Go Back   Professional Soldiers ® > Special Forces > Base Camp

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-30-2008, 17:30   #1
That Guy v2.0
Asset
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 27
The Demise of the Green Berets

I came across this today in the new edition of Soldier of Fortune. The title is from the article in the magazine. I was prepared to blow it off until I got to the end and saw who wrote it.

However the title as it originally appeared is called the Long Farewell written by MajGen Guest and was an editorial that appeared in "The Drop" in late 2007.

I thought it was interesting given other things that I had read or seen in various media about the shift at SOCOM from a DA approach to a UW/COIN approach. The highlight being MARSOC's mission being UW now. This duplication of effort is discussed below. Being pretty much in the dark as to why there seems to be no love lost between the SOCOM/JSOC crowd and SF I thought I would post this to see what the QPs here thought about MajGen Guest's analysis.

Link: http://www.veteransofspecialforces.o..._farewell.html
*************

For a glimpse into the future of Special Forces, check out the Capstone Concept for Special Operations. Or read using your Adobe Reader by clicking on HERE http://www.socom.mil/Docs/USSOCOM_CCSO_2006web.pdf : Read through it carefully. Can you find the words "Special Forces" anywhere? Or "Special Forces Group?" Can you find ODA? Or ODB? Or "Special Forces Battalion?"

You can't find these words. We can read that as a big signal that you won't be able to find Special Forces anywhere before very long. There are many other signals that the senior leadership in both USSOCOM and DA are working to do away with the Green Berets. The generals at USSOCOM and in the Pentagon have been blurring the distinctions between Special Forces and the SOF units (Rangers, JSOC, SEALS, Delta, et al.) for some time. We now see references to "Air Force Special Forces," "Navy Special Forces," and "Marine Special Forces" but we rarely see the term U. S. Army Special Forces. We do see "Army SOF," which only describes a grouping of forces, not a capability. We do see SF ODAs referred to as "Special Operations Detachments," another sad precursor of the future.

The Capstone Concept for Special Operations being developed for USSOCOM includes the concept "Global Expeditionary Forces," and all indications point to an intent to replace the SF Groups with this new concept. The organizational charts are changing, too, and the plans are for these Global Expeditionary Forces to work directly for USSOCOM worldwide in a JSOC-like configuration. The Security Assistance Force (SAF) concept, built around the Special Forces groups, has been discarded although the SAF is a much more streamlined and effective mechanism for utilizing U. S. Army Special Forces since the SAF is regionally oriented and works directly for the Combatant Commander.

Is this a ploy to be able to take the ODAs and use them operationally without going through the Group HQs, including the Group SFOBs? Since 1952, conventional headquarters have attempted to neutralize Special Forces Command and Control by treating the Group and Battalion HQs as non-operational administrative units that maintain ODAs in order that conventional units such as JSOC can cherry-pick them to use as support for their own missions. Reportedly, SF troops are already under the operational control of JSOC. JSOC is using the Green Berets for JSOC own ends, whether it is to gather intelligence for JSOC missions or whether it is to carry out "special missions" that (if successful) JSOC can take the credit for. You can imagine who will suck up the blame if such a "special mission" goes south.

How can Special Forces be neutralized in this way? If those who want to do away with the Green Berets are successful, they will need the full support of the senior leadership of the U. S. Army. Will they do away with the Special Forces Officers Branch? The Special Forces Warrant Officers Branch? The Special Forces NCO Career Management Fields? To date, we merely have the unusual spectacle of a relatively small unit (USSOCOM), however joint they may be, taking control of an entire United States Army branch.

Have they disestablished The United States Army John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center and School as a branch school and center of TRADOC? USASOC has already taken the Combat Developments capability out of the Special Warfare Center and made it a staff section of USASOC HQs. Bear in mind that this is the heartbeat of the Force Developments and Requirements Process, and therefore has a major say (if not the controlling say) in all future concept development, acquisitions, organization, and the supporting doctrine for Special Forces. This, in turn, impacts recruitment, promotions, training and equipping the Force, doctrinal studies and publications, and Concept Developments to support Special Forces. This also impacts U. S. Army Psychological Operations and Civil Affairs Concepts and Developments. Since this power node was moved from the Special Forces Center and School to USASOC, SWC is now a pygmy in the lineup of TRADOC schools. A harbinger of the future is the recent cut of 13 million dollars from the SWC budget.

