|
|
Thread Tools |
06-29-2009, 11:38 AM | #7161 |
Hog Driver
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Georgia
Posts: 12,224
|
Quote:
So they're really SOCOM's infantry unit?
I think there's alot of redundancy in the military, lots of different units that do the same "job". There's alot of overlap between units of the different branches. When created it doesn't seem like the overlap was there, but nowadays... |
06-29-2009, 11:41 AM | #7162 |
#voteblackjack
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Northwood, NH
Posts: 35,754
|
I think it needs more specialization. Cut back on the redundancy. Each unit has a specific purpose and that's the only unit that serves that purpose.
__________________
Join the New England G.I. Joe Collector's Group: Battleforce New England Join the March of Cobra. Read the epic adventure on Kindle Worlds and visit the page to learn more. https://www.facebook.com/marchofcobra/ |
06-29-2009, 11:57 AM | #7163 |
Hog Driver
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Georgia
Posts: 12,224
|
Agreed. And perhaps making many units more well-rounded. For instance, they should just send everyone through Jump School. Understandably they can't make everyone go through Ranger School because of time (during times of war) and size (number of slots available) and the fact that the training is harder and not all will pass.
There should be a clearer hierarchy that allows the top graduates of BCT and AIT or OSUT to volunteer for more elite units like the Rangers and then SF and then SFOD-D and so on. So how are recruits selected to join various divisions anyway? Do they look at each recruit's score and let him make a list of preferences (75th, 101st, 82nd, etc) and the best recruits get their first choice depending on the need of each division/regiment? |
06-29-2009, 12:40 PM | #7164 |
Hog Driver
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Georgia
Posts: 12,224
|
I like the idea that divisions will no longer have an armor brigade, infantry brigade, engineer brigade and artillery element, but instead all brigades, except the Aviation Brigade, will have identical battalions.
Each brigade will have the following: 3 Combined Arms Battalions (CABs), 1 Non-Line-of-Sight (NLOS) Cannon Battalion, 1 Reconnaissance Surveillance and Target Acquisition (RSTA) Squadron, 1 Forward Support Battalion (FSB), 1 Brigade Intelligence and Communications Company (BICC), and 1 Headquarters Company. |
06-29-2009, 12:55 PM | #7165 |
#voteblackjack
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Northwood, NH
Posts: 35,754
|
Right, all recruits are Jump qualified. Then goes to "Rangers do this", "10th Mountain does this", "82nd does this" and so on..
__________________
Join the New England G.I. Joe Collector's Group: Battleforce New England Join the March of Cobra. Read the epic adventure on Kindle Worlds and visit the page to learn more. https://www.facebook.com/marchofcobra/ |
06-29-2009, 02:00 PM | #7166 |
EQ-Viper
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 4,343
|
All the hair-splitting and the nitpicking that determines who are worthy of the "Special Operations Forces" label (and the possible detrimental effects on personnel morale) is exactly what the USMC tried to avoid when they resisted designating any unit as special operations capable or even creating a dedicated contributory arm to USSOCOM (it was only in 2006, after much external and internal pressure, that the Corps finally designated MARSOC as it's official contribution to the USSOCOM effort... prior to that, they cooperated with and contributed personnel to USSOCOM on an "as-necessary" basis, or otherwise routed any Marines meant for USSOCOM assignment through NAVSOC/NAVSPECWAR).
