# MARINE SPECIAL OPERATORS BREAST INSIGNIA



## JARadar (Jun 11, 2017)

Are SARCs authorized to wear the MARINE SPECIAL OPERATORS BREAST INSIGNIA?


----------



## Hillclimb (Jun 12, 2017)

No.


----------



## JARadar (Jun 12, 2017)

Can SARCs go through the MARSOC A&S?


----------



## TLDR20 (Jun 12, 2017)

I think the answer to that is also no.


----------



## Teufel (Jun 12, 2017)

He accidentally hits on an excellent point though. SARCs are mission critical personnel in Raider units from the team to regimental level but cannot officially become Raiders because they remain Recon Corpsman assigned to MARSOC. They don't get to wear Raider insignia or use the Raider title even though I would argue they deserve both. This is what happens when you create a command over night and apply band aid solutions to your problems.


----------



## Hillclimb (Jun 13, 2017)

While we'd like to blanket and cover every issue in one request/swoop; shoving a list demands to HQMCs face is a sure way to get every one of them shot down.

Everything has been a long enduring battle, and it's just like the old addage of eating an elephant: One bite at a time. Looking back at 11 years we've created 3 Special Operations Battalions, the 0372 MOS, close loopd our SOOs, name change, regional alignment, MSOI device, etc. I don't think anyone denies there's plenty of changes still needed to be made, however at the end of the day, big Marine Corps has the final say. And us packaging one request at a time has a better chance of getting approved, than bombarding them with 20 things we need now.

Im sure sending Corpsman through ITC as an alternative to produce more SARCs, or have SARCs tailored more to our mission has been discussed; I just don't know where it's at. SARCs on the team's are Raiders to me: Device or not.


----------



## Scubadew (Jun 13, 2017)

Hillclimb said:


> While we'd like to blanket and cover every issue in one request/swoop; shoving a list demands to HQMCs face is a sure way to get every one of them shot down.
> 
> Everything has been a long enduring battle, and it's just like the old addage of eating an elephant: One bite at a time. Looking back at 11 years we've created 3 Special Operations Battalions, the 0372 MOS, close loopd our SOOs, name change, regional alignment, MSOI device, etc. I don't think anyone denies there's plenty of changes still needed to be made, however at the end of the day, big Marine Corps has the final say. And us packaging one request at a time has a better chance of getting approved, than bombarding them with 20 things we need now.
> 
> Im sure sending Corpsman through ITC as an alternative to produce more SARCs, or have SARCs tailored more to our mission has been discussed; I just don't know where it's at. SARCs on the team's are Raiders to me: Device or not.



While the SARC pipeline produces absolute studs it does so at a slow rate and demands that some graduates  go to Recon or Force as well as they need SARCs just the same. Have you heard more on MARSOC developing Raider docs from within? I know several guys who did a homegrown version vs the pipeline but the talks I've had sound like ITC + SOCM to produce a Raider corpsman would be very helpful for fielding numbers and that those members would attend insert schools just like CSO's do instead of being a required part of the pipeline (Ex. BRC/SOCM graduate taking a choke on water in dive and getting sent to a hospital and out of the pipeline entirely as it stands now).


----------



## Teufel (Jun 13, 2017)

Hillclimb said:


> While we'd like to blanket and cover every issue in one request/swoop; shoving a list demands to HQMCs face is a sure way to get every one of them shot down.
> 
> Everything has been a long enduring battle, and it's just like the old addage of eating an elephant: One bite at a time. Looking back at 11 years we've created 3 Special Operations Battalions, the 0372 MOS, close loopd our SOOs, name change, regional alignment, MSOI device, etc. I don't think anyone denies there's plenty of changes still needed to be made, however at the end of the day, big Marine Corps has the final say. And us packaging one request at a time has a better chance of getting approved, than bombarding them with 20 things we need now.
> 
> Im sure sending Corpsman through ITC as an alternative to produce more SARCs, or have SARCs tailored more to our mission has been discussed; I just don't know where it's at. SARCs on the team's are Raiders to me: Device or not.



