View Full Version : Are we selecting the right people and training them correctly
Are we selecting the right people with the right mentality for our core mission of UW?
Does the SFQC prepare the future SF Team member to understand and conduct full spectrum UW?
If you look at Rhodesia their SAS and Selous Scouts looked for different traits because of different core missions.
Are we selecting the right people with the right mentality for our core mission of UW?
Does the SFQC prepare the future SF Team member to understand and conduct full spectrum UW?
If you look at Rhodesia their SAS and Selous Scouts looked for different traits because of different core missions.
SFQC at best is a test of physical & mental fortitude. One does not go to SFQC to learn.
If one gets selected and goes on to the Q, you will be taught the fundamentals of all the core traits of SF, plus your assigned MOS specialty.
When you complete the Q and receive the long tab, you will be assigned to a team and your training will continue.
I am fully aware of the differences. Where do SF Operators (see our history as this term goes back to 1952) learn more than just the basics of UW?
Where in our NCOES and OES is the higher learning on the core mission?
Subjects like
This is how a VEO takes over a village then spreads it to another village and then the state and then the country.
This is how agitation propaganda works
Remember It Is Far More Intellectual Than a Bayonet Charge...or Raid
I am fully aware of the differences. Where do SF Operators (see our history as this term goes back to 1952) learn more than just the basics of UW?
Where in our NCOES and OES is the higher learning on the core mission?
Subjects like
This is how a VEO takes over a village then spreads it to another village and then the state and then the country.
This is how agitation propaganda works
Remember It Is Far More Intellectual Than a Bayonet Charge...or Raid
opsec?
Ok - I'm going to take the bait.......
Are we selecting the right people with the right mentality for our core mission of UW?
Who are "we" and "our" ??
I really need to understand who you are referring to as "we" and "our"so I can properly formulate the correct ratio of "Real Answer to Snarky Cynicism" for my future posts in this thread.
The entire "Assessment and Selection" process has had more tweaks than an 80 year old mans lower back but the overall process has remained pretty constant for right at 67 years.
What do "we" think about that?
bailaviborita
01-22-2022, 20:51
Sorry to resurrect this from 2019- but while I was at SWCS a couple years ago this was a hot topic. The two views I heard:
1- Selection doesn't necessarily select for the right traits- it is probably too heavily reliant on the physical and not enough on the mental. The Q isn't where we train guys to be SF- it is just the basics, then they get to a team and really learn how to be SF. If we try to pick the right people perfectly- we'll never get it right and probably just screw it up--- and if we try to train SF guys thoroughly in the Q they'll be at SWCS forever and/or we'll be constantly changing things.
2- we can't make any changes to Selection because it will be looked at as if we're making things easier for females and then there will be night letters and GOs getting retired... so can't have that. Same for the Q--- but we can change it and will.... because change looks like progress. And it had gotten out of hand in terms of length. Problem is... every change... creates delays in the pipeline and bottlenecks. But- THIS time we'll get it right...
Here's a question I never understood- one of the guys who did the most work out at MacKall to figure out Selection, gather data, and try to get at the intangibles- was allowed to stay to make LTC out there, then retired and works for the Indianapolis Colts now as their head of player development. No one has reached out to him... and one of his biggest takeaways was you can't just look at objective data... you have to do some other stuff and do some interviews... to get at the intangible and subjective. You have to figure out values. I'd argue we went the opposite way lately...
Sorry to resurrect this from 2019- but while I was at SWCS a couple years ago this was a hot topic. The two views I heard:
1- Selection doesn't necessarily select for the right traits- it is probably too heavily reliant on the physical and not enough on the mental. The Q isn't where we train guys to be SF- it is just the basics, then they get to a team and really learn how to be SF. If we try to pick the right people perfectly- we'll never get it right and probably just screw it up--- and if we try to train SF guys thoroughly in the Q they'll be at SWCS forever and/or we'll be constantly changing things.
2- we can't make any changes to Selection because it will be looked at as if we're making things easier for females and then there will be night letters and GOs getting retired... so can't have that. Same for the Q--- but we can change it and will.... because change looks like progress. And it had gotten out of hand in terms of length. Problem is... every change... creates delays in the pipeline and bottlenecks. But- THIS time we'll get it right...
Here's a question I never understood- one of the guys who did the most work out at MacKall to figure out Selection, gather data, and try to get at the intangibles- was allowed to stay to make LTC out there, then retired and works for the Indianapolis Colts now as their head of player development. No one has reached out to him... and one of his biggest takeaways was you can't just look at objective data... you have to do some other stuff and do some interviews... to get at the intangible and subjective. You have to figure out values. I'd argue we went the opposite way lately...
