View Full Version : The spec ops stretch
Surf n Turf
10-16-2006, 21:22
Interesting Read
The spec ops stretch
Expansion plans leave many in Army Special Forces uneasy
By Sean D. Naylor
The impending expansion of Army special operations forces laid out in this year's Quadrennial Defense Review is spreading waves of unease throughout the Special Forces community.
The 10,000 soldiers in the Army's five active and two National Guard Special Forces groups make up the largest component of the U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCom) and are the U.S.' pre-eminent exponents of unconventional warfare (working with guerrilla groups to overthrow an enemy regime) and foreign internal defense (training friendly governments to defend themselves against insurgencies). But many SF officers feel that U.S. Army Special Operations Command (USASOC) has left them in the dark about how it plans to deliver on the QDR's promise to expand the number of SF battalions by a third over the next several years. They are deeply concerned that, despite the generals' protestations to the contrary, a rushed expansion of Army special operations forces will result in an SF contingent that, while bigger on paper, will contain half-filled units manned by troops who are less mature, less experienced and less skilled in languages and foreign cultures than SF soldiers traditionally have been.
http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/2006/10/2174369
SnT
The Reaper
10-16-2006, 22:53
Helluva article.
Sean Naylor just stated much more eloquently many of the points I have been making for a while.
Not too much there I would disagree with.
TR
Jack Moroney (RIP)
10-17-2006, 05:22
Not too much there I would disagree with.TR
I agree, but who is listening and where is the chain of command's indorsement for this? This shouldn't be a BFO from Sean Naylor but a position paper by USSOCOM indorsed by all the component commanders.
And I love this quote:But many SF officers feel that U.S. Army Special Operations Command (USASOC) has left them in the dark about how it plans to deliver on the QDR's promise to expand the number of SF battalions by a third over the next several years. They are deeply concerned that, despite the generals' protestations to the contrary, a rushed expansion of Army special operations forces will result in an SF contingent that, while bigger on paper, will contain half-filled units manned by troops who are less mature, less experienced and less skilled in languages and foreign cultures than SF soldiers traditionally have been.
If they are so damned concerned who are they, where are they, and why aren't they standing on top of their bosses desks. It's time to stand up and be counted and stop placing your career ahead of your men. This crap about some "group commander having to take a brick and make it fly" shows the cut off point between the managers and the leaders. This is command negligence.
x SF med
10-17-2006, 06:49
One point that has not been voiced in this article, or in my other research is taking older FOGs (like myself, and a few others on the board) to the Company HQ, Bn HQ, and Grp HQ levels, freeing up the NCOs that have been 'snaked' from teams. We all know the mission, have the Qualifications, and have passed the Clearance fiasco, We may not be as physically able to as the kids to be 'on the ground' but we know enough and care enough to make sure the support, intel and commo are what they need to accomplish their missions.
Just a thought.
It's time to stand up and be counted and stop placing your career ahead of your men.
Sir, its a rare breed that does this...hopefully not in SF as well.
CoLawman
10-17-2006, 08:19
Sean Naylor took SecDef to task in his book "Not a Good Day to Die". Most of the issues Naylor addressed in the book involved the SecDef's micromanaging of the mission in Astan. Now this article seems to be (again) directing the reader to the top of the heap.........SecDef.
It is awful difficult, and takes a special person, to sacrifice one's career by butting heads with the SecDef. I would assume that alot of the top military brass have taken a stance that keeping one's mouth shut at least allows them to stay in the fight.
It seems to this layman that the SecDef is the epitome of micromanagers! It further seems to me that he is McNamara reincarnated!
If Naylor's credibility is not questioned then it is time for the SecDef to move to a retirement home.
One point that has not been voiced in this article, or in my other research is taking older FOGs (like myself, and a few others on the board) to the Company HQ, Bn HQ, and Grp HQ levels, freeing up the NCOs that have been 'snaked' from teams. We all know the mission, have the Qualifications, and have passed the Clearance fiasco, We may not be as physically able to as the kids to be 'on the ground' but we know enough and care enough to make sure the support, intel and commo are what they need to accomplish their missions.
Just a thought.Till this day, I can not for the life in me, figure out why? They won't recall you FOGs....:munchin
Stay safe.
Jack Moroney (RIP)
10-17-2006, 10:14
It is awful difficult, and takes a special person, to sacrifice one's career by butting heads with the SecDef. .
Well actually isn't that what leadership is all about? It doesn't matter whether it is the SECDEF or the next individual above you in the chain of command. You have an obligation to your mission and your men to stand your ground and confront the issue head on. A Platoon leader who knows that an order is going to get his men killed and does not stand before the Company Commander and state his piece is wrong. If the order stands, then the only other option is to lead the platoon from the front and take the first round. Unfortunately this is not the case because the point of departure here is sacrifice of your career or the sacrifice of the men who are depending on you to do the right thing. People at the decision making level that are driving the show are not going to hear the first shot fired that is going to take out the first troop and it is hard for me to accept that anyone watching the battle unfold on HDTV shot from a drone can feel the agony of the guy on the ground if he did not have the balls to ensure that he did all he could to provide him with the right tools and mix of folks required to do the job. It doesn't take a special kind of person to do that it is expected of any commander who is supposed to look to his troops and his mission but then, for the most part, I will agree with you that it takes a special kind of person that builds his career at the expense of his subordinates regardless of the cost. Let me end this before I get wound up. Rant over.