I agree with what you are saying but there was a time when the Marine Corps could have covered all these issues in one fell swoop: at the very beginning. The Marine Corps entered into SOCOM reluctantly and largely without consistent guidance and direction. Col Bob Coates put together an excellent test unit that was well received in SOCOM but that experience was eagerly ignored in the creation of MARSOC. The Marine Corps slapped together a headquarters out of 4th MEB, threw two Force Recon Companies, the Foreign Military Training Unit, and some money into a pot and stirred it up. That's not the best way to do business. The right way to do business is to establish a 5-10 year plan phased growth model that would have clearly defined progressive milestones and goals to enable planners to resource the unit appropriately. MARSOC has done a great job building the airplane in flight but that's not the most efficient way to do things. The problem now is that HQMC looks at MARSOC as a finished product at this point. It's fully operational capable and it will be harder to change things now. Why fix it if it isn't broken? You may argue that it's still slightly broken but then again if it works it isn't broken... and then why fix it if it isn't broken? 

I have heard lots of talk about sending SARCs through ITC. It always goes back to the Navy. The Navy is slow to change and sees no reason to change the SARC NEC to suit MARSOC. MARSOC, however, could petition the Navy to allow SARCs serving at a Raider battalion to wear the Raider device. That's an easy change, just like how SARCs transitioned with Marines over to the Marine Combatant Dive Badge. POG 40 at PP&O helped coordinate that.  I bet you no one at POSOD has brought it up to the Navy though. 

Personally I thought that MARSOC should have treated the Raider Regiment like the Ranger Regiment and allowed all screened and selected personnel to become Raiders. Special Operations support personnel are all screened, albeit not the same level as CSOs, but that would have created a more inclusive culture and a more cohesive unit. Like it or not, a special operations support SIGINT, HET or EOD Marine is probably in higher demand to SOCOM than a CSO. Those Marines are in short supply and very high demand. I'm not a Raider and never will be so my opinion isn't relevant but it was something I talked about with some of my peers who went over to MARSOC.


----------



## Devildoc (Jun 14, 2017)

Teufel said:


> Your post.....



I don't know much about the end-user with SARCs (vis-à-vis Recon/MARSOC) or how they get distributed now, but I do know a thing or two about how Big Navy handles its personnel assigned to the Marines, and you are spot on with your assessment that it always goes back to the Navy and the Navy is reluctant to change.  I also agree from my comfy armchair that it seems like a better product and better value to run it like how Ranger Regt does it, but just as hidebound as the Navy is with tradition and loathe to change, the Marines seem equally so.*

*Disclaimer:  I have been totally out now for several years, so I don't know if the culture has moved at all from how it was.


----------



## The Hate Ape (Jun 14, 2017)

Scubadew said:


> While the SARC pipeline produces absolute studs it does so at a slow rate and demands that some graduates  go to Recon or Force as well as they need SARCs just the same. Have you heard more on MARSOC developing Raider docs from within? I know several guys who did a homegrown version vs the pipeline but the talks I've had sound like ITC + SOCM to produce a Raider corpsman would be very helpful for fielding numbers and that those members would attend insert schools just like CSO's do instead of being a required part of the pipeline (Ex. BRC/SOCM graduate taking a choke on water in dive and getting sent to a hospital and out of the pipeline entirely as it stands now).



Well on a positive note to this, due to the incredibly slow rate of production for SARCs and them getting sent out to Recon & MARSOC alike - they get a lot of deployments in on our side of the house. I knew a handful of SARCs with more deployments under their belt than most of the senior guys I was under, in summary: They get REALLY fucking good at what they do for a living.

We had a junior medic we tried getting into ITC, we called him "Rope" and we were all rooting for him - he hadn't finished his SARC Pipeline but he finished the 18 series medic course and was supposed to go back to complete his pipeline when he either got orders to another unit or went elsewhere.


----------



## Devildoc (Jun 14, 2017)

double tap


----------



## Teufel (Jun 14, 2017)

The Hate Ape said:


> Well on a positive note to this, due to the incredibly slow rate of production for SARCs and them getting sent out to Recon & MARSOC alike - they get a lot of deployments in on our side of the house. I knew a handful of SARCs with more deployments under their belt than most of the senior guys I was under, in summary: They get REALLY fucking good at what they do for a living.
> 
> We had a junior medic we tried getting into ITC, we called him "Rope" and we were all rooting for him - he hadn't finished his SARC Pipeline but he finished the 18 series medic course and was supposed to go back to complete his pipeline when he either got orders to another unit or went elsewhere.


Deployments are good but they can also wear guys down and destroy families. The SARC production vs demand ratio is frankly unsustainable.