Another indication that SWC’s position of leadership in the arena of Unconventional Warfare is disappearing is that on 27 June 2007 the USMC formally activated the Marine Special Operations School, with the stated intent of the USMC Senior Leaders that it will become "the premier FID and Unconventional Warfare University in the entire SOF community." See http://www.marsoc.usmc.mil

Approval from USSOCOM was required for this duplication of effort, as well as for the above-quoted statement. There can be no true duplication for many years, if ever. The culture of the USMC will be even less amenable to the necessities of working with, through, and by indigenous people than the culture of the conventional Army. The Marines are a world-class service and a superb fighting force but they are new to FID and new to Unconventional Warfare. Many a harsh lesson awaits them if they are going to try to replace the Green Berets. U. S. Army Special Forces has been increasing in proficiency and experience in Counterinsurgency, Foreign Internal Defense, Unconventional Warfare, and International Security Assistance Missions for more than a half century. Are the Marines willing to form up more than 300 Special Forces-type Operational Detachments, and take the slots out of their own hide? Why would USSOCOM leaders be willing for the USMC to start this effort from scratch when time is of the essence? Is USSOCOM willing to hand over the personnel authorizations currently supporting U. S. Army Special Forces to the USMC so they can become the premier FID and Unconventional Warriors of the future? Is somebody selling wolf tickets?

************

Going a step farther, a "Joint Special Operations University" has been established at Hurlburt Field by USSOCOM. Is there a Joint Infantry Operations University? Or a Joint Air Operations University? Why was Special Operations or Special Forces never integrated into the War Colleges and Service Schools? This would have been less expensive and much more effective. Instead of a few select special operators learning what they should already know, future leaders of the entire Armed Services would have learned about Counterinsurgency (CI), Unconventional Warfare (UW), and Foreign Internal Defense (FID) missions. As a result of this failure to integrate teaching about the core missions of Special Forces into the service schools, we are now seeing repeated failures by Army senior leaders in combat missions they do not understand. The poor performance of our senior leaders has betrayed and undercut the outstanding performance by American soldiers – Regulars, Reserves, and National Guard -- in our sustained effort in Iraq and Afghanistan.

For the past twenty years USSOCOM and DA Senior leaders have refused to integrate Special Forces Doctrine, Operational Concepts, and TTPs into the U. S. Army doctrine and operational concepts. Therefore, Special Forces concepts have not been taught at Leavenworth and in the War Colleges to future Army and Joint leaders. Now we have another generation of senior leaders who cannot distinguish between Counterinsurgency Principles & Operational Concepts and Unconventional Warfare Principles & Operational Concepts. They have buried their heads in the sand regarding the requirements of unconventional warfare for decades, and continue to do so. This will produce a continuing series of failures in missions involving Unconventional Warfare and Counterinsurgency. Is it any wonder that we find ourselves wringing our hands, hoping that General Petraeus will pull off his one-man show?

************

Last edited by That Guy v2.0; 03-30-2008 at 17:34. Reason: to add a link from original source
That Guy v2.0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2008, 17:31   #2
That Guy v2.0
Asset
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 27
continued:

In the USSOCOM Capstone Concept, the tactics, techniques, and procedures for conducting Special Forces operations are turned on their heads. This developing concept speaks in terms of pulling everything back to CONUS and of deploying JSOCs in the same way as Carrier Battle Groups and Marine Expeditionary Units, instead of doing what has worked so well for so long for Special Forces. Look on pages 9 and 10 of the Capstone Concept, under "Global Expeditionary Force." While this concept would work for raids and other direct actions (such as JSOC, Rangers, Seals, and USAF Special Tactics Teams are trained to conduct), if USSOCOM attempts to steal the mission of Special Forces by using this model, they will merely create a Roving Gnome, who will soon be sending for backup. In short, the USSOCOM Capstone Concept totally ignores the demonstrated and historically successful Special Forces operational concept of working by, with, and through those we are helping.

As a result of more than fifty years of fine-tuning, each Special Forces Group now operates in its assigned region. Group HQs deploy joint combined exchange training teams, or JCETS, to enhance bilateral relations and interoperability with regional nations through military-to-military contact. These U. S. Special Forces JCETS establish long-term relationships with indigenous personnel. They work to improve regional unit combat skills and humanitarian requirements. They develop trust between host nations and the USA with a program tailored to meet specific needs as identified by Green Berets on the ground. This capability will disappear with the Green Berets, and no SOF "shock-and-awe" can replace it.

Conventional leaders such as the general officers at JSOC and USSOCOM do not like the idea of letting the mission develop as the situation unfolds. They think of that as an upside-down state of affairs. They are not comfortable with letting the ODA, far from home, establish the requirements of the operation. The only way they have been trained to lead is with the conventional, top-down, do-as-I-command leadership style. They may give lip service to the idea of getting feedback from subordinates, but they seldom practice it.

