTPs.

This smacks of the "which is better, SEALs or SF" threads popular elsewhere on the internet.

Trip_Wire has already delineated the primary difference - the HRT is organized to operate inside the US, military organizations with similar missions are prohibited from doing so by law, with a very few exceptions that we will not discuss here.

What is the difference to you?

TR

WhiskeyBoarder
08-30-2006, 22:40
Sorry, I understand the closing of this conversation. It had a totally different effect that I intended.

Upon re-reading my posts, I can understand how one can interpret a “this versus that” scenario, which is not totally what I intended.

It just seemed that in a previous thread that the HRT (who, truly, is only being picked on b/c they were the unit referred to) was looked at as having inferior skills in regard to a school hostage situation in comparison to certain military units. That being said, I didn’t want to compare, say, ********I mean, who cares? Every unit has its benefits and weaknesses. But, on the same note, if so many experienced professionals are going to point out the weaknesses of a certain unit, then as a person who may one day choose to attempt to join such a unit, it would only seem logical to ask what the downfalls are.

I am reaching for an example here, but consider this: If I wanted to join the army, I wouldn’t ask a Marine about the army, right? But if I wanted to find out about the bad side of the army, I wouldn’t ask a gung-ho “hooah” army dude because his idea would be jaded. I would ask a professional, honest Marine who has worked with the army to explain what he sees as the pros and cons in a brother service. Of course, I would only rely on this opinion in some small percentage compared to the many other questions that I would ask those within the particular service that I was trying to join. But getting outside PROFESSIONAL opinion is important… especially when considering devoting your entire life and well being to an organization- as I am sure you all understand.

So… in so many less words, I am just asking for an expanded conversation on non-military tactical units, if any one chooses to expel opinions and/or experiences. If not, then I appreciate your time and am very honestly sorry for choosing the wrong forum for my queries.

Team Sergeant
08-31-2006, 09:59
WhiskeyBoarder,

If you cannot understand the reasoning from the previous thread then do more research on your own. You might want to do some heavy reading regarding the Russian Beslan school incident and the Moscow Theatre incident. Consider how they were "resolved".

TS

WhiskeyBoarder
08-31-2006, 23:27
***WhiskeyBoarder,

If you cannot understand the reasoning from the previous thread then do more research on your own. You might want to do some heavy reading regarding the Russian Beslan school incident and the Moscow Theatre incident. Consider how they were "resolved".

TS***


Thank you. Good enough answer for me. I guess that when I posed my original questions, I was hoping to receive feedback concerning personal experiences in either A) dealing with the posed situation or B) experience dealing with the discussed government, but non-military, units. In lieu of those, this response is the next best thing. I have pointed reading and while the mentioned events are both recognizable, I realize there is always more to learn.

So this post was probably pointless rambling. But, hopefully, it was more then that. Many of “us” (the young, inexperienced, naive, etc) really look up to you guys. So if I can be one voice speaking for everyone else, then just know that when any of you say, "READ THIS," we quickly scurry to "READ THAT."

Thank you for your time.

haztacmedic
09-01-2006, 18:30
I got a feeling things are about to turn ugly here!

x SF med
09-01-2006, 18:34
Nah, won't get ugly. It'll be over before it gets ugly, WB vs TS - no contest - all TS has to do is show up.

haztacmedic
09-01-2006, 18:41
You are right but its exciting to see just how it will all go.

The Reaper
09-01-2006, 18:59
I am amazed at the number of people who show up here and do not seem to realize that the first thing to do when you find yourself in a hole is to stop digging.

TR

x SF med
09-01-2006, 21:40
I am amazed at the number of people who show up here and do not seem to realize that the first thing to do when you find yourself in a hole is to stop digging.

TR

Unless you hear the whistling of incomming... then you dig faster. I think the mortar pit is ready, Sir. Charge 5? 10 rounds? Hang?