Team Sergeant
10-17-2006, 11:30
In all my years I've never actually seen a twelve man A-Team. While I'm sure our Commanders had a few (on paper) I've never seen one standing in one place at one time.
Fact: There are not enough men that actually desire to do what we do with the raw talent we require period.
The only possible way to enlarge the Army Special Forces is to reduce the requirements and to lower our standards. This has been done before to fill our ranks. (We’re still recruiting off the streets, allowing privates to attempt SFAS, I don't know about the officer side of the house. That should enlighten most intelligent individuals we CANNOT currently fill our ranks.)
The only way the US military could enlarge the Army Special Forces is to lower the standards to such a level that anyone just wishing to could earn the Green Beret.
If we dilute the Army Special Forces to the point we no longer intimidate or put the fear of allah into today's global terrorists IMO we will cease to be an extremely effective fighting force. What's worse it will cause high-quality men to leave and good men not to join.
Team Sergeant
The Reaper
10-17-2006, 11:54
Agreed. The smart thing to do would have been to try and stand up another Group oriented on the CENTCOM AOR, not to add force structure to every SFG out there.
Or we could look at bringing another two Guard SFGs on line, which might be easier.
The decision to bring in 18Xs was a good one. Once the program started producing results, it seems to me that it was turned into a stampede to get more kids of lower quality into the program.
If as my boss, you tell me that my goal as a training unit commander is to give you 750 SF soldiers, great, I can just throw away the standards and draw the line at 750. Everyone above that line, report to the CIF and draw your Tabs and Green Berets. I know that it is not quite that simple, but that is the net result. When you give people numbers for goals, rather than asking for everyone who can make the standards, and the cadre's success is based upon that, too many will do just what you asked for. Meet the numbers, regardless of quality or standards.
As noted before, the leadership at USASOC is not oriented on SF, despite the fact that SF is the largest component of USASOC and SOCOM. Two ways to tell how you stand within an organization. The origin of the leadership and where the money goes. The SOCOM CG is an aviator with an SF Tab and a Ranger Tab, not really an SF soldier for a very long time. The USASOC CG and CSM are both Rangers. The JSOC CG is a Ranger. SOCOM has not had an actual SF CG since MG Joe Lutz stood it up. All of the past USASFC CGs I can recall other than the current one and his predecessor have ended their careers without hitting four stars or a SOF three star command. Four of the the previous five SWCS CGs (the senior SF two-star position) have retired, the other is serving out his career as a non-promotable three-star in Purgatory. Where is SF in charge beyond that? The previous USASOC CG was our best shot at a four-star SF soldier and he retired out of the job.
Where do you think the money is going? SF as the largest component with the preponderance of missions and boots on the ground gets a tiny portion of the SOF funding. An SFOD-A with more missions and a lot less support dedicated to it, has less and (lower quality) night vision than a Ranger infantry platoon. The majority of SOCOM's money goes to infil platforms (dedicated almost exclusively to Black units) and the black units themselves. What do you think the priority is?
I fear that this will only get worse as the Army continues to put a glass ceiling on real SF officers who have been working in their MOS for their careers. That virtually guarantees that the leadership and those making money decisions will only see to SF AFTER the other units have been fully resourced.
We got the job done and the good press, the politicians gave the resources to SOF, and the SOF leadership failed to do their duty to put the money where their mouths were.
My apologies for the rant.
TR
x SF med
10-17-2006, 12:47
Till this day, I can not for the life in me, figure out why? They won't recall you FOGs....:munchin
Stay safe.
I wouldn't bitch too loud or long - as long as I was a DA civilian or brought back at a decent rank that takes into account the education and business experience to help run whichever B, C, or D I was assigned to. My knees are fried, but my brain still works most days.
TR-
Rant away, I don't think you'll get too much push back from the SF guys here, especially since you're giving the truth, from experience.
(opinion from an outsider) the SEALs have been able to recruit straight from the civilian world with success and without a drop in quality. I think we should take a page from their book and perhaps set up a prep program for the 18x contract, such as the SEAL's RDAC. It appears that this will be the Army's way of trying to fill their need, with a national prep program that is successful we will be able to better evaluate/prepare those coming in. There are good candidates out there, you just have to go get them. You guys could also bring back SOPC (i believe that was the name of it), which along with a prep program would seriously bolster the quality of candidates.
What I said above will help better prepare those already wanting to come to SF, the other step needed is to appeal to more people. The Army could spend more money advertising to get the SF name out there and into the heads of the people. (I have read stories of SEALs going to marathons and other extreme competitions to try and recruit)This will get SF more recognition, but as long as it is "The Army" promoting it, SF will easily be able to keep its "quiet professional" motto true to form. (which is another recruiting advantage point) Like I said, these are just opinions from someone not in the military. The problem is that all this requires money, it will show how badly the Army truly wants to have qualified SF soldiers downrange.
82ndtrooper
10-17-2006, 13:05
I guess they forgot SOF Truth # 4 ??
Jack Moroney (RIP)
10-17-2006, 13:17
(opinion from an outsider)
Your opinion, while welcome, shows a total lack of understanding between SEALS and SF. If all we needed was folks that could swim and do push-ups we could recruit water ballet stars with no-necks. I would suggest that you do a little more reading about what we do and what is required before you spend any more time exploiting your marketing and recruiting skills to draw folks into SF. We are not about making corn flakes. It is not the lack of interest in SF, it is the lack of those qualified to meet the requirements for SF. To quote a line from an old CW song, "If wishes were horses then beggars would ride"!