----------



## Devildoc (Jun 14, 2017)

Teufel said:


> Deployments are good but they can also wear guys down and destroy families. The SARC production vs demand ratio is frankly unsustainable.



Witnessed this.  And since you had brought up a comparison to Ranger Regt for the Raiders, let me ask you this question:  do you see a model like that which NSW went to, sending Team guys (and not corpsmen) through medical training to be medics?  Would that add more medical assets and be better for Recon/MARSOC?  Or would it take Recon guys and CSOs out of the mix and make the community deficient on that side?  I don't know if I have an opinion on this, but throwing it out for discussion.


----------



## Hillclimb (Jun 14, 2017)

Can't speak much on the selection of support personnel or a system implemented like the Ranger Regiment. Personally, I don't think it'd be necessary. A lot of the enablers we get aren't 18 year olds straight out of boot. Most are experienced Corporals and Sergeants from the fleet and are a really proficient at their jobs.

Currently as it stands(and maybe @The Hate Ape can clear this up), you get a brief screening by the monitor, report to your BN, then complete your advanced school, SERE, and STC(intro/fam to common skills), and you are deployable as an enabler and will chop 180 days out to the team you're deploying with. If you suck or have a bad hallway reputation, the team probably will have heard and find ways to fire you before they deploy. Likewise, if someone has a good hallway reputation the team will try to grab you. Adding another selection type process is just another course to staff, and step between the team's getting their enablers, just so my S-1 admin clerk or embark specialist can go through an extra layer or screening.


----------



## Hillclimb (Jun 14, 2017)

Devildoc said:


> Witnessed this.  And since you had brought up a comparison to Ranger Regt for the Raiders, let me ask you this question:  do you see a model like that which NSW went to, sending Team guys (and not corpsmen) through medical training to be medics?  Would that add more medical assets and be better for Recon/MARSOC?  Or would it take Recon guys and CSOs out of the mix and make the community deficient on that side?  I don't know if I have an opinion on this, but throwing it out for discussion.



I don't ever see a CSO going to schools to become the team medic for a number of reasons


----------



## Gunz (Jun 14, 2017)

Hillclimb said:


> While we'd like to blanket and cover every issue in one request/swoop; shoving a list demands to HQMCs face is a sure way to get every one of them shot down.
> 
> Everything has been a long enduring battle, and it's just like the old addage of eating an elephant: One bite at a time. Looking back at 11 years we've created 3 Special Operations Battalions, the 0372 MOS, close loopd our SOOs, name change, regional alignment, MSOI device, etc. I don't think anyone denies there's plenty of changes still needed to be made, however at the end of the day, big Marine Corps has the final say. And us packaging one request at a time has a better chance of getting approved, than bombarding them with 20 things we need now.
> 
> Im sure sending Corpsman through ITC as an alternative to produce more SARCs, or have SARCs tailored more to our mission has been discussed; I just don't know where it's at. SARCs on the team's are Raiders to me: Device or not.




Amos did his best to make the elephant indigestible. I remember when he shot down the name change and emblem in '11.


----------



## Scubadew (Jun 14, 2017)

The Hate Ape said:


> Well on a positive note to this, due to the incredibly slow rate of production for SARCs and them getting sent out to Recon & MARSOC alike - they get a lot of deployments in on our side of the house. I knew a handful of SARCs with more deployments under their belt than most of the senior guys I was under, in summary: They get REALLY fucking good at what they do for a living.
> 
> We had a junior medic we tried getting into ITC, we called him "Rope" and we were all rooting for him - he hadn't finished his SARC Pipeline but he finished the 18 series medic course and was supposed to go back to complete his pipeline when he either got orders to another unit or went elsewhere.



And that last part is just the thing. Big Navy doesn't see a SOCM qualified HM who is needed, but instead they see an 8404 so they detail them as such.


----------



## Teufel (Jun 14, 2017)

Hillclimb said:


> Can't speak much on the selection of support personnel or a system implemented like the Ranger Regiment. Personally, I don't think it'd be necessary. A lot of the enablers we get aren't 18 year olds straight out of boot. Most are experienced Corporals and Sergeants from the fleet and are a really proficient at their jobs.
> 
> Currently as it stands(and maybe @The Hate Ape can clear this up), you get a brief screening by the monitor, report to your BN, then complete your advanced school, SERE, and STC(intro/fam to common skills), and you are deployable as an enabler and will chop 180 days out to the team you're deploying with. If you suck or have a bad hallway reputation, the team probably will have heard and find ways to fire you before they deploy. Likewise, if someone has a good hallway reputation the team will try to grab you. Adding another selection type process is just another course to staff, and step between the team's getting their enablers, just so my S-1 admin clerk or embark specialist can go through an extra layer or screening.



