View Full Version : Army Stands Up to 6 Security Force Assistance Brigades (SFAB)
6 Brigades????
Security Force Assistance Brigades (SFAB)
Army Stands Up 6 Brigades to Advise Foreign Militaries
Military.com | Feb 16, 2017 | by Matthew Cox
The U.S. Army announced Thursday the creation of six new brigades designed to take on the service's growing mission of training and advising foreign militaries.
The first of six planned units known as Security Force Assistance Brigades, or SFABs, as well as the new Military Advisor Training Academy will be established at Fort Benning, Georgia, starting in October, according to an Army press release
The brigades are the service's first permanent units whose core mission is conducting security cooperation activities, allowing quick response to combatant commander requirements, the release states.
Until now, the service has been deploying combat units to train, advise and assist security forces in Iraq, Afghanistan and other partner nations. The new units are designed to enhance the readiness of the Army by reducing demand for existing brigade combat teams to conduct security force assistance operations, preserving BCT readiness for full-spectrum contingency operations, according to the release.
"SFABs will benefit the Army by providing trained and accessible resources for support to missions such as:
foreign internal defense,
stabilization operations,
security force assistance
and counterinsurgency operations,"
Anderson said.
link: (http://www.military.com/daily-news/2017/02/16/army-stands-up-6-brigades-advise-foreign-militaries.html?ESRC=eb_170217.nl)
Wonder if there will be any 18 Series slots in the new brigades?
I don't think so Pete, these are to be conventional.
I need to ask......
...what in the holy sweet fucking name of all that is good is going on in the US Army?
Just think - we will finally have a Regiment within the US Army that was recruited, organized, trained, and equipped to do things like FID, SFA, and COIN.
I dont know why someone didnt think of this sooner - six O6 level commands to focus on these new and emerging mission sets....
Lets call them...
1st SFAB
3rd SFAB
5th SFAB
7th SFAB
10th SFAB
20th SFAB
...and then once they have established themselves and gained the trust of senior army leadership, we could get each of them an extra BN so they could dabble in UW
After reading the new army times about letting folks grow beards, this all makes sense now.
It's too bad I am less than six months from retirement because this seems like the kind of challenge that a man could make a career out of.
sfshooter
02-17-2017, 16:14
Did the term "force multipliers" lose it's significance in the Army? Next thing you know they'll be trying to stand down the SF units since the conventional guys think they can do it all.
blue02hd
02-17-2017, 16:58
Congratz to all you AD guys!!
Looks like SF has worked itself out of a job. First MARSOC, now this,,,,,,,
Badger52
02-17-2017, 17:28
Somewhere from my childhood there's an old issue of Look magazine rolling over in its grave.
:rolleyes:
Congratz to all you AD guys!!
Looks like SF has worked itself out of a job. First MARSOC, now this,,,,,,,
The Army had MiTT teams and SPiTT teams and BiTT teams galore back during the wars... We never ran out of work. Mostly because we were doing different things, and they just weren't that effective. In all of the countries we are in, there are lots of units we aren't touching due to manpower constraints. Plenty of work to go around.
- six O6 level commands to focus on these new and emerging mission sets....
Bet making billets is the reason for the season. Like boll weevils looking for a home.
I am having a hard time being convinced that somewhere, we aren't just missing the plot and drifting off-message.
Money to big army for this, or money to the guys we already PAY to do this to cover the added requirement.
Again, somebody missed the boat or we would be discussing 2d SFG, 4th SFG, 6th SFG, 8th SFG, 9th SFG, and 21st SFG in stead of 6 different SFABs filled with PFCs and 2LTs
See that thing on the horizon.... its the boat we missed.
Except SF, post 9-11 basically said they wouldn't train, advise and assist anyone except CT forces. That leaves a HUGE gap open for the Army. We did it to ourselves.
sfshooter
02-19-2017, 13:37
The Army had MiTT teams and SPiTT teams and BiTT teams galore back during the wars... We never ran out of work. Mostly because we were doing different things, and they just weren't that effective. In all of the countries we are in, there are lots of units we aren't touching due to manpower constraints. Plenty of work to go around.