The Reaper
10-17-2006, 13:18
(opinion from an outsider) the SEALs have been able to recruit straight from the civilian world with success and without a drop in quality. I think we should take a page from their book and perhaps set up a prep program for the 18x contract, such as the SEAL's RDAC. It appears that this will be the Army's way of trying to fill their need, with a national prep program that is successful we will be able to better evaluate/prepare those coming in. There are good candidates out there, you just have to go get them. You guys could also bring back SOPC (i believe that was the name of it), which along with a prep program would seriously bolster the quality of candidates.
What I said above will help better prepare those already wanting to come to SF, the other step needed is to appeal to more people. The Army could spend more money advertising to get the SF name out there and into the heads of the people. (I have read stories of SEALs going to marathons and other extreme competitions to try and recruit)This will get SF more recognition, but as long as it is "The Army" promoting it, SF will easily be able to keep its "quiet professional" motto true to form. (which is another recruiting advantage point) Like I said, these are just opinions from someone not in the military. The problem is that all this requires money, it will show how badly the Army truly wants to have qualified SF soldiers downrange.
tag:
Not sure what your background is from the info in your profile.
The SEALs are looking for a different type of recruit, strong of back and totally dedicated to the mission. They do not really do UW or FID, or speak the required languages, so their needs are different from ours. We might find some very fit and smart 18 year olds, but we are not going to find very many mature people of that age.
You do not appear to understand the SF prep process. SOPC is not gone, it just changed names. Besides, the people with the dedication and maturity we want will prep themselves, they do not need someone to hold their hands and make them ruck long and hard. The sort of people that we want have generally tended to self-motivate and those who did not were not really the sort of people we were looking for. Those who would be influenced by a flashy ad campaign and not by the SF soldiers making the news are not the ones we want either.
It is not a lack of those who want the beret so much as it is a lack of those who are winning (and able) to pay the price of admission. If we took everybody, the tab wouldn't read "Special Forces", it would be "Average Forces".
Just a friendly heads up, you might do some more reading before jumping in with both feet.
Welcome aboard.
Rats, the Colonel beat me to the punch, as usual.
TR
x SF med
10-17-2006, 13:54
Col Jack, TR -
You both beat me to the punch, c'est domage. I agree with your assessments, and would like to add some other comments:
The SF community is proud of the title "Quiet Professional", a screaming rock star ad campaign is the antithesis of the image we prefer to project. As specialized generalists we have to have more on the ball than any other force out there - medics can shoot and make commo; commo men can shoot and give an IV, weapons men can set demo and give IVs; demo men can make commo and collect intelligence - and each of the 12 men on a Team brings some other piece to the others due to the nature of each man's background. An SFOD-A is a force multiplier, as well as a force unto itself (when need be), 12 men who can create an army out of farmers; destroy an already trained army through harrassment and interdiction; gather intelligence, quietly; or rebuild areas of a country ravaged by war. We are teachers, diplomats, construction workers, health care providers, sanitation engineers, and above all else US Army soldiers. I would rather serve on a short Team with fully qualified, mature men than on an overstrength team of rock star, glory seeking teenagers with more balls than brains. Notice the use of capitalization for Team vs team - QPs will understand why I chose that distinction, give me a Team. Let the rockstars go to the SEALs or the Rangers, let the men come to SF, many good soldiers have not made it in the Q course and still been great soldiers, Special Forces is different and requires a different type of person - and no test can say what that type is, thus SFAS and the Q - trials by fire, to then go through the biggest trial by fire - your first year on a Team.
I'm not sure anybody that hasn't experienced this really understands what I just put down, but those that have BTDT are smiling a little.
CO Jack, TR - apologies for the rehash of multiple posts throughout the site, for some reason, I felt sorry for tag and decided to spoonfeed him.
CoLawman
10-17-2006, 13:55
You are absolutely correct, that is what leadership is all about. Accountability up and down the chain. But it appears that there are very few in the General Officer rank willing to shoulder that burden.
Well actually isn't that what leadership is all about? It doesn't matter whether it is the SECDEF or the next individual above you in the chain of command. You have an obligation to your mission and your men to stand your ground and confront the issue head on. A Platoon leader who knows that an order is going to get his men killed and does not stand before the Company Commander and state his piece is wrong. If the order stands, then the only other option is to lead the platoon from the front and take the first round. Unfortunately this is not the case because the point of departure here is sacrifice of your career or the sacrifice of the men who are depending on you to do the right thing. People at the decision making level that are driving the show are not going to hear the first shot fired that is going to take out the first troop and it is hard for me to accept that anyone watching the battle unfold on HDTV shot from a drone can feel the agony of the guy on the ground if he did not have the balls to ensure that he did all he could to provide him with the right tools and mix of folks required to do the job. It doesn't take a special kind of person to do that it is expected of any commander who is supposed to look to his troops and his mission but then, for the most part, I will agree with you that it takes a special kind of person that builds his career at the expense of his subordinates regardless of the cost. Let me end this before I get wound up. Rant over.
Jack Moroney (RIP)
10-17-2006, 14:34
You are absolutely correct, that is what leadership is all about. Accountability up and down the chain. But it appears that there are very few in the General Officer rank willing to shoulder that burden.
You can't lay this entirely at the feet of the GOs-see the PM I sent you and if you would like to explore it a little more we can do it back channel.