Papas and Christian both talked about calling everyone in the battalion a Raider, or at a minimum extending it to all SOCS Marines. I think Papas had a Raider Battalion at the time and Christian was inbound. I don't remember. In any event, the Raider Regiment didn't adopt that policy. I think they should have extended the Raider title and insignia to SARCs right off the bat. I'm not sure if they tried to or not.


----------



## Teufel (Jun 14, 2017)

Hillclimb said:


> I don't ever see a CSO going to schools to become the team medic for a number of reasons



The Marine Corps came extremely close to doing this though a few years ago. It's been discussed numerous times. I talked to Schuele and Dervin about it when they ran the MARSOC school house. The Navy will never produce enough SARCs to staff MARSOC and Recon. They don't even provide the Marine Corps with all the 8404s they are supposed to. MARSOC has a higher staffing goal than Recon so HQMC stiffs Recon on SARCs but even so MARSOC is still short. Scheule was talking about creating MARSOC medics to fill the gap. MARSOC convinced the Navy to send them partially trained SARCs instead and got BRC-SOCM 8404s.


----------



## The Hate Ape (Jun 15, 2017)

Hillclimb said:


> Can't speak much on the selection of support personnel or a system implemented like the Ranger Regiment. Personally, I don't think it'd be necessary. A lot of the enablers we get aren't 18 year olds straight out of boot. Most are experienced Corporals and Sergeants from the fleet and are a really proficient at their jobs.
> 
> Currently as it stands(and maybe @The Hate Ape can clear this up), you get a brief screening by the monitor, report to your BN, then complete your advanced school, SERE, and STC(intro/fam to common skills), and you are deployable as an enabler and will chop 180 days out to the team you're deploying with. If you suck or have a bad hallway reputation, the team probably will have heard and find ways to fire you before they deploy. Likewise, if someone has a good hallway reputation the team will try to grab you. Adding another selection type process is just another course to staff, and step between the team's getting their enablers, just so my S-1 admin clerk or embark specialist can go through an extra layer or screening.



Yes and no. As a SOCS I've seen the new wave of guys come from the school house (their actual MOS schools) and show up as PFCs, who in return, have the highest risk of liberty incidents and usually atleast 1 out of 4 won't make it out of the pipeline for those reasons alone. I just saw a few months back and more recently a no-shit, screening process, where people fly over from the west coast (two from Okinawa) just to screen here at the compound. I like this and hope they can figure a way out to boost the numbers because honestly, there's a lot of SOCS who are either getting out or moving onto something else.

The pipeline is always changing and it depends on the leadership at the support battalions because historically, the leadership at the MSOBs never put enough time into laying out a plan for the support units because, shockingly, they were engaged with conflict zones all over the world and their own training.

I came in just shy of 2012 where the training staff was pretty stacked with Force types and former 18 series guys who needed a break from training 0372 hopefuls for 9months at a time, also throw in some former T-Cell guy from various services (even our own) and you had a pretty wild course that changed almost every day because it was either too fast paced or too dumbed down. By the time they got it right (I was already deployed) someone scrapped the idea and STC went away for a while. Then it came back under someone else's direction and from what I understand it has never been the same. I don't know.

The best training I've received aside from real world was doing the workup with my first team. That team was led by some of the most well-versed and experienced individuals I have ever met in my life who were definitive members of the community during a golden-era.

I'm proud to have known them.

Regarding team assignments for SOCS, as someone with both a good and bad reputation in the hallways I can tell you personally that it boils down to how you perform on the team and where you are in the deployment workup. It is what it is but there is a drop-dead point where it hurts the team more to drop a guy late in the game before there's enough time in the workup to speed a SOCS up (especially a new one) with TTPs and getting him adjusted to his new found non-POG life.