I went into Iraq in '03 as a senior trainer for the New Iraqi Army. The initial group of guys was mostly ex/retired SF, SEAL types and a few crazy jarheads. It was headed up by CMATT (Coalition Military Assistance Training Team), and consisted of US, Brit and Aussie troops. The Civilian side was headed up by retired general Crocker. Some of you guys might remember him from Afghanistan as he wasn't fond of SF from what I heard. That contract turned into a complete cluster fuck. By 4 months into the contract most of us spec op types had quit and found better contracts. That first battalion of the New Iraqi Army almost all quit about a month after they graduated. Vinnel Corporation which had the contract also had had a contract for years training the Saudi National Guard and I know of some ex Vietnam SF vets that worked there.
In Afghanistan I lived on a little camp with ODA 713. Right next door was an Afghan Kandak (battalion) that had a handful of National Guard advisors. When that team became involved in a serious engagement in the Zerkoh valley to the south they called the Guard guys to bring the Afghans for support. The Guard guys got "lost" and never made to the firefight. Took some F-16's to get things right.
I imagine there are a lot of stories like this and I have more. If you don't have the right kind of guys with the right training you aren't going to have very good advisors/trainers. I agree also that there is plenty of work for this type of thing or the PMC's wouldn't be getting contracts for this. Don't know what they will turn out from their "special" school at Ft. Benning but it will be interesting to see.
I have just never been impressed seeing conventional guys in this role.
My guess it will be short bus special not SF special.
If it's job security everyone is concerned about, take a deep breath. We're fine. GPF isn't going to work us out of a job. There are way, way more RFFs for SF than we can ever fill. These brigades are an attempt at relevance, not a concerted effort to replace us. The first time a "real" war breaks out they will drop this mission like a hot rock.
EDIT - secondly, they aren't going to advise and accompany. No conventional commander is going to be cool with five guys accompanying an Indig battalion in kinetic operations. Won't happen.
I wouldn't characterize it as a job security issue... but as a problem of mission focus and resource management.
and vision.
This is a chance for growth.
We are stretched thin, so I think someone should be saying,
"Hey, we got this... no need for six more army brigades and the ungodly funding that comes with it - give me six battalions of SF guys, and we'll do it ourselves."
fuck letting the Army stick their nose under the tent... it never turns out well
For the last five years, I have had team guys talking about how ridiculous our mission sets are...
local police that cannot do offensive operations - meanwhile, conventional forces are partnered with BN sized combat units.
OUR JOB
Living FAR out in the countryside trying to deal with local powerbrokers...
...only for a conventional O5 and his "TAC" to show up and essential usurp the gathering because he is the battlespace coordinator.
OUR JOB
Admittedly, I have been off the ODA for some years now, but as a company SGM, the complaints I got from the teams about the lopsided mission creep is unbelievable.
We should be god damned furious that the Arny is putting out want ads for lower enlisted folks to dabble in our business because we are "too busy."
....too busy doing what?
I understand that we are turning down missions because of how 'in demand' we are but why not capitalize on that value?
Or we could keep throwing money at whatever "niche" we seem to be in search of right now while other folks move in to fill voids.
It seems more like we are willing to "let" them do shit we dont "want" to do because we are busy trying to reinvent ourselves.
I'd rather say, "give me more money to build a bigger schoolhouse, and I'll take care of it instead of seeing 6 SFAB being developed that will essentially conventionalize something that is supposed to be one of our bread and butter gigs. We should be screaming bloody murder for expansion that allows us to cover something instead of sitting quietly while some whackjobs are submitting DOTMILPF documents showing how good a job big army will do
I am of the opinion that nothing good for the best interest of the SF Regiment will come of this.
...but I am wrong about a lot of things, so who knows
bblhead672
02-20-2017, 14:42
Is this an attempt to put 15-20,000 regular Army people who couldn't otherwise qualify for Special Forces into SF Roles? Dilute the SF brand with progressives, women and LGBT types doing similar (but not as effective) activities?