If only there were SOF organizations that had a particular mission that “Selected” people based on a “Mission Set” that was considered “No-Fail”. Maybe, just maybe, the “bosses” could “interview” each “candidate” after they were worn down to raw nerves to see just what kind of Man the “candidate” was. Then, after that “Selection”, the “Candidate” would return for “Extensive Training” on that particular “No-Fail-Mission”, and if that “Candidate” should happen to “Fail”, they would be “Released for failing to meet Standards”…..
See, UW is treated as a “ho-hum, maybe it’ll work, maybe it won’t” instead of “If you get kicked out of the G-Base, the Taliban will defeat the Northern Alliance”…. Yeah, that almost happened more than once….. But hey, Failure apparently IS an option today….
I’m glad I am retiring…..
...to get at the intangible and subjective. You have to figure out values.
I love a good necro-post and this one is awesome. Quite some years ago I worked with a Marine and he talked about getting at the intangibles and the subjective as it related to the USMC recruiting approach and like you said - its all about the value system.
Ever since then, I've used this analogy:
For years, the US Army has appealed to the selfish side of recruits.
Join the Army - we'll give you money for college.
Join the Army - we'll teach you a skill that you can use when you get out.
Join the Army and travel the world.
Join the Army, we'll embrace your dysphoria.
The USMC doesn't have to pitch any of that shit.
Hey there Mr Gunnery Sergeant - the Army recruiter said he'll give me college money...
-Well, the Marines give you college money too. So do the Air Force and the Navy.
Well then Mr Gunnery Sergeant, why should I join the Marines if everyone gives out the same college money?
-Well, because you'll get to be a mother fucking Marine.
Look at those old commercials - Army commercials had people in the back of a commo van, learning how to talk on the radio.
Or a guy waving his canteen cup at the 1SG as if that shot would really go down that way.
Or one lone dude literally running the opposite way as everything going on behind him as we marched forward with an 'Army of One'.
The USMC had a commercial where a guy climbed up a mountain, picked up a fucking broad sword imbued with a lightning bolt, and killed a fucking dragon.
The Army drinks coffee - the fucking Marines Kill Dragons with electrified fuck swords.
The Army isn't the least bit interested in espousing a value system. Even now - our online recruiting campaigns address our acceptance of intersectionality and our commitment to helping the new generation recognize their true identity. We offer intersectional single parents a welcome home while the Marines fight a running gun battle.
"We" talk a good story, but our senior Army leaders are stuck using words like campus and enterprise instead of barracks and unit.
the light is fading folks - the sun is going down and the close of the day is getting closer.
(at this point, some of you should be hearing Rodney Dangerfields booming voice in your head, emotionally reciting the words from an old Dylan Thomas poem)
Do not go gentle into that good night,
Old age should burn and rave at close of day;
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
Though wise men at their end know dark is right,
Because their words had forked no lightning they
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Good men, the last wave by, crying how bright
Their frail deeds might have danced in a green bay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
Wild men who caught and sang the sun in flight,
And learn, too late, they grieved it on its way,
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Grave men, near death, who see with blinding sight
Blind eyes could blaze like meteors and be gay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
And you, my father, there on the sad height,
Curse, bless, me now with your fierce tears, I pray.
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
Values are so 2000 and late.
These
Dang - two "Box is right" threads in a row!!!
That's been my bitch about raw Army versus the Corps for 30 years. The Army is all about "Come on down, we want you, we'll give you free shit, and you'll love it."
The Marines are: "Hey, slow down Cowboy....we're not sure you have what it takes to be a Marine."
Guess to which branch a testosterone-filled 18 year old stud says: "Oh yeah?? Fuck you...here I come!!"
and for note - there is a current USMC commercial that follows a woman - but it doesn't "celebrate" her womanhood - it simply reinforces that the service needs people that know what right looks like and that every Marine is an Infantryman
our mainstream commercials are depicting individuals as though they are video game avatars...
I guess we need to recruit more nerds that can wage just enough cyberwar to make sure our pipelines aren't compromised and that our soldiers aren't getting too opinionated on social media
...except for that problem where we cant seem to defeat the obligatory Chinese hackers
Critical thinking, vision, equity, excelsior !!
Remington Raidr
01-23-2022, 13:38
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQSmctFqZlI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQSmctFqZlI
compared to ours
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C8-Yslv4PME
Please tell me that’s a prank video.
Please tell me that’s a prank video.
Look up the GoArmy ewetoob channel and look through the "The Calling" Series.
Then go back and look at some of the random GoArmy videos on their channel.
