View Full Version : Regionally Aligned Brigades
Sorry if it has been posted before, but when I searched for Regionally Aligned Brigades, it came up with nothing.
What are your opinions on this? For those of you who do not know what it is, it is the Army's new plan to align a brigade(hence the title) with each theater command to provide training for host nation forces(sounds familiar eh?)
http://www.dialogo-americas.com/en_GB/articles/rmisa/features/special_reports/2012/02/08/feature-ex-2871
http://defense.aol.com/2011/10/11/new-army-units-to-tackle-military-co-op-missions/
The Reaper
02-26-2012, 10:35
What could go wrong with this plan?
An E3 with Basic and AIT behind him and no language skills should be able to teach his HN counterpart equally as well as an E7 with 10 years of experience, SF and Ranger School, and cultural/language training.
Why not just use infantry squads for VSO without the SF guys?
Same-same, right?
TR
Peregrino
02-26-2012, 11:01
Same-same, right? TR
It will be by the time they finish "tweaking" JRTC and publishing the .ppt slides. Just ask them.
the Army also plans to issue field manual to the force on how to work with foreign militaries.
I read that and all I could think "I'm pretty sure there already is one of those out"
When I first heard about the Regionally Aligned Brigades, I was a little disgusted. It seems everyone is trying to get into the FID realm with out any of the proper training. The SEALs are evening doing it, with nobody qualified in the language.
Nothing wrong with being area oriented, with vehicles and troops camo'd for the area, a bare minimum of language training, maybe even some cultural training. Tie it into weather, terrain, and it would speed up the prep for deployment into that area.
Just so long as they realize they are not Special Forces, and don't try to be Special Forces.
Just so long as they realize they are not Special Forces, and don't try to be Special Forces.
Yeah, except they won't. I work in Theater Security Cooperation with Mexico. Whenever the RAB concept is discussed, it is always characterized as "you know, that stuff SF used to do."
The Reaper
02-26-2012, 11:40
Nothing wrong with being area oriented, with vehicles and troops camo'd for the area, a bare minimum of language training, maybe even some cultural training. Tie it into weather, terrain, and it would speed up the prep for deployment into that area.
Just so long as they realize they are not Special Forces, and don't try to be Special Forces.
That is not the proposal on the table.
What you are referring to has long applied to apportionedand theater based forces.
Looks to me like the Big Army trying to steal a page from our playbook to remain relevant and to compete for forces.
One of the biggest issues from the VSO program with conventional attachments has been the assumption by the VSO force that they were now "SF."
TR
"you know, that stuff SF used to do."
Wow...saying something like that is asking to get karate chopped in the throat!
I think with this, you might hear more conventional commanders saying "We can do the same thing SF can, but with out the special pays"
greenberetTFS
02-26-2012, 12:10
Yeah, except they won't. I work in Theater Security Cooperation with Mexico. Whenever the RAB concept is discussed, it is always characterized as "you know, that stuff SF used to do."
This is probably very true indeed,like the magazine Wired recently stated that SEALS are IN, and Special Forces are OUT..........:eek:
Big Teddy :munchin
We shouldn't kid ourselves any longer...
There are battle space owners that already overtly wonder exactly what it is that SF can do that they can't do by themselves. Hell, we have as many terps as 'they' do...
...and they can do it without all of the uniform violations and opfund problems.
Our collective attitude as a force coupled with our collective ego has put us in a very uncomfortable predicament.
Surgicalcric
02-26-2012, 12:22
...Our collective attitude as a force coupled with our collective ego has put us in a very uncomfortable predicament.
Well said.
I think that in itself is its own endless thread about our "unwanteds".
So if the whole Army can get this up and going, where does that leave us as a Regiment?
At the GO level there is an insatiable demand for SOF, particularly SF. They receive everyone's SITREPs and raw information reports, and can tell the difference. ODA SITREPs are read in their raw form by theater commanders. No one at that level cares what an Infantry Captain writes on a daily basis. While 2LT Snuffy or LTC Dickwad may think they can do what SOF can do, GO's at the theater level know better.