That's alright. Taxpayers didn't need that money anyway.
Things that come to my mind:
If the plan is to strip 3500 lower enlisted (and probably LTs) out of a standard IBCT MTOE, leaving just 500 senior NCOs and officers to create an SFAB, who exactly will sustain/maintain/support the ops advisor types? Will these SFABs need outside support?
Will these BDEs be built on volunteers only, or will folks get 'assigned' whether they like it or not? I bet the voluntolds will do a GREAT job advising foreign partners.
Can someone fail the advisor course at Benning and not get assigned to an SFAB, or do orders trump ability?
Will folks coming out of an SFAB be treated like the AFPAK Hands, MiTTs and guys that went SF before it was a branch (i.e., crapped on by their 'home' branches, and subordinated to the 'loyal' guys that never left the home branch)?
Will leading an advisor team come after branch qualification jobs for both officers and NCOs, or will the assignment be like leading an ODA?
Is the Army going to hire a bunch of maintainers to keep an IBCT/SBCT's worth of equipment in cold storage up to snuff to transform these SFABs into real IBCTs/SBCTs in an emergency like one article mentioned?
Just a few concerns off the top of my head.
Badger52
02-20-2017, 21:24
I'm curious how language requirements are going to work. If, as in the article, it says "advise... up to ministerial levels" (or well enough to not get shot on a square range) I'm thinking we're not talking about 40 hours on how not to offend someone.
My humble opinion on these topics:
If the plan is to strip 3500 lower enlisted (and probably LTs) out of a standard IBCT MTOE, leaving just 500 senior NCOs and officers to create an SFAB, who exactly will sustain/maintain/support the ops advisor types? Will these SFABs need outside support?
Oh God yes. I fully expect these Brigades to deploy a whole BN at a time to a given area, with full support packages. They certainly won't be going the SF route and using a suitcase of cash + hotel rooms.
Will these BDEs be built on volunteers only, or will folks get 'assigned' whether they like it or not? I bet the voluntolds will do a GREAT job advising foreign partners.
These won't be volunteer units. The MITT teams, etc, weren't, and neither will these. There aren't 6 brigades worth of volunteers for this. Anyone with a real hard on for this will end up at SFAS, not here.
Can someone fail the advisor course at Benning and not get assigned to an SFAB, or do orders trump ability?
Probably going on regardless. The MITT advisor course was not really pass/fail, more like attend/go on. I suspect that this is the same.
Will folks coming out of an SFAB be treated like the AFPAK Hands, MiTTs and guys that went SF before it was a branch (i.e., crapped on by their 'home' branches, and subordinated to the 'loyal' guys that never left the home branch)?
Again, I think so. The Army, despite all the talk of this being an "important mission", does not view this as the path to success for their Officer corps. Commanding "real" units is. This is a great place to be a commander if you are never going to be a commander.
Will leading an advisor team come after branch qualification jobs for both officers and NCOs, or will the assignment be like leading an ODA?
I see this being a compensation prize for guys that didn't get a "real" unit to be the commander or CSM of.
Is the Army going to hire a bunch of maintainers to keep an IBCT/SBCT's worth of equipment in cold storage up to snuff to transform these SFABs into real IBCTs/SBCTs in an emergency like one article mentioned?
Who knows. I think the "expansion" narrative is just marketing, and will not be an actual, well developed logistical plan.
Great points, Scooter. I could see one, maaaaaybe two SFABs (which would create ~1000 advisors, from PLT to BDE level) to help out with the steady-state demand, but six just seems unsustainable.
Ret10Echo
02-22-2017, 06:41
So then this little nugget pops up....
DoD will create diverse teams to cut out duplicate offices in military services
Seriously??!!