Okay I’ll start off with there is no love for Naylor, because I think he will (has) violate OPSEC to write a story, but I think he got this one pretty close to the truth.
The biggest thought on recruiting is SF ODA Team guys are not Rangers, they are not SEALs, they are not black Nomax and Velcro “Operators” SF Teams are a special breed with a very unique mission. You can’t walk off the street and be as 18 Series.
The only way they will get this many SF troops in this short time frame is (in my opinion): Lower the standards or start breeding SF babies in a special Warrior pre-school.
In 2005 the Q Course graduated 791 enlisted SF soldiers, according to Nye, compared with 282 in 2001. The goal from now on is to graduate a minimum of 750 enlisted SF soldiers per year.
SF has always had the challenge of getting the right guys to volunteer…hey if we were a dime a dozen then I don’t think we would be Special! SF candidates must be self-motivate, must have the maturity, and must be committed to the team and mission. Our society doesn’t hold those personalities traits as the gold standard…everyone gets a trophy for trying, everyone is Special – in their own way, it is not PC to tell someone they are not good enough!
A constant refrain of senior uniformed leaders in USASOC and SOCom over the past few years has been that any growth in Special Forces will not come at the expense of the traditionally high standards required to pass the Q Course. But there is widespread concern among SF NCOs, officers and retirees that the USASOC chain of command is already pressuring the cadre to lower standards.
To say they haven’t lowered standards is a complete crock…I’ve talked to too many SWC cadre.
18B…is failing FDC a releasable event?
18C…gotta calculator for the demo exam?
18D…can you name ALL those body parts and pills?
18E…how fast is that Morse code?
Does failing an exam twice get you sent to Korea or does it cause those committee OIC’s to “re-exam” the tests? To see if we are teaching the "right stuff" and validate the “we are not lowering standards” argument.
18X program…great idea on the small contingent of people in our society that would make a great SF team member but hadn’t considered the Army as a career choice. But it seems to me that is not what we are using it for.
In fiscal 2005, 375 of the 791 active-duty enlisted graduates of the Q Course were products of the 18 X-ray program. This year the equivalent numbers were about 280 out of 750, according to Nye, who noted that USASOC had reduced the 18 X-ray recruiting goal for 2006 and again for 2007.
My 2¢ is that if these Senior Commanders and politicians (really one in the same) keep up this mentality in 10 years SF will be an over glorified Ranger BN, in competition with the SEAL teams for mission, money and members!
I think every commander of SF troop or organizations should have the SOF Truths tattooed on his chest in reverse…that way he could review them in the mirror every morning while he shaves!
• Quality is better than quantity.
• Special operations forces cannot be mass produced.
• Competent special operations forces cannot be created after emergencies occur.
• Humans are more important than hardware.
Rant over...good luck SF!
I apologize I was just thinking out loud of how to allow SF get larger without cutting down on standards. What I was trying to say is that we cannot control who chooses the 18x contract and the majority that do are probably from the ages of 18-24 (typically not the most mature age group). I was saying that by adding a prep program, an SF one and not a SEAL type, pt till you die thats all we care about, would help socialize these boys into men, instilling the beliefs and values SF (people are most easily socialized when they first join the military). You are right SOPC is still there, but it has been so watered down that it has lost some of its effectiveness (which is one reason 18x has turned into a floodgate) Also, the people who do the extra things or show that they are more willing to run, pt, learn languages, or whatever show that they have more dedication which in return generally means more mature. We could thus take these more mature/dedicated people and socialize them into qualified SF candidates, both mentally and physically.
I apologize I don't mean to sound argumentative in any way, just expressing ideas. Thanks for your time.
I apologize I was just thinking out loud of how to allow SF get larger without cutting down on standards. What I was trying to say is that we cannot control who chooses the 18x contract and the majority that do are probably from the ages of 18-24 (typically not the most mature age group). I was saying that by adding a prep program, an SF one and not a SEAL type, pt till you die thats all we care about, would help socialize these boys into men, instilling the beliefs and values SF (people are most easily socialized when they first join the military). You are right SOPC is still there, but it has been so watered down that it has lost some of its effectiveness (which is one reason 18x has turned into a floodgate) Also, the people who do the extra things or show that they are more willing to run, pt, learn languages, or whatever show that they have more dedication which in return generally means more mature. We could thus take these more mature/dedicated people and socialize them into qualified SF candidates, both mentally and physically.
I apologize I don't mean to sound argumentative in any way, just expressing ideas. Thanks for your time.
Tag...CoL. Moroney and T.R. have alreay sounded the warning bell...a simple Roger out would do.
sorry was just discussing the topic with you guys...roger out ;)
The Reaper
10-17-2006, 15:31
I apologize I was just thinking out loud of how to allow SF get larger without cutting down on standards. What I was trying to say is that we cannot control who chooses the 18x contract and the majority that do are probably from the ages of 18-24 (typically not the most mature age group). I was saying that by adding a prep program, an SF one and not a SEAL type, pt till you die thats all we care about, would help socialize these boys into men, instilling the beliefs and values SF (people are most easily socialized when they first join the military). You are right SOPC is still there, but it has been so watered down that it has lost some of its effectiveness (which is one reason 18x has turned into a floodgate) Also, the people who do the extra things or show that they are more willing to run, pt, learn languages, or whatever show that they have more dedication which in return generally means more mature. We could thus take these more mature/dedicated people and socialize them into qualified SF candidates, both mentally and physically.
