More Than Door-Kickers

[NousDefionsDoc]

Jack Moroney-withdrawing back into the recessess of my MSS.

LOL - yeah right Sir. Can anybody on this board honestly even imagine the Colonel:
1. Withdrawing?
2. Sitting in a MSS?

[Surgicalcric]

Originally Posted by magician

Talk some more, please.

Great conversation.

Not that my opinion matters or Magician needs a parrot on his shoulder but please do continue.

I know, I know; back to the medic stuff....

Crip

[bost1751]

Jack:

Thanks for the information. I kind of think you were and exception to the unwritten rule in the previous era. However, you did get out and punch the right tickets when needed. Bo Baker was another that got to stay around and move. I don't think he was as fortunate as you on the SF time though.

[Billy L-bach]

The integration of an infantry regiment and an aviation regiment into the Umbrella of 'Special Operations' is where real "Special Forces" began to get pushed back to what is slowly becoming second class citizen status... I know my opinion is unpopular with lots of people, but we have let ourselves get pushed aside by what I like to refer to as "conventional SOF" We now "expect" that an infantry regiment should get certain benifits... some of us no longer believe an aviation regiment is a 'support' element. Now-a-days I am more likely to get my ass chewed for grooming violations than a buck sgt 11b in the infantry regiment. Most of my real complaints are poorly addressed on an 'open' web forum, but thats how it goes...

Long gone is "Strat' Recon" now its just "Special" We have added more "missions" to our focus.... not because thats what "Green Berets" do.... but because it allows us to "include" others. Combatting Terrorism, Counter-proliferation, arent they all direct action type missions that fall under the scope of things we formerly refered to as "collateral activities" ?

Some services consider small unit actions (commando style raids) as "Unconventional Warfare" Isnt it just a raid? Does it become 'unconventional' because we used a different helicopter or a different type of gun? Information operation? Civic Action? Are they new missions or collateral parts of UW.... If they are "missions" why in the world did I have to clean some old womans barn at the end of the Q-Course? Why didnt a civil affairs trainee come out and do it?

When I am doing the "life saving steps" on someone, am I practicing "SOF-medicine" or am I just doing first aid? Does an airfield takedown stop being "special" if the 82d does it? I have been around for a day or two... but I seem to have missed a few "key-meetings" at some point, and just need to be brought up to speed so I can understand who and what "Special Operations" really means.

I stopped feeling "Special" a long time ago.... I continue to do what I do because it needs to be done and everyone else in the military has gotten waaaay too high speed to do it.

I hope I didnt stir the pot more than it needed.... but if the pot dont get stirred every now and then some of the stuff settles to the bottom and burns.... then the pot is ruined.

...and I dont know about the rest of you, but I hate eating stew out of a burned up pot.

...just my two cents
I could be wrong.

[The Reaper]

Billy:

You said nothing untrue, or that didn't need to be said.

The tough thing is that USSOCOM and USASOC are necessary for Special Forces to thrive, but at the same time, they compete for limited resources and for the most part, are not really fans of SF.

I have seen years when the Infantry Regiment's budget exceeded that of several SF Groups, and when infiltration platforms (which consume roughly 80% of USSOCOM's budget) allocated ZERO hours of blade time to white SOF.

Note the core of the Aviation Regiment were the aircraft and personnel formerly assigned to each SF Group. Yes, kiddies, at one time, each and every SFG had their own infiltration platforms ASSIGNED. They were "consolidated" to provide "better support", and to provide economy of scale savings. IMHO, the day they left was the last day SF got regularly scheduled aviation support.

Preach on, brother!

TR

[CPTAUSRET]

Billy:

You don't post often, but when you do I always listen!

Terry

[magician]

I hear you, Billy.

I agree: a raid is a raid is a raid.

One of the things that felt so good to me when I first joined SF (I was a Bat boy beforehand, a very radical, rebellious Bat boy, and it was a foregone conclusion that I was heading to SF, if only because I knew why the Big Ranger in the Sky included pockets on uniform trousers) was the license that I was suddenly granted to think outside the box.

This was illustrated to me a few times, when we pulled whoppers and generally played unfairly, as used to be the hallmark of old SF.