Devildoc said:


> Witnessed this.  And since you had brought up a comparison to Ranger Regt for the Raiders, let me ask you this question:  do you see a model like that which NSW went to, sending Team guys (and not corpsmen) through medical training to be medics?  Would that add more medical assets and be better for Recon/MARSOC?  Or would it take Recon guys and CSOs out of the mix and make the community deficient on that side?  I don't know if I have an opinion on this, but throwing it out for discussion.



They honestly do not need the medical training to the extent of SARCS -

My aforementioned deployment involving the hospital corpsman who went to SOCM (attempting to get to ITC) also involved losing one of our own (our team chief) in the final months of being there. One of the main responders was an incredible CSO with exactly the calm, cool, and collected attitude one could only hope to produce in that situation. He administered the crike, the ketamine, managed the 9-line and mist on the radio and continued to work the area security alongside his fellow teammates. This guy was the biggest force multiplier I've ever met in my life and while he stands out in the crowd, it is a crowd of a similar company.

Most CSOs who get even a little experience are able to handle themselves in a TCCC scenario let alone any reactive medicine. SOCM teaches really advanced stages to the point where it would lose its intent in the mix of veterinarian skills, dentistry, running clinics and shit like that. Though I place a high value on SARCs and absolutely love them - I see it as a train the trainer sort of thing seeing as they're in charge of the team's medical training the entire workup, and medical ttps during the deployment.

I would however, be all about sending team members to the combat medic course offered at the higher tier level.



Teufel said:


> Papas and Christian both talked about calling everyone in the battalion a Raider, or at a minimum extending it to all SOCS Marines. I think Papas had a Raider Battalion at the time and Christian was inbound. I don't remember. In any event, the Raider Regiment didn't adopt that policy.



Correct, this was referenced thoroughly in 2014-2016 (everyone a raider) with a lot of satire. Personally, I don't consider myself a Raider and never will - it has nothing to do with my MOS and all to do with the fact that I am not permanently assigned here and constantly in the grind of this business (workups, training or deployments). This life will break you physically and mentally without warning, I'm proud of what I have accomplished here and grew under the people & places that challenged me. Nonetheless, I will leave this life very soon from now - the people I'm leaving behind are here forever, stuck in the grind; they traded in their economy class engines to do nothing short of a 150 mph at all times because that's the requirement.

Those guys are Raiders.



Teufel said:


> I think they should have extended the Raider title and insignia to SARCs right off the bat. I'm not sure if they tried to or not.



I don't know anyone who even wants to wear the device. Every SARC I associate with (about 5 or 6) speaks with a high level of pride in being known as a Reconnaissance Corpsman and a SOCM graduate even more. It's pretty easy to identify a SARC anyway - long ass fucking hair, sleeve tattoos and the bubble & wings. Too bad they're usually not in uniform and walking around in flip flops and RVCA shirts.


----------



## Devildoc (Jun 15, 2017)

The Hate Ape said:


> Your post...



Thanks for your insight.  To be sure when NSW went to its own source rating and took HMs out of the mix and started sending team guys to SOCM, it caused a great deal of consternation.  I could see it giving the Marines some indigestion as well if they had to send Marines to SOCM. 

Around the time MARSOC stood up, I knew a couple of the Master Chiefs in the detailer's shop, and they were all concerned about how to spread SARCs (and corpsmen in recon who were not SARCs) who were already spread thin to a new unit, diluting the manpower.

As to the device, like it or lump it, the Marines have been the last branch to dabble in bling.  @The Hate Ape is spot on; everyone but everyone knows what the bubble and wings are, and who wears them.  For swabbies who do like chest candy, there is a tremendous amount of pride with that which shows serving with the Marines...first with the FMF ribbon, then FMF warfare device, and certainly with the bubble/wings.


----------



## Ooh-Rah (Jun 15, 2017)

This has turned into one of those threads where I envision myself sitting at the bar with a few guys, just listening...and appreciating the wealth of knowledge being exchanged.


----------



## JARadar (Jun 15, 2017)

As a very new guy to this world... I very much appreciate all the insight.


----------



## Gunz (Jun 15, 2017)

Corpsmen with the original Raider units weren't officially Raiders either, although they humped the same courses. I'm sure their Marine brothers-in-arms considered them Raiders in everything but name. Corpsmen (and combat medics) are sacred to all of us who've gone into the fight with them.