I apologize I don't mean to sound argumentative in any way, just expressing ideas. Thanks for your time.
tag:
It would appear that you are not getting it. Let me break it down for you.
As I understand it, you have never been to any military training or served a day in SF. For that reason, your opinions are largely irrelevant.
How do you know that SOPC is watered down? Have you been there? We already have a prep program for young men who have yet to go to SOPC to mature and learn, it is called the United States Army.
Are you aware of the meaning of the acronym SA? You might do some research into "situational awareness", something we consider very important, pretty much essential in SF.
Now consider that you are new on this site, have a single digit post count, are very young, and have never served a day in the military, much less completed SF training.
Look at the people who are voicing opinions here. Hmm, what do the words Quiet Professional mean on this site? Better yet, who has the green bold user IDs?
The people you are giving your baseless opinions to have on average, over twenty years of service in SF. In case you missed the background, one is a former Training Group commander, who helped stand up SFAS (SFOT, back then), another has a total of over seven years in SWCS, several spent producing 18Cs. Another is currently a senior NCO on a Team.
What value is added by your comments, and who are you trying to impress here? Would you step into a conversation by several former and current NFL players to tell them how you think the game should be played?
I strongly recommend that you revert to listening silence, seek any answers you might need via the Search button, and limit your posts to wishing people Happy Birthday, unless you have a serious question that cannot be answered elsewhere, or significant expertise in the topic being discussed, like teenage fashion or pop culture.
Good luck.
TR
82ndtrooper
10-17-2006, 15:40
Col Jack, TR -
You both beat me to the punch, c'est domage. I agree with your assessments, and would like to add some other comments:
The SF community is proud of the title "Quiet Professional", a screaming rock star ad campaign is the antithesis of the image we prefer to project. As specialized generalists we have to have more on the ball than any other force out there - medics can shoot and make commo; commo men can shoot and give an IV, weapons men can set demo and give IVs; demo men can make commo and collect intelligence - and each of the 12 men on a Team brings some other piece to the others due to the nature of each man's background. An SFOD-A is a force multiplier, as well as a force unto itself (when need be), 12 men who can create an army out of farmers; destroy an already trained army through harrassment and interdiction; gather intelligence, quietly; or rebuild areas of a country ravaged by war. We are teachers, diplomats, construction workers, health care providers, sanitation engineers, and above all else US Army soldiers. I would rather serve on a short Team with fully qualified, mature men than on an overstrength team of rock star, glory seeking teenagers with more balls than brains. Notice the use of capitalization for Team vs team - QPs will understand why I chose that distinction, give me a Team. Let the rockstars go to the SEALs or the Rangers, let the men come to SF, many good soldiers have not made it in the Q course and still been great soldiers, Special Forces is different and requires a different type of person - and no test can say what that type is, thus SFAS and the Q - trials by fire, to then go through the biggest trial by fire - your first year on a Team.
I'm not sure anybody that hasn't experienced this really understands what I just put down, but those that have BTDT are smiling a little.
CO Jack, TR - apologies for the rehash of multiple posts throughout the site, for some reason, I felt sorry for tag and decided to spoonfeed him.
At this very moment, I just witnessed yet another "ROCK STAR" ad campaign commercial for the Navy SEALs. GODSMACK playing loudly, and images of frogmen, rubber raiding crafts, HALO, patrolling, and a Maquire/STABO lift off. It's pretty easy to see who that demographic is targeted for.
Looks pretty cool, I think I'll join. do they take 42 year olds ?? :lifter
X_SF_Med...............what is the quote from Col. Charlie Beckwith ?? "I'd rather go down the river with 7 studs than 100 shitheads" I believe the "QP's" refer to this as "Economy of force" ?
sorry was just discussing the topic with you guys...roger out ;)The ";)" don't cut it!
Sign up or STFU!;)
Stay safe.
CoLawman
10-17-2006, 16:32
Roger Out!
You can't lay this entirely at the feet of the GOs-see the PM I sent you and if you would like to explore it a little more we can do it back channel.
The only possible way to enlarge the Army Special Forces is to reduce the requirements and to lower our standards. This has been done before to fill our ranks. (We’re still recruiting off the streets, allowing privates to attempt SFAS, I don't know about the officer side of the house. That should enlighten most intelligent individuals we CANNOT currently fill our ranks.)
The only way the US military could enlarge the Army Special Forces is to lower the standards to such a level that anyone just wishing to could earn the Green Beret.
If we dilute the Army Special Forces to the point we no longer intimidate or put the fear of allah into today's global terrorists IMO we will cease to be an extremely effective fighting force. What's worse it will cause high-quality men to leave and good men not to join.
Team Sergeant
Fully agree with this statement above and what SF18C wrote. Great information in Naylor’s story, will anyone listen. Probably not.
I was at SWC and saw the way standards may not have been dropped, but they were... lets say made better. BS
It started outside of SWC with Mother Army and Big TRADOC. No end of course exams and no double test of subjects. Well everyone knows SWC isn't a TRADOC course. That is right to a point, the only ones that are – the AIT courses. So the 18 Series are not AIT, there retraining. So the students are held to a different standard, then a standard TRADOC courses student is. SWC Standards.