My favorite example is when I was in the SF Detachment Commander's course. We had a raid to plan. The muldoons in my class wanted to stage a standard raid. I argued for something a little more imaginative, but I was voted down. Whatever.

A Colonel came in and sat down to hear our concept of the operation. He was bored, I could tell, though there was nothing really wrong with our plan. It was straight out of 7-8.

I then committed the cardinal sin of saying, "well, sir, we also had another idea," and I then proceeded to explain how I thought that it made more sense to hijack a van that was used to bring the guard replacements in, then put our own guys in the van, and pull a trojan horse entry onto the objective.

Well. The Colonel woke up. And he told us to plan and implement the mission in that way.

I was forever after considered a spotlight Ranger by the other studs in the course, but...in retrospect, I consider that a compliment. Too many of those guys were water walkers and backstabbers and top blockers, anyway. We actually had one guy who was wearing an unearned Ranger tab. He was busted on the last day of the course.

They let the guy graduate.

He had to take the tab off. But he graduated, and he went on to command an ODA in 7SFGA.

Anyway. I digress.

I honestly do not know what solution to propose. I do know that old SF is different than the risk averse SF that emerged in the early 1990's.

I think that there is a place for the old style Sneaky Petes.

Yes, you have to keep them away from everyone else in peacetime. But when the balloon goes up, you need those guys.

What I would not give to be 20 years younger.

[NousDefionsDoc]

Great post Billy.

[Billy L-bach]

the day they left was the last day SF got regularly scheduled aviation support.

BINGO!

TR.... the Navy gets more support from the aviation regiment then I have seen delivered to SF in a loooong time.

The fact is... if a 'group' REALLY REALLY needs aviation support... I feel better about asking a leg unit for help because I know they wont back out on my requirement at the last minute because a "cooler" mission came along. Not to mention, the paper trail is a lot less painful

special my ass....


$ 0.02

[Jack Moroney (RIP)]

Originally Posted by Billy L-bach

Long gone is "Strat' Recon" now its just "Special" We have added more "missions" to our focus.... not because thats what "Green Berets" do.... but because it allows us to "include" others. Combatting Terrorism, Counter-proliferation, arent they all direct action type missions that fall under the scope of things we formerly refered to as "collateral activities" ?

I could be wrong.

No you are not wrong, but you are going to have to give me some leeway here as I am just an officer that has been allowed only briefly to walk with you from time to time and have listened to many of your contemporaries and those that have come before voice the same concerns. This is not a recent phenomenom, it has been going on since SFs inception. When I started out in this profession ,SF's primary doctrinal manual (FM31-21, dated 1961) was called Guerrilla Warfare and Special Forces Missions. That manual recognized exactly what you are saying that a raid is a raid, recon is recon, and FID (for the most part) was the flip side of UW. It also recognized that virtually all those mission we have today were going to be executed in some form or another during UW missions either by the team, their guerrillas, or surrogates trained/supported/or inspired by SF teams and that , for instance, PSYOPs was part of the necessary skill sets for GW.

The labeling today of missions as "Special" has more to do with the bean counters and allocation of resources in terms of force structure, materiel, doctrinal responsibility, and turf protection. While you are absolutely right when you say a raid is a raid and all of the subsets that now have their own names are still a raid what it boils down to is resourcing units tasked for those missions with the materiel, time, facilities, etc, etc, for which they will be held accountable. Manuals are not just for those of us that use them to define what we are supposed to do they are for the education of those who do not have the requisite qualifications needed to make decisions on our employment both within the SF community, SOF community and the Joint community at large. It used to be, and I do not know if it still is done, that when a new doctrinal manual was written it would have to be presented at a Doctrinal Review Approval Group (commonly know as being DRAGed) to all the other Army School Commandants not only so they knew what we were doing but where in the big picture they fit and where we fit in the overall scheme of warfighting. Having had the unpleasant experience of being the DOTD for SWC for a while I fought out some of those meetings defending our roles and codifing what it was that we do. Most of the time we won, sometimes we compromised, and rarely did we lose. You see as long as SF is part of the Army it will have to compete for resources that are not paid for by the joint monies and the only way to accomplish this is to define what it is you do with names that recognize that this particular purview of "special" this and "special" that is understoond by the joint community at large.