James Gleason passed away last year in Tampa. He was a Navy Corpsmen with the Raiders in WWII and wrote a book about it. General Mattis had this to say about him:

_“I met Doc Gleason and he is made of the right stuff — a true Fleet Marine,” said James Mattis, a retired Marine general and former commander of U.S. Central Command. “‘Doc,’ who represented all the character and Gung-Ho that have made our Navy Corpsmen brothers so highly respected in the macho Marine Corps. Doc was a great sailor, fine friend and a true role model for us all. We will miss him terribly.”_

The Mad Dog didn't go as far as to call Gleason a Raider, but I don't think any Marine would object to a Raider Corpsman wearing the patch. They earned it even if they don't get to wear it on the uniform.


----------



## Red Flag 1 (Jun 15, 2017)

[Q


----------



## The Hate Ape (Jun 15, 2017)

@Ocoka about the Corpsman wearing a Raider emblem.

Some supplemental information to my previous post regarding our SARCs and Raiders - every SARC I know also unquestionably dons a Raider patch somewhere on their kit or drifire/crye cammies. This is - MOSTLY - immediately considered acceptable by 0372s.

Even for the ones who are not embraced right away, those guys are more quickly accepted into the circle than say - a SOCS who would have to wait until a deployment or two on the teams to even consider wearing a jack patch let alone consider themselves truly a part of the community.

Some people (SOCS) will whine about that statement or grumble at it - doesn't make it any less truthful. IMHO the situation is relative to perspective and the individual but the best rule of thumb concerning that stuff is if you have to ask someone whether you rate something or not then you probably already know the answer.


----------



## Devildoc (Jun 15, 2017)

@The Hate Ape, the jack patch is all-hands now, not just for NSW.

NSW can be very....cliquish.  They generally don't care much for non-NSW, no matter the contribution to the mission.  I found the Marines to be very accepting and inclusive once you prove you weight and worth.


----------



## Gunz (Jun 15, 2017)

Devildoc said:


> @The Hate Ape, the jack patch is all-hands now, not just for NSW.
> 
> NSW can be very....cliquish.  They generally don't care much for non-NSW, no matter the contribution to the mission.  I found the Marines to be very accepting and inclusive *once you prove you weight and worth*.



Once Marines know that you are willing to crawl through fire to get to their wounded, you walk on water and you'll be a sacred brother for life. I served with two Corpsmen whom I would fucking kill for. When one of them rotated a replacement came in and buried his head in the dirt during his baptism of fire and was gone the next morning. That was an extremely rare exception to the rule.

These special operations qualified Corpsmen, SARCs, combat medics, SF medics, PJs etc are some very special cats. If there was a church where I could pay homage to them, I'd be there every fuckin Sunday with a complimentary bottle of Johnny Black.


----------



## Grunt (Jun 15, 2017)

We always considered our "Docs" as being one of the team. It was that simple. For the most part -- with very rare exceptions -- they did everything we did. Yep...they were brothers!


----------



## The Hate Ape (Jun 15, 2017)

Devildoc said:


> @The Hate Ape, the jack patch is all-hands now, not just for NSW.
> 
> NSW can be very....cliquish.  They generally don't care much for non-NSW, no matter the contribution to the mission.  I found the Marines to be very accepting and inclusive once you prove you weight and worth.


 

Wrong jack. I'm referring to the raider jack specifically. The one pictured in the previous post.


----------



## DasBoot (Jun 15, 2017)

Ocoka said:


> Corpsmen with the original Raider units weren't officially Raiders either, although they humped the same courses. I'm sure their Marine brothers-in-arms considered them Raiders in everything but name. Corpsmen (and combat medics) are sacred to all of us who've gone into the fight with them.
> 
> James Gleason passed away last year in Tampa. He was a Navy Corpsmen with the Raiders in WWII and wrote a book about it. General Mattis had this to say about him:
> 
> ...


Side note- the number of SOF guys who retire in Tampa is mind boggling. And I mean beyond just guys who ended up there when they finished their careers at SOCOM- it's like every SOF savage decides to head down there when they hang it up.


----------



## Gunz (Jun 15, 2017)

DasBoot said:


> Side note- the number of SOF guys who retire in Tampa is mind boggling. And I mean beyond just guys who ended up there when they finished their careers at SOCOM- it's like every SOF savage decides to head down there when they hang it up.



Tampa has it's attractions.


----------



## Devildoc (Jun 15, 2017)

The Hate Ape said:


> Wrong jack. I'm referring to the raider jack specifically. The one pictured in the previous post.