Eventually you will notice that all of "The Calling" series has had the comments turned off.
Many off their videos allow comments - but the ones addressing anything remotely controversial are usually turned off.
The Army doesn't really want to hear what you've got to say.
It's not a prank.
...diversity, ekwality, and inclusivity are what we will use to fight the next war.
latest Army Tweet :D
https://twitter.com/USArmy/status/1485025247199997956
I was always told it was a no fail mission.
The US Army adopting a manufactured pop culture flash in the pan hip hop artist as a source for its philosophical social media captions to random PR photos is right in line with John Blutarsky conjuring up memories of the Germans bombing Pearl Harbor.
At age 50 I went back into the Guard, I had 15 years active mostly with 7th and 10 more years with 20th but didn't retire because my ex-wife could have gotten half my retirement, so I was out for several years. With that said, I went back in but joined an Infantry unit down the road from me (Scouts with 3/116th INF 29th ID) with the idea I could help them build an effective Scout/Sniper section plus I didn't want to be the old guy on a 20th/19th SFG ODA that won't admit his best days are behind him.
Over half my Scouts could not pass the PT test...I don't mean like have a 270 or above, I mean pass at the lowest level. I then became an Infantry instructor where we were putting females through training, a place they do not belong but honestly, most were tougher than the men. Then I became a Warrant officer and was written up in training for calling several of my class mates out for being sissies (I would have been thrown out if I said pussies, plus I have too much respect for pussy to elevate my fellow WOC's). Now as a 131A in a unit filled with millennials I have found that the Army I joined in 84 is a fossil. It is the Guard, so, I take that into consideration, but combat has not changed at the most basic level, you have to walk with heavy shit on, take a dump in front of your friends, and accept being too hot or too cold. As an AWG advisor I found few units capable and the Guard is WAY behind them.
I told my son to go into the Marines, be part of something, train hard, get liquored up leave, chase pussy, be a warrior. That concept no longer exists in the Army
Ok...this becoming another one of those depressing readiness threads...I'll say it again...at least we've got the Space Force! :rolleyes:
Sorry to depress you SQ but the Army does not get the meateaters we need. Honestly, if there were tabbed females when I came in in 1984 I would have gone to the Rangers or the Marines....hell, even the SEALs for that matter. Our leadership in SF has totally failed the Regiment the last few decades. In the mid 90's we were letting Joes pass that couldn't swim, had GT's below 110, and pushed them to Group for a team to fix. I'd rather see us have 3 SF Groups fully capable then 5 that are marginal.
bailaviborita
02-17-2022, 18:34
Sorry to depress you SQ but the Army does not get the meateaters we need. Honestly, if there were tabbed females when I came in in 1984 I would have gone to the Rangers or the Marines....hell, even the SEALs for that matter. Our leadership in SF has totally failed the Regiment the last few decades. In the mid 90's we were letting Joes pass that couldn't swim, had GT's below 110, and pushed them to Group for a team to fix. I'd rather see us have 3 SF Groups fully capable then 5 that are marginal.
Just go slower?
https://taskandpurpose.com/opinion/special-operations-women/?amp
Politics and pressure are sabotaging women in special operations
Heavy-handed policy has been applied like a hammer to a task for a scalpel.
Just go slower?
https://taskandpurpose.com/opinion/special-operations-women/?amp
Politics and pressure are sabotaging women in special operations
Heavy-handed policy has been applied like a hammer to a task for a scalpel.
The solution to this whole “women in SOF” stupidity is simple. Put the first split-tail GB on the next JCET to Saudi Arabia. Let the system do the rest. I don’t care if she’s the baddest, smartest, fastest chick ever. The rest of the entire uncivilized world doesn’t have any kind of “women’s lib”. If she ain’t in 10th Group and in Germany or France, then she’s a liability. Period. Full Stop.
So go ahead 1st SFC, try that shit and see what happens when reality meets ideology.
tom kelly
02-18-2022, 06:21
Why would we QP's of History expect ODA's to have warriors like Jerry Shiver, Dave Dolby, Ola Mize and Bob Howard in Group when we have low-life people at the top of the Chain of Command. The POTUS is a career brain dead grifter politician, The Sec. of Defense in a job way over his capabilities, The 5 sided puzzle palace, I can only guess what is running that shit show... The U S Military is the "Rodney Dangerfield" of the worlds armed forces... They get no respect, because, they don't earn or deserve it... Yea, we got a nuclear arsenal, but , There is no one with the balls to pull the trigger.... Our enemies are the first to discover our weakness, Putin knows our politicians that are in office so does China, Iran and North Korea. Today it's the Ukraine, tomorrow Taiwan...