Now back to common sense, you and I both know that a raid is still a raid and "Special" reconnaissance encompasses many tasks-to include Strategic Reconnassaince but the TTPs don't often change regardless if you are gathering intell at the tactical, operational or strategic level with the exception of the tools and toys that are made available for us to use. The term Special Operation has also taken on a life of its own and it has gotten ridiculous as you have pointed out. The only term with Special in it that still has a clear line for definition is SF and has little to do with the name of the various missions and collateral activities and everything to do with the folks.

So, your frustrations are not new and as long as SF continues to set the standard when it comes to soldiering everyone will want to attach "special" to what ever they do just like they all wanted a frigging beret. But headgear and adjectives to define missions and activities aside, a raid is still a raid but the measure of those that execute the missions, whatever they are called, will be judged by the excellence in execution which will always be your hallmark whether or not you feel "special".

Jack Moroney-humbled by the shadows cast by those with whom I had been given the privledge to serve and the responsibility to command.

[Peregrino]

Sir - In defense of "knuckle draggers" everywhere, I wish SF's leadership did a better job of educating the troops about the points you've made. The part about educating the Army and redefining missions to "fence" pieces of the pie needs to be understood by every SF soldier. What you explained in a couple paragraphs cost me several years of "learning the ropes" - and I've always liked "redefining things to get more resources/lattitude". Now if guys on the teams would just understand that it's about resources and approach the fight as another battle with words/ideas the weapons of choice (isn't that supposed to be one of our strong suites?) and other consumers their/our adversaries maybe they'd be a little more enthusiastic about what now seems to be "distracting word games with no useful purpose". Unfortunately I think the team guys that complain the loudest about semantics are so focused on fighting alligators that they've forgotten the mission included draining the swamp. My .02 - Peregrino

[dennisw]

Colonel Moroney said:

I just lucked out, I commanded two conventional companies and did conventional staff time as an S4 and S3 and was still able to command two A-Teams, two B-Teams, S3 of a SF Group and Battalion, and a SF BN XO before the branch came into existence.

Sir:

Now that special ops is a distinct branch of service, do you believe an officer could serve their entire time, other then the initial command, in special ops and still become a qualified general officer? I do not mean in the eyes of the regular army, but in your eyes?

[NousDefionsDoc]

dennis,
Neither the time nor the place.

[bost1751]

I know I am sounding like a stuck record, but as the old wagon turns the same spokes continue to come around. The term "special" seems to be attached to everything these days. I retired 12 years ago and I still recall much of what is being said today also being said years ago. We, SF NCOs, were being told if we didn't conventional time we would not get promoted. We were drafted into the drill sgt program and so on. The rumors turned out to be just that. Others were out to get rid of SF, or it appeared thay way anyway. If you have not already experienced it, you will, that you are nearly hated by several out in the conventional Army. The reason is simple, professional jealousy.

The term quite professional is fitting for SF. You do your absolute best in everything you do. You don't brag about it or look for pats on the back and a parade in your honor. You because you are professional. Others may get credit for what you did. To me that is the basis for the unit's name " Special Forces".

The Col's articles were very educational for me. You are right in not every being educated in why some things that absolutely ludicrus are done. I was fortunate enough to have a couple of SGM's along the way that explained a water down version of the The Col explained to us.

It sounds to me like the now 7 missions are still the same as we always had. Now they have just split a couple of them and attached new names to them.

[uboat509]

When I was in the 18F course the SWCS CSM came and talked to us. He was angry because he had caught one of our guys needing a haircut. He came to the class expecting to just issue a blanket asschewing and move out. What he walked into was a bunch of students and instructors who were angry about some very big SWCS mandated changes to the course. Instead of just telling us to quit whinning and suck it up he took the time to hear our grievences and to explain SWCS' position and to promise to try to mitigate some the problems. One of the things that he said was that we can teach any knucklehead to shoot but only SF can do what we were doing.

SFC W