Gotcha.  Good example of same language, two different meanings.


----------



## TLDR20 (Jun 15, 2017)

Devildoc said:


> I don't know much about the end-user with SARCs (vis-à-vis Recon/MARSOC) or how they get distributed now, but I do know a thing or two about how Big Navy handles its personnel assigned to the Marines, and you are spot on with your assessment that it always goes back to the Navy and the Navy is reluctant to change.  I also agree from my comfy armchair that it seems like a better product and better value to run it like how Ranger Regt does it, but just as hidebound as the Navy is with tradition and loathe to change, the Marines seem equally so.*
> 
> *Disclaimer:  I have been totally out now for several years, so I don't know if the culture has moved at all from how it was.



I don't really get your point here.

I don't know how you think Ranger Regiment does "it" but they have a much larger recruit pool to pull from and to be honest an easier pipeline. 

Ranger Regiment selects at RASP then either sends to SOCM or a dude gets RFS'ed before he gets there. After SOCM he goes back to regiment. Are you suggesting corpsman just go to A&S? If that is what you are suggesting I would agree, strongly. But that would not a SARC make. 

MARSOC needs to just make themselves ODA's. Make 4 different MOS's and take a regional responsibility, everything but SOUTHCOM is up for grabs;)

Also the way the SEALs did it is fucking stupid. They now create "medics" who want nothing to do with being a corpsman, and in fact aren't "medics" until after at least one "deployment". My use of quotes is intentional. Many of the new SEAL "medics", not old school dudes who were corpsman before,  can't even run platoon medical training themselves...


----------



## Devildoc (Jun 15, 2017)

TLDR20 said:


> I don't really get your point here.
> 
> I don't know how you think Ranger Regiment does "it" but they have a much larger recruit pool to pull from and to be honest an easier pipeline.
> 
> ...



I don't know why NSW did what they did, or why they did it.  Oh, some have tried to explain it to me, but it never made sense.  I agree with your last statement, and have said similar things.  

I have also thought it a good idea that HMs go to A&S, just as they have to go to BRC before going through the Recon pipeline.  So to that, I agree.


----------



## The Hate Ape (Jun 15, 2017)

TLDR20 said:


> I don't really get your point here.
> 
> I don't know how you think Ranger Regiment does "it" but they have a much larger recruit pool to pull from and to be honest an easier pipeline.
> 
> ...



We cant. One SF group is larger than all of our unit combined. To take the helm on the AOs, let alone dedicate ourselves beyond dividing the world into 3 parts is a shot in the foot. We can barely retain enough personnel as it is...


----------



## Teufel (Jun 15, 2017)

The Hate Ape said:


> We cant. One SF group is larger than all of our unit combined. To take the helm on the AOs, let alone dedicate ourselves beyond dividing the world into 3 parts is a shot in the foot. We can barely retain enough personnel as it is...


I talked to Col Schuele about this when he was the CO of the school house. He wanted to do what you're talking about but decided against it because MARSOC is too small to specialize like that.


----------



## The Hate Ape (Jun 16, 2017)

^Spot on Sir.

CSO retention has always been decent in comparison to the SOCS. Aside from SOCS not being permanent personnel, a portion of SOCS who are brought over as Sergeants tend to not reenlist either and/or are recruited heavily by T1/SMUs each year. The result is experience/personnel shortfalls at the companies & teams alike. IMHO MARSOC tries to lock down more AOs than it's personnel can man even currently.


----------



## TLDR20 (Jun 16, 2017)

The Hate Ape said:


> We cant. One SF group is larger than all of our unit combined. To take the helm on the AOs, let alone dedicate ourselves beyond dividing the world into 3 parts is a shot in the foot. We can barely retain enough personnel as it is...



You could regionally orient in terms of language, and deploying to the same A/O's. I'm not saying you should be taking over for SF...


----------



## The Hate Ape (Jun 16, 2017)

Yeah almost everyone hits up a language factor. The scope of the issue I'm suggesting isn't so much based on "taking over" for an ODA which would be an absurdity in a place where they're (SF) established (especially South America) but to even lock down on anything in particular. We're literally too small to commit to an AO outside of the Middle East and Africa and consistently rotate dudes in/out. Going back to language, this is why most dudes are learning Arabic and French dialects and shit because that's almost the only languages guaranteed to be used.