Of course it's about the bureaucratic bloat and not operational mission areas.
human resource management, acquisition and contract management, logistics and supply chain management, health care management, base services and cyber/IT management
Link here (http://federalnewsradio.com/defense/2017/02/dod-will-create-diverse-teams-cut-duplicate-offices-military-services/)
So then this little nugget pops up....
Seriously??!!
Of course it's about the bureaucratic bloat and not operational mission areas.
Link here (http://federalnewsradio.com/defense/2017/02/dod-will-create-diverse-teams-cut-duplicate-offices-military-services/)
I think this is a different effort altogether.
Ret10Echo
02-22-2017, 07:19
I think this is a different effort altogether.
Oh definitely different.
Just ironic that they are working to identify "duplication of effort".
The tip of the spear for "advise and assist" seems to be having trouble with execution.
The headline, "The Army's much-hyped advise-and-assist brigade couldn't find enough soldiers to actually advise and assist, SIGAR chief says " is popping up on Task and Purpose, and Business Insider.
Lots of effort went into standing up this "capability" only to payoff with a 70% attrition rate and a force full of folks that was described by some as an "organizational clusterfuck"
Sounds like just giving folks a unique color for their beret doesn't actually move the ball over the goal line.
Good times...
Ret10Echo
07-31-2019, 13:30
Sounds like just giving folks a unique color for their beret doesn't actually move the ball over the goal line.
Good times...
WHAT!!
I'm shocked... Shocked I say.
The content of the video by SIGAR Chief John Sopko has the potential to smoke one or several OER's :munchin
link: T&P article/video (https://taskandpurpose.com/sigar-army-sfab-recruiting-retention?jwsource=cl)
It's been a while since I sat thru an IG review, but this one is not good :eek:
Combat Diver
08-01-2019, 01:14
After watching them here in Afghanistan, there is two thing they are good at Keystone cops and burning bridges. Got banned from the ODB compound here just two weeks ago for being unprofessional and lying to the ODB.
CD
TOMAHAWK9521
08-01-2019, 09:02
After watching them here in Afghanistan, there is two thing they are good at Keystone cops and burning bridges. Got banned from the ODB compound here just two weeks ago for being unprofessional and lying to the ODB.
CD
Sounds like the old MITT teams that bumbled about my team's A/O in northern Iraq. I recall speaking with one of their senior NCO's. I asked him what their mission was, what their MOSs were, and what qualifications they possessed to be out there. The guy answered that they were pretty much "just like you guys in Special Forces." I laughed at him and told him, "Sure, pal. You just keep telling yourself that." :rolleyes:
...well, the Armee Tymes said that the CSA said any ill feelings about the SFABs should be directed to him. Its a great idea, expertly executed, with SME inut from SWC.
The ODB might be at fault because the SFABs are an exquisite advice and assist capability.
I know, because I read about it in the Armee Tymes
When I was still in service I got to see the beginning of this when I attended the SFA Foriegn weapons instructor course. I was happy to see the open mind for the consideration that there is some blend to the training of foriegn forces by conventional requires an understanding of culture and the weapon systems they employ. Weapons was at least a start to standardize. Honestly, I commend the Army for trying. I feel blessed to have been invited.
The first red flags I saw was the certification to train foriegn weapons alone was only a one week course. For a reasonable variety of common foriegn weapon systems. However further holes in the plot was the course at least at the time was not tailored to the AO the brigade was deploying to. It already had became a one size fits all...which I think defeated the purpose.
The further obvious was that the one week was clearly not long enough to train conventional forces with a variety of backgrounds to be sufficient in training battalions or less, with weapons many, if not most, had never encountered as their primary nor understood as the purpose of its assignment to the force structure and tactic it was designed. Foriegn units do not outfit to the same profile we do and in some cases forcing change could have diminished their effectiveness.
This concept of the SFAB brewed from the type of war and perhaps a misunderstanding of the SOF truth that not all missions require SOF forces. A question was asked and it was answered.
Again, there is a need to train conventional forces in a better manner for these types of operations.
However, the execution just does not seem fulfilled. Mission and Training focus being foremost.
