The spec ops stretch

Surf n Turf · 10-16-2006, 21:22

Interesting Read

The spec ops stretch
Expansion plans leave many in Army Special Forces uneasy
By Sean D. Naylor
The impending expansion of Army special operations forces laid out in this year's Quadrennial Defense Review is spreading waves of unease throughout the Special Forces community.

The 10,000 soldiers in the Army's five active and two National Guard Special Forces groups make up the largest component of the U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCom) and are the U.S.' pre-eminent exponents of unconventional warfare (working with guerrilla groups to overthrow an enemy regime) and foreign internal defense (training friendly governments to defend themselves against insurgencies). But many SF officers feel that U.S. Army Special Operations Command (USASOC) has left them in the dark about how it plans to deliver on the QDR's promise to expand the number of SF battalions by a third over the next several years. They are deeply concerned that, despite the generals' protestations to the contrary, a rushed expansion of Army special operations forces will result in an SF contingent that, while bigger on paper, will contain half-filled units manned by troops who are less mature, less experienced and less skilled in languages and foreign cultures than SF soldiers traditionally have been.

http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/2006/10/2174369

SnT

**The Reaper** · 10-16-2006, 22:53

Helluva article.

Sean Naylor just stated much more eloquently many of the points I have been making for a while.

Not too much there I would disagree with.

TR

**Jack Moroney (RIP)** · 10-17-2006, 05:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Reaper

Not too much there I would disagree with.TR

I agree, but who is listening and where is the chain of command's indorsement for this? This shouldn't be a BFO from Sean Naylor but a position paper by USSOCOM indorsed by all the component commanders.

And I love this quote:But many SF officers feel that U.S. Army Special Operations Command (USASOC) has left them in the dark about how it plans to deliver on the QDR's promise to expand the number of SF battalions by a third over the next several years. They are deeply concerned that, despite the generals' protestations to the contrary, a rushed expansion of Army special operations forces will result in an SF contingent that, while bigger on paper, will contain half-filled units manned by troops who are less mature, less experienced and less skilled in languages and foreign cultures than SF soldiers traditionally have been.

If they are so damned concerned who are they, where are they, and why aren't they standing on top of their bosses desks. It's time to stand up and be counted and stop placing your career ahead of your men. This crap about some "group commander having to take a brick and make it fly" shows the cut off point between the managers and the leaders. This is command negligence.

x SF med · 10-17-2006, 06:49

One point that has not been voiced in this article, or in my other research is taking older FOGs (like myself, and a few others on the board) to the Company HQ, Bn HQ, and Grp HQ levels, freeing up the NCOs that have been 'snaked' from teams. We all know the mission, have the Qualifications, and have passed the Clearance fiasco, We may not be as physically able to as the kids to be 'on the ground' but we know enough and care enough to make sure the support, intel and commo are what they need to accomplish their missions.

Just a thought.

Guy · 10-17-2006, 08:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by x_sf_med

One point that has not been voiced in this article, or in my other research is taking older FOGs (like myself, and a few others on the board) to the Company HQ, Bn HQ, and Grp HQ levels, freeing up the NCOs that have been 'snaked' from teams. We all know the mission, have the Qualifications, and have passed the Clearance fiasco, We may not be as physically able to as the kids to be 'on the ground' but we know enough and care enough to make sure the support, intel and commo are what they need to accomplish their missions.

Just a thought.

Till this day, I can not for the life in me, figure out why? They won't recall you FOGs....

Stay safe.

x SF med · 10-17-2006, 12:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Guy

Till this day, I can not for the life in me, figure out why? They won't recall you FOGs....

Stay safe.

I wouldn't bitch too loud or long - as long as I was a DA civilian or brought back at a decent rank that takes into account the education and business experience to help run whichever B, C, or D I was assigned to. My knees are fried, but my brain still works most days.

TR-
Rant away, I don't think you'll get too much push back from the SF guys here, especially since you're giving the truth, from experience.

Five-O · 10-17-2006, 06:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jack Moroney

It's time to stand up and be counted and stop placing your career ahead of your men.

Sir, its a rare breed that does this...hopefully not in SF as well.

CoLawman · 10-17-2006, 08:19

Sean Naylor took SecDef to task in his book "Not a Good Day to Die". Most of the issues Naylor addressed in the book involved the SecDef's micromanaging of the mission in Astan. Now this article seems to be (again) directing the reader to the top of the heap.........SecDef.