To keep the pace though, we marry up a lot with Tridents and you guys for the purpose of a consistent US presence in a given area obviously.


----------



## CDG (Jun 16, 2017)

TLDR20 said:


> Also the way the SEALs did it is fucking stupid. They now create "medics" who want nothing to do with being a corpsman, and in fact aren't "medics" until after at least one "deployment". My use of quotes is intentional. Many of the new SEAL "medics", not old school dudes who were corpsman before,  can't even run platoon medical training themselves...



This could easily be swapped for NSW JTACs.  The contractors who run the NSW JTAC schoolhouse aren't allowed to fail dudes for any reason, and their evals are a fucking joke.



Devildoc said:


> I don't know why NSW did what they did, or why they did it.



Because NSW thinks the only people in the entire world who matter are other NSW personnel.  They would rather have a SEAL who's a shitty medic/JTAC/whatever else, than have a stud at those jobs who doesn't have a Trident.


----------



## TLDR20 (Jun 16, 2017)

CDG said:


> This could easily be swapped for NSW JTACs.  The contractors who run the NSW JTAC schoolhouse aren't allowed to fail dudes for any reason, and their evals are a fucking joke.
> 
> 
> 
> Because NSW thinks the only people in the entire world who matter are other NSW personnel.  They would rather have a SEAL who's a shitty medic/JTAC/whatever else, than have a stud at those jobs who doesn't have a Trident.



The thing is they were good medics before. When I went through they were some of the best students. Now guys do it because they were told to.


----------



## CDG (Jun 16, 2017)

TLDR20 said:


> The thing is they were good medics before. When I went through they were some of the best students. Now guys do it because they were told to.



A big part of this is probably the fact that SEAL is its own rating (SO) now.  Up until 2008, even with a SEAL contract, you were going through an "A" school (equivalent of AIT) first.  There were, IIRC, 12 jobs you had to choose from if you wanted to sign a SEAL contract, you couldn't just show up as an unrated seaman/fireman/airman.   So they were getting dudes that had been through Corpsman school, and wanted to be medics along with being SEALs.  A natural progression is to keep those dudes in that line of training.  Now, unless it's a dude that was out in the fleet for awhile as a corspman, or FMF corpsman, guys are coming through BUD/S without any other training.  So you lose that natural slotting.


----------



## The Hate Ape (Jun 16, 2017)

CDG said:


> The contractors who run the NSW JTAC schoolhouse aren't allowed to fail dudes for any reason, and their evals are a fucking joke.


LMAO.


CDG said:


> Because NSW thinks the only people in the entire world who matter are other NSW personnel.  They would rather have a SEAL who's a shitty medic/JTAC/whatever else, than have a stud at those jobs who doesn't have a Trident.


I had different experiences - for one we (Marines) have always received a shit ton of love from Trident types. This has been either in Coronado training areas, San Diego dive bars or in Iraq. CCTs from the Air Force get mucho credit as well and are common attachments. Maybe that perspective is coincidental but it has held up since 2013ish for me.


----------



## CDG (Jun 16, 2017)

The Hate Ape said:


> LMAO.
> 
> I had different experiences - for one we (Marines) have always received a shit ton of love from Trident types. This has been either in Coronado training areas, San Diego dive bars or in Iraq. CCTs from the Air Force get mucho credit as well and are common attachments. Maybe that perspective is coincidental but it has held up since 2013ish for me.


I know several guys who have had great times out at bars with the Team dudes.  They seem to like having us around in training to provide inputs.  But, there is a reason NSW went away from having TACP/CCT attachments as JTACs on actual ops/deployments.  The last platoon I worked with had a ton of dudes that had been through the NSW JTAC course, just so they had plenty of options without having to use outside help, regardless of how proficient that outside help is.

ETA:  "They" refers to individual NSW JTACs, not platoons as a whole.


----------



## The Hate Ape (Jun 16, 2017)

When did this happen? TM3 was using CCT attachments when I was in Iraq 2015-16.


----------



## CDG (Jun 16, 2017)

The Hate Ape said:


> When did this happen? TM3 was using CCT attachments when I was in Iraq 2015-16.



It's not like it's an official policy, just how things have been trending and the general mindset of NSW in my experience, and what's been relayed from other dudes that have worked with them/worked at the NSW JTAC schoolhouse.


----------