It helps to think of "special operations forces" as not exactly being "better" than their non-SOF peers. It's just that their role is different. Whereas non-SOF units are geared towards conventional warfare (although these days, what exactly is "conventional" warfare is a bit nebulous), SOF personnel are trained specifically for low-intensity, occasionally indirect and non-kinetic, conflicts. But in truth and practice, there is a great crossover with regards to the skillsets found in the two communities. For example, in terms of a conventional foot patrol, an SF sergeant or a Ranger NCO would probably not offer much more in terms of capability than a Marine infantry unit leader or a "standard" Army Infantry NCO with comparable field experience. It's only when you get down to the context-specific stuff that SOF personnel will consistently differentiate themselves from the non-SOF brethren. In that sense, "special" is relative and is not a distinction that represents greater specialist knowledge. Many non-SOF personnel receive just as much, if not more specialty training than their SOF peers. I personally know of one Navy Gas Turbine Technician CPO who managed to get a competitive slot in NAVSOC/USSOCOM, ahead of other applicants with solid SEAL experience, primarily on his demonstrated real-world aptitude and accumulated training and experience. I'm not using that example to say that one community is better than the other, but I'm using it to say that there's a lot more parity to level of training and specialization available to the SOF and non-SOF community than most people think, and the "special" in special operations is more a designator of where that training and specialization is applied, and not a firm indicator that those assigned to special operations forces are in any consistently tangible way superior to their non-SOF counterparts. Part of the blame for SOF personnel being lionized to the excessive degree they currently are falls on the media, and part of it is the DoD's publicity machine's fault. Again, I hate having to always refer to John T. Reed's articles (it gives off the impression that I always take his word as the gospel truth, which I don't), but for my money, he's probably the best no-bullshit source when it comes "elite" units and their place in the Armed Forces firmament and serves as a good counter-perspective to what we get from more popular media sources. Just so we don't waste an inordinate amount of time discussing the guy's credentials, Reed is a 1968 West Point grad, graduated Ranger School in '68, and led an 82nd Airborne Division platoon in Vietnam. Anyway, here are some excerpts from one of the articles on his website: Quote:
‘Elite’ is a relative term One of the main things that bugs me about so-called “elite” military units is that they are leaving out the fact that “elite” is a relative term when used by the military. There are few truly elite units in the military by objective civilian standards. I would list the following as truly elite military units by any standards: * The faculty at the U.S. Military Academy (West Point—may be true of Annapolis and the Air Force Academy as well. I wouldn’t know. A guy I roomed with for two years when we were cadets was the commander of this unit in the early 2000s, that is, he was the Dean of the Academic Board at West Point.) * The Navy’s Blue Angels (fighter jet acrobatic demonstration team) * The Air Force’s Thunderbirds (fighter jet acrobatic demonstration team) * Navy nuclear submariners I have also been very impressed with the Green Berets, but I am not sure they are in the “elite” unit category. I think they are elite but the public image seems to be that they are more specialized than supermen. When I was in the Army they were more weird than “elite.” They had a high percentage of multi-lingual immigrants from foreign countries. When they needed a two-way radio, they bought it at a civilian store. (A current ranger/green beret says that’s not true. It was common knowledge when I was in the military which was long before the current guy.) The rest of the Army had to put in a requisition and wait five years. Because of their non-bureaucratic ways, I volunteered five times to join them. I was on orders to be transferred to 5th Special Forces Group (Green Berets) in Vietnam, but the orders were canceled for unknown reasons. My definition of “elite” would be that when you have those units compete with similarly trained civilians, the military would win. There was some sort of reality TV show a few years back that pitted teams in “iron men”-type races in various exotic locales around the world. As I recall, the Army Rangers and Navy SEALS always entered teams, but never beat the civilians. I think the above truly elite military units that I listed would generally defeat their civilian counterparts in a fair competition. So-called “elite” military units that I think are only “elite” in a relative sense compared to other military personnel would include: * SEALS * Rangers * Paratroopers Quote:
Not supermen ... The more dangerous problem is that the top civilian and military leaders seem to believe their own B.S. about the “elite” troops and demand more of them than they can perform. The Special Forces trying to hide in the desert during the daytime is one example of getting nutty about believing Rangers are real life Rambos. Another was the infamous Blackhawk Down incident in Mogadishu. That was a combination Ranger-Delta Force operation and about as stupid a plan as has ever been attempted in military history. Another plan—to rescue our hostages who were being held by Iranian students was even dumber and more disastrous in result. That was an “elite” Delta Force operation. Another Delta Force operation was brilliantly executed. That was the rescue of U.S. prisoners of war from Son-Tay North Vietnam. The problem there, as with the Pointe du Hoc operation, was a profound intelligence failure. The American prisoners had been moved out of the camp in question some time before we attacked. So we rescued no one and no other such rescue was possible after we tried the first because the enemy stepped up security as a result. These idiotic operations are apparently based on the notion that Rangers and other so-called “elite” forces are supermen. We are not. Ranger training prepared us to do ambushes, tiny hit-and-run combat operations, and reconnaissance patrols in enemy-infested areas as long as the weather was warm, there were no dogs, the population was sparse, and we had lots of thick vegetation to hide in by day. In the case of non-reconnaissance missions, we also need a way to be extracted quickly after we attack. If the patrol lasts more than a few days, we also need a way to be resupplied with food and water during the patrol. In any other situation, Rangers are just ordinary infantry with stronger motivation. You cannot, for example, drop Rangers onto the top of a building in densely-populated Mogadishu in broad daylight and expect them to survive or accomplish a difficult mission. Rangers were not trained to do that that. Nor could they have been. It was a suicide mission no matter who was assigned it and no special training could change that. Asking Special Forces to hide in the desert all day in Iraq near a civilian village before Desert storm was almost as dumb. There is an excellent comprehensive history of the Rangers and “Ranger-like” U.S. military units at http://www.ranger.org/history.html. The most successful Ranger operation in modern history appears to be the Raid at Cabanatuan which was the subject of the 2005 movie The Great Raid. Once again, the conditions for that raid were the ones I have stated repeatedly in this article are necessary for Ranger success: the weather was warm, there were no dogs, the population was sparse, and they had lots of thick vegetation to hide in by day. |
06-29-2009, 02:14 PM | #7167 |
#voteblackjack
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Northwood, NH
Posts: 35,754
|
Interesting article. Being classified as a "special" force does make people think they are better then the non-special forces, where in reality it's just more specialized training.
__________________
Join the New England G.I. Joe Collector's Group: Battleforce New England Join the March of Cobra. Read the epic adventure on Kindle Worlds and visit the page to learn more. https://www.facebook.com/marchofcobra/ |
06-29-2009, 02:24 PM | #7168 |
Hog Driver
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Georgia
Posts: 12,224
|
Zulu has it right. Well put! Combat engineers and medics for example are often recruited by SF to serve as Engineer Sgts and Medical Sgts, not because they're badasses with an MP5 or able to break necks with bare hands and perform outrageous feats of combat. One important role of a Green Beret is that of an instructor. He teaches others how to blow up a bridge or fire a LAW or adminster first aid, etc. They train indigenous, friendly militia or armies to engage the enemy through guerrila warfare or other means.
|
06-29-2009, 02:28 PM | #7169 |
Hog Driver
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Georgia
Posts: 12,224
|
However, I think they should have a clear structure of elite infantry--elite merely meaning that men receive harder, more advanced training, earn more combat experience, and learn a greater range of specialties as they ascend the elite infantry ladder. And those who reach the top of that ladder get the toughest assignments requiring their expertise and experience.
|
06-29-2009, 02:40 PM | #7170 |
#voteblackjack
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Northwood, NH
Posts: 35,754
|
Right. All infantry get the same training to a point (jump qualified), then it branches off to specialized: mountain warfare, airborne insertion, urban warfare/close quarters, etc..
__________________
Join the New England G.I. Joe Collector's Group: Battleforce New England Join the March of Cobra. Read the epic adventure on Kindle Worlds and visit the page to learn more. https://www.facebook.com/marchofcobra/ |
Thread Tools | |
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Please Help! Need filecards! | RockinHard | G.I. Joe Buy Sell Trade | 2 | 10-26-2008 06:14 PM |
Need filecards! | RockinHard | G.I. Joe Buy Sell Trade | 18 | 10-24-2008 09:17 PM |
Filecards Wanted!!!! | RockinHard | G.I. Joe Buy Sell Trade | 5 | 10-17-2008 10:25 PM |
Filecards Wanted! | RockinHard | G.I. Joe Buy Sell Trade | 5 | 10-05-2008 04:15 PM |
Quaid Spills Secrets on "G.I. Joe" | HissCommander | G.I. Joe News and Rumors | 108 | 10-01-2008 11:23 AM |
|
|
Recent Off Topic Threads |
Self Checkout apocalypse 3/26/24 |
Hisstank Late Night thread... |
Star Wars 3 3/4 discussion thread |
Last Movie You Watched? |
What song are you listening to? |