Did we water down the standards... that’s for you to answer and your own .02
But everyone that said it’s the leaders fault, IMO, where the finger pointing is needed – your right. Its was mainly the leaders at SWC, most of whom will never go back to an ODA let alone a ODB, that made the changes and pass Students that should have never be on the ODAs that they are on now. At different level they are looking at their OER/NCOER so they don’t say a word. We can evaluate 400 students with 15 instructors, we can control 80 students on a live fire range. The Committee Chief yells but the SWTG command never listens, Get It DONE. Safety?? No problem as long and no one gets hurt or blown up.
I take it this way. When my Nephew went to Ranger School this year, at 7 months in the Army, his unit didn’t teach him how to land NAV. He failed and Ranger school held him back for a week to teach him how to land NAV. He got 4 out 5 points after three Land NAV tests, were before he was only finding 1-3 each test during RANGER School. They kicked him out, go back to FT Lewis and try again. Your young learn how to Land NAV and you can come back later.
When SWC had to produce 450 Green Berets we produced around 650 that year, the same for when we need to produce 650 we graduated something like 780. A year of 750 we did 820. Were there standards?? Yes, but how were they made? I remember a CAL PLACE Exam in 2005 where “we Failed 5 students on their first CAL/PLACE Exam…. That’s to high of a number”(according to BC). Back in 2003 we had class sizes of 35 to 45 with first time failures of 10-15 students. 5 students are too high in just two years?? I don’t have a problem with a calculator and the “DEMO card” – the old “hands-on-test” now that’s a different story.
It goes back to leadership, both at SWC, USASOC, and at the unit level. SWC and USASOC just needs to pull their head out of their 4th point.
Remember that you were taught about 70-80% of your job during the Q-course for you MOS. Medics, Engs, Communicators, don’t know weapons like a Bravo, just like everyone doesn’t know how to prime demo or start an IV. Engineers are never taught that 70% of their time will be doing PBO and supply crap on the team. Medics don’t get taught how to order medical supplies, the 18C will know how, or tell your BN MED section to get it. We all have stories about that and somethings are taught at the team level. But at SWC we must hold a higher Standard. The only standard that was held was the language testing and that standard was RISEN !! Why, because we are the only SOF language speaking force within the DoD as I was told.
I see 18Bs here, a combat zone, that don’t know the difference between SLAP and APL .50 cal round. That’s wrong, I see 18Cs that don’t know DEMO for requesting – Wrong, ETC/ETC/ETC Regular Army E-6 (8 to 16 year in-service time) that can’t think on his own two feet and can’t figure out how to out load for a mission. So what did we use to do… send him to the B-team. Now B-teams are fighting B-teams, so make them an AST. So he doesn’t mess up at your ODA, he messes up five others?? Once again Leadership, but this time at the ODA level.
Are the standards dropped??? – If you think they are well make the change at the level you’re at. Stop complaining about and it and fix the problem where you can. As the Col said, stand up and make your voice heard. The 18X are just like the "bad" guys we would get only 5 year ago, you train them to the standard of your ODA or you send them to the B-team or SIGDET/Arms room.
Rant is over
82ndtrooper
10-17-2006, 18:28
secondary post. No need.
The Reaper
10-17-2006, 18:30
I believe that is known as "Economy of force"
Are you reduced to quoting and replying to yourself now?
TR
82ndtrooper
10-17-2006, 19:46
Are you reduced to quoting and replying to yourself now?
TR
I edited to read as a question. "I believe the "QP's" refer to this as economy of force" ?
Your quote does sound as if I'm talking to myself. Roger OUT !!
x SF med
10-17-2006, 19:59
MtnGoat-
Read 5x5, agreed.
Funny thing is, in the 80's the same arguments were made, but the failure rate in the Q was rather extreme, we lost nearly 50% of my class in PrePhase, and another 20-30% during the Q itself- Maj Howard, Col Gritz, Col Rowe and the entire NCO cadre (anybody remember MSG Samek?) would not cave to the powers that be. Even though it was one of the most demanding things I've ever done, I would do it again.
We all have a common ground, and we do not want the next class of SF soldiers to be unprepared, they will die, as will their Teammates. There can be NO tradeoff in the course standards for the Q - at best, you learn 80% of your job, at best. Anything less is a disservice to the men going through the course.
futureSoldier
10-17-2006, 21:55
As a civilian, I have nothing to say about the truth of the report or the impact on the force. However, as a person who is about to sign an 18x contract in two weeks, I can say that for me personally (and I think many others as well) it would produced the opposite of its desired effects. First, when it came time to make a decision regarding whether to join the military and which option to take, it was THE standard that attracted me to SF. This is not so much because of the challenge, but because of the result that it produces (professional men in an unprofessional world). At the same time, it is that same standard that has already weeded out some who not have been up for it. For instance, there were two other seniors from my university who kept saying they were going to go 18x but as the time came to make a choice and they still had not adaquately prepared, they decided to apply to grad schools instead.
The easiest way for me to explain this (and the reason why I think that my opinion has any relavance here at all) is that it is this very standard that is already making a huge difference in my life, although it is very far away. Every morning I get up thinking about that standard and what I have to do that day in order to prepare to meet it (thank you NousDefionsDoc). If I was going to sign a ranger contract, or go OCS, I honestly would not feel that same pressure. I would still feel the need to prepare for Ranger school and a very strong responcibility to prepare if going OCS, but it would not be the same. I don't care what percentage of people are making it through selection these days, I have this idea in my head that you all have a standard of "find a way" or "never quit" and that nothing less will suffice.