To circle back....if the SFAB is not the answer, what can the Army do to do it right? There is a long list. Just hoping whatever influence is needed to ground these principles prevails.
Will putting it to paper ever gain the attention it deserves? I dont know. But please keep trying. All of you are the best qualified to do so.
If I am of offense, my apology as I am not, nor never was SF qualified. I have much ignorance in the scale of this whole matter.
Thank you all for your continued service.
So fellow SF comrades what will SF bring to the future fight besides cultural awareness and language skills? The SABs will work on those skills and JSOC is now doing Assist Advise and Accompany missions. So what will SF bring to the fight? We also have MARSOC taking our missions. What will set SF apart so it will not go away?
What will set SF apart so it will not go away?
Success.
lol...uh, don't worry...someone will have to clean up their mess and....there are many MTT's that are so basic we do not need to be involved.....and, this is not new really....MACV.....
What SF guy hasn't run on the MATTA mile thru the woods on smoke bomb hill.
Military Advisor Training Team Area..... MATTA.....
miclo18d
08-09-2019, 07:39
Please define?
success[ suhk-ses ]
noun
1. the favorable or prosperous termination of attempts or endeavors; the accomplishment of one's goals.
2. the attainment of wealth, position, honors, or the like.
3. a performance or achievement that is marked by success, as by the attainment of honors:
The play was an instant success.
4. a person or thing that has had success, as measured by attainment of goals, wealth, etc.:
She was a great success on the talk show.
Before I was a fuzzy green hat, I worked as a security contractor overseas. I worked with guys from all kinds of SOF and non-SOF backgrounds. What I noticed about former SF guys was that they had a knack for making things work regardless of support and/or assets. I didn't see that as much from others despite often being squared away hard chargers.
x/S
Before I was a fuzzy green hat, I worked as a security contractor overseas. I worked with guys from all kinds of SOF and non-SOF backgrounds. What I noticed about former SF guys was that they had a knack for making things work regardless of support and/or assets. I didn't see that as much from others despite often being squared away hard chargers.
x/S
That’s what has always made us different. In my current job they are always wondering how i did this or that.....
That’s what has always made us different. In my current job they are always wondering how i did this or that.....
As a Co SGM I never had to define the minimum standard...I had to articulate the limit of advance...
Scimitar
08-09-2019, 21:44
Simple - Those who have a job or a career can't raise to the level of those who have a calling.
S
These are all professional traits that any well lead unit can develop.
What unique skills, skill sets does SF have currently and will develop in the future to set us apart and keep SF around. Language and cultural awareness can be learned.
Remember the Army chopped a lot of SF post-Vietnam.
These are all professional traits that any well lead unit can develop.
What unique skills, skill sets does SF have currently and will develop in the future to set us apart and keep SF around. Language and cultural awareness can be learned.
Remember the Army chopped a lot of SF post-Vietnam.
Dude, any skill can be learned. Your angling towards an argument that says brain surgeons are doomed to extinction because anyone can learn brain surgery.
Of course language, cultural skills, small unit tactics, perseverance, tactical aptitude, can all be learned. Of course there are other people in the army that are great leaders, or have the right combination of attributes. Of course the army could screen people for these traits, combine them into units, and teach them the afore mentioned skills..... of course, it’s already done that..... why they would want to begin again is an enigma to me, and no one is suggesting that they do.
You’ve got kind of a weird angle here.
1stindoor
08-12-2019, 06:23
Simple - Those who have a job or a career can't raise to the level of those who have a calling.
S
That was exceptionally well said...think I'll steal it. :D
I too am going to "appropriate" that statement.
x/S
WarriorDiplomat
08-17-2019, 11:27
These are all professional traits that any well lead unit can develop.
What unique skills, skill sets does SF have currently and will develop in the future to set us apart and keep SF around. Language and cultural awareness can be learned.
Remember the Army chopped a lot of SF post-Vietnam.
I agree skills can be taught and learned by anyone given enough time but I disagree that the inclination or breeding to this line of work is common it is not common tried and true.