69harley
02-18-2022, 09:26
The solution to this whole “women in SOF” stupidity is simple. Put the first split-tail GB on the next JCET to Saudi Arabia. Let the system do the rest. I don’t care if she’s the baddest, smartest, fastest chick ever. The rest of the entire uncivilized world doesn’t have any kind of “women’s lib”. If she ain’t in 10th Group and in Germany or France, then she’s a liability. Period. Full Stop.
So go ahead 1st SFC, try that shit and see what happens when reality meets ideology.
This is happening right now in 3rd, but not to Saudi.
Rather than test out Chick berets on a team it would have been nice had they just made all high school and colligate sports co-ed and observe how that turns out. My assumption is that the loss of money forcing college sports to integrate would be a pretty big deal and to have it solely based on merit would effectively eliminate any females on any teams ever.
Interesting article Bubba, I stopped reading Task and Purpose several years ago due to their contributors, the CEO was a Force Recon officer, surprisingly, and we got into a heated debate over a similar issue of co-ed units. He seems to be a fan
Rather than test out Chick berets on a team it would have been nice had they just made all high school and colligate sports co-ed and observe how that turns out.
Great euphemism, currently playing out at your kids HS.. :mad:
I'll see your Tweet and raise you a commercial.....
https://youtu.be/nVUcevfmzEM
stopped reading Task and Purpose several years ago due to their contributors...
Task & Purpose is basically Buzzfeed in camo.
frostfire
03-27-2022, 19:49
it would have been nice had they just made all high school and colligate sports co-ed and observe how that turns out. My assumption is that the loss of money forcing college sports to integrate would be a pretty big deal and to have it solely based on merit would effectively eliminate any females on any teams ever.
um...it's already taking place, except the term is not coed but tra........
The result of biology meets ideology is just as predicted, but no loss of money so far.
I don't recognize my country anymore :(
First, awesome video, truly inspired me to be more inclusive as well as hate my genitals.
Second, I'll double down on my previous statement, I say make it mandatory to have at least 1/3 of every High School football, baseball, lacrosse and wrestling team be female and must play at least half of every game./meet...no chicks...no playing.
I just want to see the data, you know, what's the "Science" have to say about it?
Scimitar
04-11-2022, 17:41
First, awesome video, truly inspired me to be more inclusive as well as hate my genitals.
lol, classic.
Back when they first starting pushing the females in Combat Arms MOS's the USASOC Deputy Commander came to 7th SFG(A) and held a "sensing session" to supposedly listen to the community's thoughts but in actuality he was there to sell the idea. Since I was a terminal E7 looking at retirement I volunteered to attend and I told him straight up, "You send a female GB to the ME or even down south, you will have an incident that results in a catastrophic loss of rapport." I told him outright, down south the Julios will never listen to a female because they will be too busy trying to figure out how to be the guy that successfully bangs her and in the ME she will be the target of violent sexual assault. I tried to appeal to his sense of duty to his fellow officers by pointing out that such an incident would end the careers of the TL, the CC, and the BC at minimum and most likely the GC. He could have cared less. I supposed I should not have expected much from a pilot.
x/S
tom kelly
04-13-2022, 15:38
This B S of "equity, Affirmative Action" and other brain dead nonsense propagated by the liberal left socialist will NOT WORK ...Anybody remember why MACV-SOG instituted the one-zero's and the one-one's....ABILITY to Accomplish the Mission...Experience in doing the Job ....Not rank, not who you knew....
Back when they first starting pushing the females in Combat Arms MOS's the USASOC Deputy Commander came to 7th SFG(A) and held a "sensing session" to supposedly listen to the community's thoughts but in actuality he was there to sell the idea. Since I was a terminal E7 looking at retirement I volunteered to attend and I told him straight up, "You send a female GB to the ME or even down south, you will have an incident that results in a catastrophic loss of rapport." I told him outright, down south the Julios will never listen to a female because they will be too busy trying to figure out how to be the guy that successfully bangs her and in the ME she will be the target of violent sexual assault. I tried to appeal to his sense of duty to his fellow officers by pointing out that such an incident would end the careers of the TL, the CC, and the BC at minimum and most likely the GC. He could have cared less. I supposed I should not have expected much from a pilot.
x/S
When I filled out the SOF wide survey in the being I wrote at the end in the comment block.
Why waste our time with this survey you have already made up your mind that you are putting woman in the course so what is the point.
When I filled out the SOF wide survey in the being I wrote at the end in the comment block.
Why waste our time with this survey you have already made up your mind that you are putting woman in the course so what is the point.
I'm feeling like you are not the only person that put such a comment in the remarks block.