In Unconventional Warfare, Counterinsurgency and FID Operations, U. S. Special Forces Groups are without peer. 5th Special Forces Group, led by then-COL John Mulholland, has the unique distinction of liberating a nation successfully with a Brigade-sized force. 5th SFG(A) took down the Taliban in Afghanistan and, until they were replaced by conventional forces and leaders, were doing just fine in making the Afghanis an important ally by using the SF model of working with, by and through the local people.

************

Compared to the lean organization of Special Forces, the USSOCOM model creates a bureaucracy with too many supervisors for too few workers, with the supervisors far away from the action. Money that would be better spent on the mission will be used for funding extra layers of chairborne supervisors. Worse, an unwieldy organization gets in the way of accomplishing the mission. The men on the ground have a much better feel for what they need to do and how best to do it, while the top-down bureaucratic rigidity frustrates more than it facilitates.

Will these newly created bureaucratic slots be filled with Special Forces officers and NCOs? What do you think? The conventional officers who have risen up to the highest ranks through their connections with JSOC, Delta, the Rangers, 160th Aviation, and the SEALs will be in charge. There is only one Special Forces officer (newly promoted) above the rank of Major General, so – once again – Special Forces is being decapitated and will be under the ultimate command of those who have never gone through selection and assessment, never attended the SFOC, never served a tour on an ODA, never served repeated assignments in a SFG(A).

The 2006 Version of the USSOCOM Capstone Concept that we can access online does not show the new organizational charts that are presently proposed for the Global Expeditionary Forces in the 2007 Capstone Concept. They are classified, but in the end there may be more than a dozen staff officers and NCOs for every soldier who will be assigned the mission on the ground. Reliable sources state that, even now, there are more than 130 (maybe as many as 160) U. S. Army E-9s in Army Special Mission Units assigned to JSOC. When that is compared with the 13 to15 E-9s in a Special Forces Group, it does tend to raise eyebrows. What are they doing? According to the reports, thirteen of them are packing parachutes.

This year, in April, USSOCOM put out a DVD celebrating its Twentieth Anniversary. It is about twenty minutes long. Even though Special Forces personnel make up the greatest part of the USSOCOM forces, the U. S. Army Special Forces are never once referred to in this DVD. Although Special Forces is the oldest force in USSOCOM and has been the USSOCOM workhorse since its inception not one Green Beret is to be seen in the montage of photographs. Colonel Banks is not mentioned in the historical overview, nor General Yarborough, nor General Healy. There is no reference to Colonel Bull Simons, Colonel Charlie Beckwith, nor General Joe Lutz. Yet without these men the path to the present day in United States "Special Operations" would be difficult to imagine. Most amazingly, the DVD made no reference to President John F. Kennedy who supported the establishment of Special Forces in 1961.

Will Special Forces exist ten or twenty years down the road? What can we do to insure the continuing contribution of the Green Berets?

***********

On 25 July the United States House of Representatives announced the forming of a commission to examine the roles and missions of the United States Armed Services. This may be our only chance to turn back the erosion of U. S. Army Special Forces and the exploitation of our SF soldiers. Each retired and each active duty Special Forces NCO and Officer can contact his elected representatives by letter, by fax, by telephone, and in person. We can:

--Express concern that the United States is in danger of losing a military capability that the U. S. Army Special Forces has been developing for more than fifty years.

Explain that the proved capability of U. S. Army Special Forces will not be replaced by the new concepts of USSOCOM, and that other Army units or other Services, such as the Marines, do not have the necessary training and experience to conduct sustained FID, Counterinsurgency, and Unconventional Warfare missions in the world-wide war on terrorism.

--Tell our elected representatives of personal experiences in working with host nation forces, and of personal experiences with hostile interference (past and present) on the part of conventional commanders who resent Special Forces.

--Ask if the Congress will particularly examine USSOCOM in order to determine which units are receiving funding, and how much, compared to which units are doing the work.

--Ask if the Congress will determine whether or not the senior leaders of the U. S. Army and of USSOCOM are actually qualified to conduct Unconventional Warfare, FID, and Counterinsurgency operations, or are they actually only qualified and experienced in conducting Direct Action operations?

--Ask each Member of Congress that you contact if he or she will personally serve as Champion for the Green Berets, and fight to preserve this one-of-a-kind national capability.

We have served our Nation and Special Forces. It is time to fight again, this time for the preservation of the Force. If we do not protest the poor stewardship of the U. S. Army and USSOCOM leaders concerning U. S. Army Special Forces and its unique capability, we will certainly see this capability diminish.