It is awful difficult, and takes a special person, to sacrifice one's career by butting heads with the SecDef. I would assume that alot of the top military brass have taken a stance that keeping one's mouth shut at least allows them to stay in the fight.

It seems to this layman that the SecDef is the epitome of micromanagers! It further seems to me that he is McNamara reincarnated!

If Naylor's credibility is not questioned then it is time for the SecDef to move to a retirement home.

**Jack Moroney (RIP)** · 10-17-2006, 10:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by CoLawman

It is awful difficult, and takes a special person, to sacrifice one's career by butting heads with the SecDef. .

Well actually isn't that what leadership is all about? It doesn't matter whether it is the SECDEF or the next individual above you in the chain of command. You have an obligation to your mission and your men to stand your ground and confront the issue head on. A Platoon leader who knows that an order is going to get his men killed and does not stand before the Company Commander and state his piece is wrong. If the order stands, then the only other option is to lead the platoon from the front and take the first round. Unfortunately this is not the case because the point of departure here is sacrifice of your career or the sacrifice of the men who are depending on you to do the right thing. People at the decision making level that are driving the show are not going to hear the first shot fired that is going to take out the first troop and it is hard for me to accept that anyone watching the battle unfold on HDTV shot from a drone can feel the agony of the guy on the ground if he did not have the balls to ensure that he did all he could to provide him with the right tools and mix of folks required to do the job. It doesn't take a special kind of person to do that it is expected of any commander who is supposed to look to his troops and his mission but then, for the most part, I will agree with you that it takes a special kind of person that builds his career at the expense of his subordinates regardless of the cost. Let me end this before I get wound up. Rant over.

SF18C · 10-17-2006, 14:51

Okay I’ll start off with there is no love for Naylor, because I think he will (has) violate OPSEC to write a story, but I think he got this one pretty close to the truth.

The biggest thought on recruiting is SF ODA Team guys are not Rangers, they are not SEALs, they are not black Nomax and Velcro “Operators” SF Teams are a special breed with a very unique mission. You can’t walk off the street and be as 18 Series.

The only way they will get this many SF troops in this short time frame is (in my opinion): Lower the standards or start breeding SF babies in a special Warrior pre-school.

Quote:

In 2005 the Q Course graduated 791 enlisted SF soldiers, according to Nye, compared with 282 in 2001. The goal from now on is to graduate a minimum of 750 enlisted SF soldiers per year.

SF has always had the challenge of getting the right guys to volunteer…hey if we were a dime a dozen then I don’t think we would be Special! SF candidates must be self-motivate, must have the maturity, and must be committed to the team and mission. Our society doesn’t hold those personalities traits as the gold standard…everyone gets a trophy for trying, everyone is Special – in their own way, it is not PC to tell someone they are not good enough!

Quote:

A constant refrain of senior uniformed leaders in USASOC and SOCom over the past few years has been that any growth in Special Forces will not come at the expense of the traditionally high standards required to pass the Q Course. But there is widespread concern among SF NCOs, officers and retirees that the USASOC chain of command is already pressuring the cadre to lower standards.

To say they haven’t lowered standards is a complete crock…I’ve talked to too many SWC cadre.

18B…is failing FDC a releasable event?
18C…gotta calculator for the demo exam?
18D…can you name ALL those body parts and pills?
18E…how fast is that Morse code?

Does failing an exam twice get you sent to Korea or does it cause those committee OIC’s to “re-exam” the tests? To see if we are teaching the "right stuff" and validate the “we are not lowering standards” argument.

18X program…great idea on the small contingent of people in our society that would make a great SF team member but hadn’t considered the Army as a career choice. But it seems to me that is not what we are using it for.

Quote:

In fiscal 2005, 375 of the 791 active-duty enlisted graduates of the Q Course were products of the 18 X-ray program. This year the equivalent numbers were about 280 out of 750, according to Nye, who noted that USASOC had reduced the 18 X-ray recruiting goal for 2006 and again for 2007.

My 2¢ is that if these Senior Commanders and politicians (really one in the same) keep up this mentality in 10 years SF will be an over glorified Ranger BN, in competition with the SEAL teams for mission, money and members!

I think every commander of SF troop or organizations should have the SOF Truths tattooed on his chest in reverse…that way he could review them in the mirror every morning while he shaves!

Quote:

• Quality is better than quantity.
• Special operations forces cannot be mass produced.
• Competent special operations forces cannot be created after emergencies occur.
• Humans are more important than hardware.

Rant over...good luck SF!