Country Teams and Geographic Combatant Commanders will always understand the capabilities that SOF and SF bring to the table, and when given the choice will always spring for SOF vs non-SOF when it comes to the Title 50 FID. No GPF FID partner has reached the capability of a SF partnered unit in any theater....people notice.
While we need to tighten the shot group on some issues, we aren't facing a threat to our existence. Regardless of what GPF does or doesn't do, SF will have a job for a long, long time.
LongWire
02-26-2012, 14:15
Ask the boys that just got back from MEZ how their rotation fared with the 82nd being in charge of the SOTF.......yes our guys reported to the 82nd, an essentially had to train them in their jobs. Very tense relationship........YMMV
Surgicalcric
02-26-2012, 14:39
They receive everyone's SITREPs and raw information reports, and can tell the difference. ODA SITREPs are read in their raw form by theater commanders...
Where is this happening?
It has been my experience the SITREPs are edited to read like the SOTF CMD wants them to read - things are fine, nothing to see here, move along.
Surgicalcric
02-26-2012, 14:41
... the 82nd being in charge of the SOTF...
Who ever decided having a CF CDR and/or staff in command of a SOTF should be fired for incompetence.
Where is this happening?
It has been my experience the SITREPs are edited to read like the SOTF CMD wants them to read - things are fine, nothing to see here, move along.
While I have seen SOTF ask for things to be re-written, it has never been to put a happier face on things or misconstrue the facts. I've seen several incidents where an ODA commander's SITREP directly contradicted a Brigade Commander's reflecting the same events. Every time this happened it caused a ruckus, but never from SOTF/CJSOTF... everyone had to go to talk to The Man and explain, but I've never seen a CPT yet who was told to change his tune.
Everyone has different experiences, you may have seen the opposite.
As far as the 82nd thing, well.... Don't understand THAT one either, it kinda of pissed me off first time I heard it too. But that is our doing to my knowledge, we could have made that go differently. We still run CJSOTF after all.
Ask the boys that just got back from MEZ how their rotation fared with the 82nd being in charge of the SOTF.......yes our guys reported to the 82nd, an essentially had to train them in their jobs. Very tense relationship........YMMV
That kind of disgusts me....wonder who thought that brain fart up
Basenshukai
02-26-2012, 18:05
While I have seen SOTF ask for things to be re-written, it has never been to put a happier face on things or misconstrue the facts. I've seen several incidents where an ODA commander's SITREP directly contradicted a Brigade Commander's reflecting the same events. Every time this happened it caused a ruckus, but never from SOTF/CJSOTF... everyone had to go to talk to The Man and explain, but I've never seen a CPT yet who was told to change his tune.
Everyone has different experiences, you may have seen the opposite.
As far as the 82nd thing, well.... Don't understand THAT one either, it kinda of pissed me off first time I heard it too. But that is our doing to my knowledge, we could have made that go differently. We still run CJSOTF after all.
I have observed exactly the same thing. I have seen the SOTF, or CJSOTF, spell check and grammar correct SITREPs. I have also seen them redact stuff where the ODA shoots themselves in the foot; like when the SITREP shows that they are "red" on some item, but clearly never advised anyone that they were "amber" on it days before. In fact, I have seen the CJSOTF commander go "to bat" for the guys, based on the ODA assessment of a situation and based on their reports (SITREPs, etc.). One example was the recent incident with the border skirmish that ended up with the Pakistanis claiming that they were the injured party, when, it was they, in fact, that messed up. The SF folks were backed 100% on this one based on their reports.
rocketjok
03-12-2012, 09:27
It's being reported that the guy who did the most recent killings was working at a vsp but was in some kind of support role. Which I will venture to guess was there infantry attachment.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/13/world/asia/us-army-sergeant-suspected-in-afghanistan-shooting.html
I remember some one here discussing this, they just got validated with a I told you so moment.
This is will be rememberd when we talk about the subject of this thread.
ODA CDR (RET)
03-15-2012, 14:38
Sad to hear things have not changed much since I got out of the game almost 8 years ago. Almost half a career of some boss or bosses that should know better by now. And the Army goes marching on...