De Oppresso Liber.
Major General (R) James A. Guest
That Guy v2.0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2008, 18:44   #3
Pete
Quiet Professional
 
Pete's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Fayetteville
Posts: 13,080
We've talked about this before

The writer was my Group commander.

I'll stop at that.
Pete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2008, 21:17   #4
optactical
Quiet Professional
 
optactical's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Ft Bragg
Posts: 139
Anyone remember the scene in "The Jerk" where Steve Martin's character assesses the sniper trying to kill him is shooting at cans? This article reminds me of that.
__________________
The enemy IS reading this.
optactical is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2008, 21:24   #5
Sdiver
Area Commander
 
Sdiver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: The Black Hills of SD
Posts: 5,917
Quote:
Originally Posted by optactical View Post
Anyone remember the scene in "The Jerk" where Steve Martin's character assesses the sniper trying to kill him is shooting at cans? This article reminds me of that.
"He hates these cans !!!!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eXRM3lFRwRI

__________________
Non Sibi Sed Suis
_____________________________________________
It's Good To Be Da King !!!! Just ask NDD !!!!
Sdiver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2008, 04:47   #6
krod
Quiet Professional
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Tent City
Posts: 85
That article has been laying around in the TM room for about a week...

I guess everytime we do something I will make sure it makes the press so everyone knows and we can stop being the "grey" men.
krod is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2008, 05:44   #7
Jack Moroney (RIP)
Quiet Professional
 
Jack Moroney (RIP)'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Vermont
Posts: 3,093
This article needs to be redefined and retitled from The Demise of the Green Berets to The Ineptitude of Senior Leadership. I find it very interesting that those that have suddenly found god created the legacies that now they see so clearly as flawed strategies. I can recall one of the contributors to this article once defining his goal to make SF the finest light infantry in the world-a bit shortsighted and way off the mark then and especially now. Those that now take up the pen thinking it is mightier than the sword would have better served us all by falling on their sword back when they were looking to their own agendas worried about where the pen would fall on their career progression. Just an observation.
__________________
Wenn einer von uns fallen sollt, der Andere steht für zwei.
Jack Moroney (RIP) is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2008, 07:01   #8
Ret10Echo
Quiet Professional
 
Ret10Echo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Occupied America....
Posts: 4,740
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Moroney View Post
This article needs to be redefined and retitled from The Demise of the Green Berets to The Ineptitude of Senior Leadership. I find it very interesting that those that have suddenly found god created the legacies that now they see so clearly as flawed strategies. I can recall one of the contributors to this article once defining his goal to make SF the finest light infantry in the world-a bit shortsighted and way off the mark then and especially now. Those that now take up the pen thinking it is mightier than the sword would have better served us all by falling on their sword back when they were looking to their own agendas worried about where the pen would fall on their career progression. Just an observation.
Would it seem that at some point the farm got sold and nobody told us?
__________________
"There are more instances of the abridgment of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations"

James Madison
Ret10Echo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2008, 10:41   #9
glebo
Quiet Professional
 
glebo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Hope Mills, NC
Posts: 2,757
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Moroney View Post
This article needs to be redefined and retitled from The Demise of the Green Berets to The Ineptitude of Senior Leadership. I find it very interesting that those that have suddenly found god created the legacies that now they see so clearly as flawed strategies. I can recall one of the contributors to this article once defining his goal to make SF the finest light infantry in the world-a bit shortsighted and way off the mark then and especially now. Those that now take up the pen thinking it is mightier than the sword would have better served us all by falling on their sword back when they were looking to their own agendas worried about where the pen would fall on their career progression. Just an observation.

Very good, our senior leaders sold us out to the marines and air force, and navy and everyone else who has "spec ops" associated with it. Now they sit back and wonder "how did that happen?". Hell, we're just about handing them all our lesson plans and POI's from up here, even how we conduct selection. But lately it has slowed down a bit, hopefully someone got wise. I guess they figure they can take over 60 years experience and put their people through a course and VIOLA, we are "special"

I figured when they were a general, they'da had the gonads to put up a fight, now everyone wants to be "special"

Comes a time when we need to be a little more louder than the "Quiet Professional" no one hears who does not speak. Now I'm not talking down at the operational level, but our highers need to make themselves heard so "Special Forces" stays special, and not just special ops like everyone else.

just my .02 worth and my very humble opinion. But this subject just really ticks me off how we are getting sold out.
__________________
Out of all the places I've been, this is one of'em....
glebo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2008, 12:43   #10
magician
Quiet Professional
 
magician's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Bangkok
Posts: 856
Quote:
Originally Posted by That Guy v2.0 View Post

In Unconventional Warfare, Counterinsurgency and FID Operations, U. S. Special Forces Groups are without peer. 5th Special Forces Group, led by then-COL John Mulholland, has the unique distinction of liberating a nation successfully with a Brigade-sized force. 5th SFG(A) took down the Taliban in Afghanistan and, until they were replaced by conventional forces and leaders, were doing just fine in making the Afghanis an important ally by using the SF model of working with, by and through the local people.
I have to say that this clause resonates for me.