But what we are doing right now as SF teams for the most part can be emulated by big Army especially when we are teaching big Army skills they are masters at....we as an SF unit has to remember that we are doing this so that we can develop a loose potential for guerilla fighters from those we have developed relationships with....at the end of the day our SA in any country is contingent on us being there and knowing what we have to work with.....remember Russell Volkman, Blackburn and Fertig amongst other cadre were doing nation building in the Phillipines prior to WW2 and once they were left behind for 3 years it was some of the same Filipinos that became the resistance force...it should be a template for every FID mission to understand what we are doing
Trapper John
08-18-2019, 07:04
Simple - Those who have a job or a career can't raise to the level of those who have a calling.
S
:lifter Finest Kind!
Peregrino
08-18-2019, 11:36
I agree skills can be taught and learned by anyone given enough time but I disagree that the inclination or breeding to this line of work is common it is not common tried and true.
But what we are doing right now as SF teams for the most part can be emulated by big Army especially when we are teaching big Army skills they are masters at....we as an SF unit has to remember that we are doing this so that we can develop a loose potential for guerilla fighters from those we have developed relationships with....at the end of the day our SA in any country is contingent on us being there and knowing what we have to work with.....remember Russell Volkman, Blackburn and Fertig amongst other cadre were doing nation building in the Phillipines prior to WW2 and once they were left behind for 3 years it was some of the same Filipinos that became the resistance force...it should be a template for every FID mission to understand what we are doing
Funny - Just gave essentially the same lecture to a couple of the young guys at the office last week. Not that we've done an indifferent job; quite the opposite, but the last 18 years have obscured the root reasons for our existence. If we're going to differentiate ourselves from the masses and preserve our future, (I think) we need to look back at our founding principles and bring them forward, evolving them and their core TTPs so they're relevant to the world we'll be asked to influence over the next 15-20 years. The other side of that coin is that we build a capability that the US Govt lacks the vision/will to employ and we keep doing "groundhog day" ad infinitum.
Trapper John
08-20-2019, 09:16
Funny - Just gave essentially the same lecture to a couple of the young guys at the office last week. Not that we've done an indifferent job; quite the opposite, but the last 18 years have obscured the root reasons for our existence. If we're going to differentiate ourselves from the masses and preserve our future, (I think) we need to look back at our founding principles and bring them forward, evolving them and their core TTPs so they're relevant to the world we'll be asked to influence over the next 15-20 years. The other side of that coin is that we build a capability that the US Govt lacks the vision/will to employ and we keep doing "groundhog day" ad infinitum.
:lifter BINGO I have echoed those thoughts in other threads over the years!
Trapper John
08-20-2019, 11:39
Funny - Just gave essentially the same lecture to a couple of the young guys at the office last week. Not that we've done an indifferent job; quite the opposite, but the last 18 years have obscured the root reasons for our existence. If we're going to differentiate ourselves from the masses and preserve our future, (I think) we need to look back at our founding principles and bring them forward, evolving them and their core TTPs so they're relevant to the world we'll be asked to influence over the next 15-20 years. The other side of that coin is that we build a capability that the US Govt lacks the vision/will to employ and we keep doing "groundhog day" ad infinitum.
That's the "nut" of the problem IMO. Need to educate the correct audience to the threats and counter strategies first. The current threat is China in SEA and Africa and the methods are economic servitude. I see the role for SF in this environment primarily as one of intelligence gathering. YMMV
We need to identify and educate key opinion leaders.
Intel NCO
09-23-2019, 13:50
That's the "nut" of the problem IMO. Need to educate the correct audience to the threats and counter strategies first. The current threat is China in SEA and Africa and the methods are economic servitude. I see the role for SF in this environment primarily as one of intelligence gathering. YMMV
We need to identify and educate key opinion leaders.
In a resource constrained environment, that would certainly be welcome.
