# Anonymous Letter Discussion and General Kurt Sonntags rebuttal (MERGED)



## twobare (Dec 2, 2017)

- MOD EDIT -

This is the link that General Sonntag is responding to:
Anonymous Letter

Rah'
*_*

_“To the Men and Women of the U.S. Army John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center and School,_

_Many of you have seen the anonymous letter calling into question the integrity of our training standards and the quality of the Soldiers being produced. Let me be clear, I would be proud to serve with each and every one of our Special Forces Qualification Course graduates, and I stand behind the quality of every Soldier we are sending to the operational force._

_The U.S. Army Green Berets have been at the tip of the spear in defense of our nation for more than 70 years. The U.S. Army John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center and School, the proponent for Special Forces, is charged with professional training and development of the force throughout a Soldier’s career._

_Since 1952, Soldiers seeking to enter Special Forces have attended a qualification course to learn advanced warrior skills. In 1988, a Special Forces Assessment and Selection (SFAS) was introduced to the course, which was based on the Assessment and Selection process of the Office of Strategic Services. SFAS evolved into a proven, challenging process that allows the regiment to better predict a candidate’s ability to succeed in training as well as operate successfully in their respective operational environment. The consistent achievements of our operational force across the globe is a testament to the quality of the effectiveness of the assessment, selection, and training model._

_The SFAS process ensures candidates successfully demonstrate the qualities of the Army Special Operations Force Attributes under dynamic and stressful conditions. To join the Special Forces Regiment, each candidate must demonstrate they possess the required strength, cognitive flexibility, and willpower to thrive in challenging and uncertain Special Operations environments. Students are evaluated using a holistic and multidiscipline approach, supported by a range of military and scientific experts to include psychologists, physiological experts and experienced combat veterans who select candidates who are physically strong, mentally tough and possess the character necessary to serve in the regiment._

_If SFAS is correct, and we believe it is, the SFQC is not a place where high attrition rates should occur. Instead, the mission of the SFQC cadre is to train to standard. Without a doubt, if you were to take five Green Berets who attended the course at different periods of time, none of them would have had to meet the same standard as those Soldiers who are now in the course. Since 9/11, the SFQC has had at least eight significant modifications, each resulting in new or modified Tasks, Conditions, & Standards throughout the respective programs of instruction. These modifications are made to keep training relevant, efficient and effective, with the needs of the operational force driving each one. Today, the SFQC consists of six distinct phases (Orientation, Small Unit Tactics/Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape (SERE), Military Occupational Specialty, Unconventional Warfare, language and graduation; followed by Military Free Fall training), which takes a minimum of 62 weeks in length if a candidate is not recycled._


_Let me address some of the concerns in the anonymous letter._

_– No fundamental SF standard has been removed._

_– No academic or character performance standards have been adjusted._

_– Previously, the Special Forces Physical Fitness Assessment (instituted as a ‘must-pass’ standard in 2012), rope climb, and ruck march were evaluated in the first phase of SFQC. Cadre will continue to administer diagnostic evaluations of these events throughout the SFQC with the final evaluation occurring in the last phase of the course. This shift gives the Cadre more time to prepare the students for these events. Students must meet these standards prior joining the operational force._

_– Training in the SFQC remains among the most difficult in the Department of Defense. In 2017, more than 2,000 Soldiers attempted SFAS and 541 graduated the SFQC._

_– I value our Cadre’s input and have not, and will not, issue a gag order. The CSM and I have visited each unit and conducted more than 10 town hall meetings with each subordinate unit within this command. We will continue to solicit feedback from each and every individual. My open door policy remains in effect._


_– Language and cultural awareness training remain an essential part of the qualification course. All students must achieve a 1+/1+ rating in their assigned language before entering the operational force; which is above the operational force minimum standard of 1/1. Up until 2006, students earned their Green Beret after successful completion of Robin Sage._

_– As an institution, SWCS has moved language instruction several times to optimize the flow of course instruction. I’ve recently adjusted the phasing of the SFQC, by moving graduation ahead of language training. By doing this, Soldiers who are already language qualified go directly to the Operational Groups after attending the Military Free Fall School; while those who are not qualified will attend language school and MFF before going to their Group assignment._

_We work closely with 1SFC (A) leadership to ensure we are producing the Green Berets needed by the 1st SFC (A), and to the standards to which they need them trained. As we speak to Operational Groups, we consistently receive positive feedback._

_– “They are well-trained, physically fit, and ready to join their teams from day one.”_

_– “Highest quality graduates we’ve seen in years.”_

_1st SFC (A) sets the standard and SWCS trains, coaches and mentors the students to achieve them. SWCS has always produced highly-qualified Soldiers who meet the expectations of the operational formations as they tend to the Nation’s business. That will not stop. Every decision is made, not only by looking forward, but with the utmost respect for our Special Forces legacy, to ensure we maintain the integrity and standards of those who have come before us._