I know I have written alot for a civilian, but I just wanted to let you guys know how powerful the SF standard is. It is having an huge effect on someone who may never see it in action. I could not make it through MEPS and it will still have made a huge effect on my life, or I could become a great SF soldier and it will have been the reason why. THE standard is simply that powerful.
Team Sergeant
10-17-2006, 22:44
As a civilian, I have nothing to say about the truth of the report or the impact on the force. However, as a person who is about to sign an 18x contract in two weeks, I can say that for me personally (and I think many others as well) it would produced the opposite of its desired effects. First, when it came time to make a decision regarding whether to join the military and which option to take, it was THE standard that attracted me to SF. This is not so much because of the challenge, but because of the result that it produces (professional men in an unprofessional world). At the same time, it is that same standard that has already weeded out some who not have been up for it. For instance, there were two other seniors from my university who kept saying they were going to go 18x but as the time came to make a choice and they still had not adaquately prepared, they decided to apply to grad schools instead.
The easiest way for me to explain this (and the reason why I think that my opinion has any relavance here at all) is that it is this very standard that is already making a huge difference in my life, although it is very far away. Every morning I get up thinking about that standard and what I have to do that day in order to prepare to meet it (thank you NousDefionsDoc). If I was going to sign a ranger contract, or go OCS, I honestly would not feel that same pressure. I would still feel the need to prepare for Ranger school and a very strong responcibility to prepare if going OCS, but it would not be the same. I don't care what percentage of people are making it through selection these days, I have this idea in my head that you all have a standard of "find a way" or "never quit" and that nothing less will suffice.
I know I have written alot for a civilian, but I just wanted to let you guys know how powerful the SF standard is. It is having an huge effect on someone who may never see it in action. I could not make it through MEPS and it will still have made a huge effect on my life, or I could become a great SF soldier and it will have been the reason why. THE standard is simply that powerful.
I guess this would fall into my statement of:
What's worse it will cause high-quality men to leave and good men not to join.
Well said, now move out and draw fire. (You still have time to make a difference.)
Team Sergeant
optactical
10-18-2006, 20:00
As a civilian, I have nothing to say about the truth of the report or the impact on the force. However, as a person who is about to sign an 18x contract in two weeks, I can say that for me personally (and I think many others as well) it would produced the opposite of its desired effects. First, when it came time to make a decision regarding whether to join the military and which option to take, it was THE standard that attracted me to SF. This is not so much because of the challenge, but because of the result that it produces (professional men in an unprofessional world). At the same time, it is that same standard that has already weeded out some who not have been up for it. For instance, there were two other seniors from my university who kept saying they were going to go 18x but as the time came to make a choice and they still had not adaquately prepared, they decided to apply to grad schools instead.
The easiest way for me to explain this (and the reason why I think that my opinion has any relavance here at all) is that it is this very standard that is already making a huge difference in my life, although it is very far away. Every morning I get up thinking about that standard and what I have to do that day in order to prepare to meet it (thank you NousDefionsDoc). If I was going to sign a ranger contract, or go OCS, I honestly would not feel that same pressure. I would still feel the need to prepare for Ranger school and a very strong responcibility to prepare if going OCS, but it would not be the same. I don't care what percentage of people are making it through selection these days, I have this idea in my head that you all have a standard of "find a way" or "never quit" and that nothing less will suffice.
I know I have written alot for a civilian, but I just wanted to let you guys know how powerful the SF standard is. It is having an huge effect on someone who may never see it in action. I could not make it through MEPS and it will still have made a huge effect on my life, or I could become a great SF soldier and it will have been the reason why. THE standard is simply that powerful.
If you want to bring something to the table then go join the infantry (preferably Ranger Regiment, Airborne or Light) for 2 or 3 years so you have something to bring to the force when you cross the threshold of a team room. If you go 18X, by the time you graduate the Q-Course, your buddies from basic in these units will have one, two, maybe even three combat tours.
I would hate to count you with the other graduates of the 18X program I have seen...crying about why they don't have E-6 yet with their one year of team time, and when asked why they should be an E-6 (a standard board question, mind you) all they can say is... "my buddy in another company has it already":eek: .
Maintain the standard by continuing what made it the standard in the first place, an organization of the Army's best and brightest, from various MOS backgrounds, all of which had SOMETHING to bring to the table when they came to a team.
These comments are not intended as a direct attack on you Futuresoldier, as I do not know you, nor group you with the microcosm I have seen of the 18X program's products. I am just speaking from what I have seen in my corner of the universe.
This is a good thread, that is a great article, and believe me, we are feeling the impact on the teams.
Editted for vocabulary and spelling...
As a prior service soldier, I wonder if the 18X program is causing such a problem but seems to have a higher pass rate then the conventional route. Why not DX the 18X program and incorporate a pre-course like PRC to allow active soldiers from varies MOSs to gain the knowledge they may be lacking. As stated before it’s up to you to do the physical fitness.Just my .02
I just contracted an 18X slot because it gets me back on active duty and a headed towards my goal. Like Future stated it’s the standards that call me to want a career in SF, knowing the man to my left and right ARE the best gives me a great sense of pride and to be honest relief. Right now am just focusing on the 25m target and getting ready for SFAS.
x SF med
10-19-2006, 13:53
I wonder if the 18X program is causing such a problem but seems to have a higher pass rate then the conventional route. Why not DX the 18X program and incorporate a pre-course like PRC to allow active soldiers from varies MOSs to gain the knowledge they may be lacking.
