Group Personalities - Page 2

**The Reaper** · 05-17-2004, 21:20

You would still be in the KZ for at least one, if not more dreaded SWCS tours, regardless of the Groups.

That is one place that a mix of the Groups should be required.

TR

NousDefionsDoc · 05-17-2004, 21:30

When I was there, it was real easy to tell who was from what Group:

1st - Baht chains and cheap cologne
5th - Looked like someone had kicked their dog and always asking for a job.
7th - a Big Street Gang. Harley shirts and no respect for anything other than other 7th Groupers.
10th - Smoked pipes and wore smoking jackets. Always ate Ramen to save money for their next TDY.
SWC - Looked like someone had kicked their dog and would beg to go anywhere but 10th Group.

Probably all changed now. A lot of people want to go to whatever Group has the war.

I think people tend to take on some of the characteristics of their AOs.

7th Group guys picked up the Latin "manana" thing a little.

10th Group guys are a lot like the French.

**The Reaper** · 05-17-2004, 21:32

Quote:

Originally posted by NousDefionsDoc
10th Group guys are a lot like the French.

Doooh!!

Now THAT'S going to leave a mark!

TR

**Jack Moroney (RIP)** · 05-18-2004, 07:07

Quote:

Originally posted by The Reaper
I'd have to agree with Basenshukai on this one.

Things have changed a lot in this respect over the years.

TR

I concur. The old days of flash cards and pointee-talkee training are long gone. Not only is language a critical requirement for SF but it brings with it all the cultural aspects associated with learning another guys language. I commanded an organization that had a language requirement for everyone not just a select few and as Basenshukai has been doing we used it in everything we did. I remember those earlier days in the late 60s when the language requirements were limited as far as coded positions on TOEs but when I was in the 10th then, and more so later on, language training was an ongoing program for all teams with UW missions regardless of what was coded on the TOE-it just made sense. Later on it got even more intense.

Case in point. When I was little and deployed to a SWA country as a the Ops Officer for a C-Team we had a LTC who was the detachment commander that felt language training really wasn't all that critical. A couple of us (me, my Ops NCO, and the LTC) were invitied to attend a dinner party at the home of our host country counterpart who spoke good English. During one part of the dinner, the LTC ,wanting to show his mastery of the local language, uttered a phrase and made a hand gesture that, when all was said and done, equaled, " Your wife is a lousy cook and by the way I am comfortable with you because I am queer". Fortunately this was not my Ops NCOs first trip to this country and he was able to smooth some very ruffled feathers. So the long and the short of it is this, it is pretty damn difficult to go into someone else's country and tell them that we are there to help them if they speak our language and adopt our customs. You know, sort of like what the State Department does. IMHO language is a critical skill and opens the door. Will everyone excel at being a linquist, no, probably not. But everyone should be able to understand the basics and communicate what is needed for their part of the mission. You never know when you will be the only guy left or available to which the indig may have to turn.

Jack Moroney

QRQ 30 · 05-18-2004, 07:29

Just don't make language the end ilose sight of the mission.

BTW: There were no flash cards or pointee talkee thingies at DLI (Defense Language Institute) one of the most respected institutes in the world. It was total immersion and the instructors could lose their jobs if caught speaking english. The short fall was that the total immersion was only for eight hours a day as opposed to 24 hours at the Monterrey Institute.

Not that this is the case but I would much prefer to have a weapons expert teach weapons through an interpretor than to have a linguist who knows nothing about weapons give the training.

**Razor** · 05-18-2004, 08:55

QRQ,

While full Groups aren't permanently stationed OCONUS anymore, each has anywhere from a company to a full battalion that is permanently OCONUS, and at least in 10th Group, the rotation between Carson, Stuttgart and SWC was a pretty regular thing for anyone spending more than a few years in Group. I would imagine its similar for the other Groups.

As everyone short of 1st Group has spent time in Afghanistan and/or Iraq lately, your point of using interpreters to get the job done is tested and valid. However, I think that there is a difference between simply getting the job done and doing it more efficiently and with better end results. That's where a solid language capability pays dividends. As Basenshukai said, you can get away with executing unilateral DA, SR or CT (to an extent) with only knowing a few key native phrases (Die mutha$*%^& being a good one), but I believe being proficient in FID or UW (or many of the collateral missions) would require a better command of the target language, as the interaction between troops and indigs requires more communication.

NDD, just because some of us have the ability to operate in more than one culture shouldn't make you feel like less of a professional. Its good that you know the limits of your abilities.

QRQ 30 · 05-18-2004, 09:19

Razor and all: I didn;t mean for this thread to degenerate into a language discussion. I have learned several and like to consider myself somewhat of a linguist. This may be hard to believe but in 1968 I was alerted for possible re-deployment from RVN to Czechoslovakia because of the Czech rebellion.

I spent less than five of my fifteen years in a ststeside group. I was one of three men on a team in Germany who didn't speak english as a second language. Perhaps we can persue this subject on another thread.

My point was that rotation between groups isn't always a bad thing. This helps maintain a universal level of training. By homesteading in one group or team for an entire career we run the danger of groups truly becoming different. Sometimes when there is a disparity between a super team or group and one that is average, it isadvantageous to the whole to re-assign some individuals.

Adios, Auf wiedersehen dobre den and Sawahdi!!.

NousDefionsDoc · 05-18-2004, 17:47

Quote:

NDD, just because some of us have the ability to operate in more than one culture shouldn't make you feel like less of a professional. Its good that you know the limits of your abilities.

You're right! I don't know what I was thinking. The Latin American Union does make it all one culture. Same money, no borders, common passport...oh wait!

monkeydan · 05-20-2004, 22:56

I'm gonna try not to get stomped on jumping in here with the big boys. I'm not gonna say that language doesn't matter. Language can mean the difference between getting by and doing something well. But a big part of being accepted by a different culture is just being humble and trying to observe local customs. This is where a SF soldier in an unfamiliar AO is gonna have a leg up on any given Joe who finds himself in the same place. In my own (very limited) experience I've gotten along rather well with just an interpreter. Of course I wasn't conducting military operations, so they not be relevant. Anyway, just something I was thinking about.

QRQ 30 · 05-21-2004, 02:47

Very good Monkeydan: Neither do I say language is not important, but in a list of Methods of Instruction, Special Forces specific training, MOS and Tactical Proficiency, I would place it at the bottom. As I said before: if I had a choice between a proficient instructor teaching through an interpretor, and a linguist who is not proficient and a poor instructor, I will pick the proficient soldier.

{QUOTE]Originally posted by monkeydan
I'm gonna try not to get stomped on jumping in here with the big boys. I'm not gonna say that language doesn't matter. Language can mean the difference between getting by and doing something well. But a big part of being accepted by a different culture is just being humble and trying to observe local customs. This is where a SF soldier in an unfamiliar AO is gonna have a leg up on any given Joe who finds himself in the same place. In my own (very limited) experience I've gotten along rather well with just an interpreter. Of course I wasn't conducting military operations, so they not be relevant. Anyway, just something I was thinking about. [/QUOTE]