Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard
Personally, and although it is certainly posted in the wrong place as it is germane to existing forums and on-going discussion, I found this paper to be a pretty good synopsis of the discussion...and this paragraph is--IMO--the 'nucleus' of the discussion.
This extended discussion of definitions was important because much of the debate that surrounds the current and future special operations capability within the Marine Corps is really about terms. One view is that the Marine Corps cannot conduct special operations, because it has no special operations forces. Others claim that MEU (SOC) and Force Reconnaissance are the Marine Corps’ version of Special Forces. As the joint doctrinal definitions show, none of these claims are accurate. SOF, SO, and SF are distinctly different. They are precise terms and organizational leaders should use them precisely. They are inter-related, but one is not a requirement for the other. For the issue of force contribution, the key fact is that based on the definitions above, the Marine Corps does not need to create any new units in order to conduct special operations and thus contribute to USSOCOM.
I've just added this document to my research files. 
Richard's $.02  |
Richard,
I haven't had the chance to read the paper posted, but did your quote come from that paper??
EDIT: Never mind. I found it in the paper.
__________________
The conduct of unconventional warfare carries heavier demands than the wearing of a beret and the mastery of unusual firearms. Unconventional warfare is a state of mind as well as mission and distinctive set of tactics. -Col.(ret) Hy Rothstein
"Those that would sacrifice a little liberty for security deserve neither liberty nor security." -Ben Franklin
Go gcreime cúnna ifrinn do bhall fearga!
Go n-ithe an cat thú is go n-ithe an diabhal an cat.
Johnny
Last edited by Backwoods; 03-08-2009 at 18:06.
|