I just contracted an 18X slot because it gets me back on active duty and a headed towards my goal. Like Future stated it’s the standards that call me to want a career in SF, knowing the man to my left and right ARE the best gives me a great sense of pride and to be honest relief. Right now am just focusing on the 25m target and getting ready for SFAS.
Jgood-
1. the first highlighted section has been addressed multiple times in previous posts on this thread, it seems you have not read the entire thread. This is a lack of SA. Also the the section, " I wonder if the 18X program is causing such a problem but seems to have a higher pass rate then the conventional route.", is not a complete sentence and is not anywhere near a coherent thought, what exactly are you trying to say?
2. If (as it seems you are saying) 18X is bad, and AD or PS military should have another route that retrains them for SFAS (I won't even get into this non-argument about retraining for SFAS or the Q) have you elected to go 18X for your reentry vehicle into the AD Army?
3. Your profile makes it sound like you really want to be at home in Phoenix - should this really be the case, how long are you going to stay in SF?
There are a lot of inconsistencies between your profile and this post, and there are contradictions in the same, and even between the paragraphs in this post. Clarity of thought and communication are keys to success in SF, you need to work on those as well asyour PT prior to getting to SFAS. Have you bought WMs book? If not, you are way behind the power curve.
At CTM, we picked up two recycles (both of whom passed). By the end of CTM, we lost another 6. For Peds, we picked up another recycle. So long as no one flunks out of Peds, we should head out on our first clinical rotation with 36 dudes. When we get back and SOCM is over, the SEALs, Boat guys and Rangers will be gone, leaving us with but 26 guys for the rest of the course (about 6 more months). I figure we've cut most of the fat from the meat by now.
I'm not sure if that is raising or lowering the standards: it just is what it is.
Books
Understood x_sf_med. Will work on correcting my SA. I have updated my profile to reflect my current status and hopefully clear up any confusion on my part.
I have chosen the 18X program as my reentry vehicle into the AD Army.
Roger, I have purchased WM's book and have read it a couple times and will continue to reread it as much as possible. I am thankful to him for writing it, and I am thankful to all the Quiet Professional who take the time on this board to post. Thank you for you input and I will act upon it.
Let me preface this by saying that what follows is only my opinion, derived from what little I have seen during the course. I don't say much on here usually but this is a topic/thread I would like to comment on.
I am an 18x and throughout the course have seen quality 18x and poor 18x candidates, as well as quality and poor AD candidates. I think if the standards remain high then high quality candidates (18x or otherwise) will pass and leave the others behind. However, even in my short time here, it seems like it has become a numbers game, as has been noted in previous posts, and some, that in the past would not have made the grade, are now being sent on to a team. From what is being said on here the first year on a team remains as a vetting process, and I look forward to the learning experience (read: challenge) that will be.
I, like others on here, decided on an 18x contract, in some part, for the challenge that a career in SF would provide, I didn't do it straight out of highschool because "I had no idea what else to do". I want to work with guys like the QPs on here, and the people on this board helped re-enforce that decision. However what has been said by MtnGoat and SF18C in their posts above, strongly reflect my thoughts, as well as many of those in my current class. While I am happy to be progressing through the course, I think I would feel safer if I had been told "come back later"
Note: If this is out of line, let me know
Edit: Terrible English
Jack Moroney (RIP)
10-25-2006, 17:12
While I am happy to be progressing through the course, I think I would feel safer if I had been told "come back later"
Well you are way ahead of the game if you are able to recognize the shortcomings you feel you have. Now work to elliminate them or if you are incapable of eliminating them develop complementary skills to negate them. Let me be very frank, what you get from the course is enough to get you to the team room door. Your real training, development, and learning will happen everyday from then on. I do not think that there was a day in my career in SF that I did not learn something new or do something to sharpen the tools that were part of my skill set or work to attain new skills that I felt I would need in the future. This is a dynamic business and what you learned yesterday has already been affected by the events of today and will require you to adjust and work to be able to perform tomorrow. There is a magnitude of skills and tasks that the school house is just not able to incorporate into the program and there are a variety of mission oriented, area oriented, team specific, and theater driven requirements with which are are yet to be presented. While many of the tasks that you are learning today seem like hard and fast rules they are not locked in concrete but set in jello because so many things you are going to be faced with are event and situation driven. Be a sponge, take in all you can but be prepared to use intelligent initiative and be capable of constant evolution to meet not only the challenges you are going to face today but those you must anticipate you are going to face tomorrow. Develop a knowledge base and performance capability that is truly enhanced by lessons learned and not one that has to be constantly reinforced by mistakes revisited.
I have only one request when they make it to my portion of the Q
Move from point A to B with a compass and map day or night
The lack of land nav skills are taking away from training time at phase II
Team Sergeant
10-25-2006, 21:00
I have only one request when they make it to my portion of the Q
Move from point A to B with a compass and map day or night
The lack of land nav skills are taking away from training time at phase II
You've got to be kidding.........:rolleyes:
Say it ain't so.......
TS
Every morning I get up thinking about that standard and what I have to do that day in order to prepare to meet it ...If I was going to...go OCS, I honestly would not feel that same pressure. if you think leading troops in combat is meeting a lesser standard than being an SF soldier, you are sadly mistaken...the missions are different, the requirements are different, but the consequences of failure will still be measured in terms of American lives lost...
my $0.02...