WarriorDiplomat
09-23-2019, 20:45
Funny - Just gave essentially the same lecture to a couple of the young guys at the office last week. Not that we've done an indifferent job; quite the opposite, but the last 18 years have obscured the root reasons for our existence. If we're going to differentiate ourselves from the masses and preserve our future, (I think) we need to look back at our founding principles and bring them forward, evolving them and their core TTPs so they're relevant to the world we'll be asked to influence over the next 15-20 years. The other side of that coin is that we build a capability that the US Govt lacks the vision/will to employ and we keep doing "groundhog day" ad infinitum.
Agree so many of our guys do not understand the end state we are looking for and the long term goals....Damn the metrics era
I also agree the origination of our unit in the Philippines is a valid template and we have the terminology and skills to flip the script before during and after such a situation.....everything between us the Generals and Congress comes down to communicating common language for decision makers military jargon and naming conventions creates more confusion than transgenderism.
I think first and foremost is their must be an agreed upon template of what we do i.e. are we the spawn of the Devils Brigade, the Jedburghs the OSS or the Filipino resistance? I say our roots are in the Philippines given our first BC was Volkman though Bank was a Jed and 10th Grp Commander but how many of our guys understand the similarities or value? the Devils Brigade were closer to a high speed Ranger Bn and SFOD-D and the OSS and Jeds are closer to the three letter agency in design and mission. We have different camps of belief in where are roots lie and what we should be doing. Choose the where we come from and what we are template and discard the rest as the genesis of other missions or other units.
The next thing once we understand what we are and should be doing then we must communicate the value of ready made insurgencies/counterinsurgencies and its role in preventing rogue regimes like Iran and its Quds force from running roughshod over a region as their efforts bear fruits. Generals and Politicians do not understand it the concept is not one that people easily grasp.....my father in law is a Phd in molecular Biology 3-4 Masters degrees etc....and to him his 8 years in the Marine Corps Infantry is how he views dealing with bad guys UW makes no sense to him though portions do but not the totality.....very smart people cannot grasp the UW concept whether it be the terminology that somehow gets officers promoted, the definition or how it is explained by doctrine, it makes no sense to people thanks to years of basic war movies focused around DA and media. For others to understand us we have to break down the specific missions into its parts and sell it piece by piece. Selling it to the decision makers is the idea and this is a long game because everyone of our guys have to be thoroughly trained in it and vetted...this is where our salesman will come from the Officers wearing the Green Beret and the long tab qualification.
Third we have a POTUS right now who seems to be willing to take a look at how we do business as a military.....my hunch is he would understand the need to separate UW from surgical strike minded command influence....what we do is more akin to playing chess strategy similar to the business world strategies and game theory than the checkers played by surgical strike....to play chess we cannot be under the control of checkers masters! IMO the POTUS would better grasp the concept than previous leaders that a qualification on paper does not an expert make. I think this would be an excellent time to sell the value of our concept over the capabilities and skills of surgical strike. It has to sold as invaluable preventative maintenance of U.S. vital interest regions. We would have to attach a future value and not a metrics game to the value of our true capability. To keep quality UW experts in this unit their must be incentive to be the best at UW and to do that separation of powers i.e. away from SOCOM's metric mindset and promotion preferences is the only way. We are the retirement plan of the military 30 yrs down the road not the lotto we are the annuity.
Finally to play Chess we need to recruit Chess players and let the Checkers guys go to a more fitting environment. It is hard to sell the Chess ideology with those who live and breath Checkers. We must face it serving 20 years with the likelihood of never seeing combat is a tough sell and requires careful honest recruiting, We have to sell this as a unique capability not a comparative to the top tier capability. We are not comparable to any of the other SOF units except for the MARSOC but lets face it most MARSOC are in their heart of hearts checkers guys disguised as IW experts. If are not going to play Chess and we are going to continue to chase shiny objects then I would recommend that we quit spending money on Robin Sage field problems and MOS training except for 18D and 18E replace it with SFARTAEC, SNIPER and ASOT...damn it if we are going to pretend to be shooters only then make our guys the best they can be and quit dick dancing.