Not that my opinion matters.
__________________

1st Platoon "Bad 'Muthers," Company A, 2d Ranger Battalion, 1980-1984;
ODA 151, Company B, 2d Battalion, 1SFGA, 1984-1986.
SFQC 04-84; Ranger class 14-81.
magician is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2008, 13:47   #11
Jack Moroney (RIP)
Quiet Professional
 
Jack Moroney (RIP)'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Vermont
Posts: 3,093
Quote:
Originally Posted by magician View Post
Not that my opinion matters.
Why not? Your opinion matters to me.
__________________
Wenn einer von uns fallen sollt, der Andere steht für zwei.
Jack Moroney (RIP) is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2008, 18:04   #12
abnremf
Quiet Professional
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Virginia
Posts: 222
Quote:
In the USSOCOM Capstone Concept, the tactics, techniques, and procedures for conducting Special Forces operations are turned on their heads. This developing concept speaks in terms of pulling everything back to CONUS and of deploying JSOCs in the same way as Carrier Battle Groups and Marine Expeditionary Units, instead of doing what has worked so well for so long for Special Forces. Look on pages 9 and 10 of the Capstone Concept, under "Global Expeditionary Force."
This idea is out the window now. Somebody called bullshit apparently.
abnremf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2008, 22:47   #13
magician
Quiet Professional
 
magician's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Bangkok
Posts: 856
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Moroney View Post
Why not? Your opinion matters to me.
Thank you, sir.

I am really dismayed by these developments.
__________________

1st Platoon "Bad 'Muthers," Company A, 2d Ranger Battalion, 1980-1984;
ODA 151, Company B, 2d Battalion, 1SFGA, 1984-1986.
SFQC 04-84; Ranger class 14-81.
magician is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2008, 10:18   #14
Blueboy
Quiet Professional
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: D.C./ Northern Virginia
Posts: 82
From my limited point of view, I can say that SF is very much in demand by Joint Force Commanders in all theaters. No one else can bring what we can to the battlefield.

What is missing is knowledge of and advocacy for SF at the highest levels.

What does TR think about all of this?
__________________
"I do not know what is true. I do not know the meaning of the universe. But in the midst of doubt, in the collapse of creeds, there is one thing I do not doubt...and that is that the faith is true and adorable which leads a soldier to throw away his life in obedience to a blindly accepted duty, in a cause he little understands, in a plan of campaign of which he has little notion, under tactics of which he does not see the use."

Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.
Blueboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2008, 10:37   #15
The Reaper
Quiet Professional
 
The Reaper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Free Pineland
Posts: 24,779
I agree that times have been better for us, as recently as 2002.

Some of the people contributing to the article were in key leadership positions when the problems were beginning and did not, IMHO, do all they could have for the future of the branch when they were in charge themselves.

There is a serious trend over the past 20 years in favor of Ranger and special mission units (and their leaderdship) with an increasing disregard for Special Forces personnel. Now everyone, from supply clerks to Marines are "Special". This has led to a serious imbalance in the SOF leadership, and a tendency towards supporting black ops, infil platforms, and DA/kinetic solutions over more humanistic, SF related resourcing and operations. How many SOCOM or USASOC CGs were SF branched officers with significant team time? Why can we not seem to get SF GOs beyond one or two stars? SF is the largest portion of USASOC, which is the largest component of SOCOM. We have more people deployed on a daily basis than the rest of SOF has assigned to them globally.

The impact of this is that while SF is in tremendous demand, we are not resourced accordingly, and our leadership is woefully ignorant in our employment. Hence the "housecleaner" remarks, prosecution of SF personnel doing their duties, and relegation of SF teams to support roles.

Just my .02 since you asked, YMMV.

TR
__________________
"It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat." - President Theodore Roosevelt, 1910

De Oppresso Liber 01/20/2025
The Reaper is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:54.



Copyright 2004-2022 by Professional Soldiers ®
Site Designed, Maintained, & Hosted by Hilliker Technologies