_As the operational environment changes, we will continue to adjust instruction to fulfill our obligation to produce fully-qualified Army Special Operations Soldiers. Some of the comments in the email warrant further evaluation, and we are doing that through formal inquiries and a number of existing institutional forums._

_Let me reiterate, CSM Arrowsmith and I seek healthy dialogue as a means of improvement. Every level of the command has been encouraged to challenge the current process, phasing and training methodology to ensure SWCS’ training remains relevant to meet the needs of the 1st SFC (A). Training at SWCS will continue to evolve to meet the needs of the Army. We will remain relevant while upholding the highest academic, military and physical standards. SWCS strives for a professional, rewarding experience for its students, cadre and families.”_



The article pertains to *Special Forces, but is this an issue plaguing other special operation forces?


----------



## amlove21 (Dec 2, 2017)

These issues are constantly on the forefront of every schoolhouse and training program in the military- not just SOF. For SOF, yes, the volume gets turned up on a lot of these because they're wrapped up in the Id and Ego of those that work there. Maintaining standards, personal accountability, adherence to a proud tradition of training and training the right way- these aren't just things we say in mission statements they're tenets and pillars of every SOF culture and something the individuals in that culture personally identify with. For a lot, those things are the very reasons why you signed up in the first place.

I want to point out that none of the claims made in the anonymous email have been substantiated. A lot of us on the board here have friends that work at the school, friends that just graduated, etc., and at least for me a couple of the reactions have been mixed. Like with everything else, "truth" lies on the midline of a lot of differing accounts.

In the end, decisions can get made at the command level that the Instructor staff feels are wrong. Instructors are typically very motivated and doing the instructor gig because they care deeply about the community and want to make it better. Sometimes, command can make a call that the instructors don't agree with and those deeply bought in Alpha type dudes see it as a personal affront, or an affront to the community or history or the standards or whatever. And neither side is technically wrong; and neither side is technically right, either.

ETA- Spelling, cause I haz the dum


----------



## Teufel (Dec 2, 2017)

I know that everyone reads the SOF truths but sometimes commanders have a fuzzy recollection of them when they are trapped inside the gap that often exists between graduation rates and manpower requirements. Especially when they usually evaluated against tangible factors like throughput goals.


----------



## amlove21 (Dec 3, 2017)

Teufel said:


> I know that everyone reads the SOF truths but sometimes commanders have a fuzzy recollection of them when they are trapped inside the gap that often exists between graduation rates and manpower requirements. Especially when they usually evaluated against tangible factors like throughput goals.


This.

Now, imagine if you will, that the commanders we are speaking of are not actually beret wearing special operators. Imagine, instead, that those commanders _might not even know those SOF truths, and are only concerned with student throughput. _

Not to derail the thread, but that's my life.


----------



## Raksasa Kotor (Dec 3, 2017)

amlove21 said:


> This.
> 
> Now, imagine if you will, that the commanders we are speaking of are not actually beret wearing special operators. Imagine, instead, that those commanders _might not even know those SOF truths, and are only concerned with student throughput. _
> 
> Not to derail the thread, but that's my life.



We're dealing with a similar issue. Our MQC was completely shut down a few years ago when a previous AFSOC CC tried to divest our capability. When he retired, we were directed to switch back to our primary mission set - but there was no operational pause. MQC was turned back on nearly overnight, but severely curtailed in the interest of throughput. Assessment and selection was non-existent at first, and primarily administrative later. We've since managed to shuffle most of the folks hired during that period off to other assignments, but we're still feeling ripple effects.

The unit owns A&S, and it has since been completely overhauled into something appropriate. MQC however, is owned by another organization (that also runs courses for other mission sets) - and continues to be a slow fight.


----------



## amlove21 (Dec 3, 2017)

Raksasa Kotor said:


> We're dealing with a similar issue. Our MQC was completely shut down a few years ago when a previous AFSOC CC tried to divest our capability. When he retired, we were directed to switch back to our primary mission set - but there was no operational pause. MQC was turned back on nearly overnight, but severely curtailed in the interest of throughput. Assessment and selection was non-existent at first, and primarily administrative later. We've since managed to shuffle most of the folks hired during that period off to other assignments, but we're still feeling ripple effects.
> 
> The unit owns A&S, and it has since been completely overhauled into something appropriate. MQC however, is owned by another organization (that also runs courses for other mission sets) - and continues to be a slow fight.


Frustrating, isn't it? 

I feel the pain of the SWCS instructors "trying to do the right thing" and having a difference of opinion (not to disparage what @TLDR20 said about how endemic the problem is) with their command. If there is some goodness to be had, it's at least you all learn together and you can all make your culture better. 

But it's even worse when you have instructors pounding a table saying "THIS ISN'T THE WAY WE DO THINGS!!!" and having those decisions flow from people that have literally zero experience.


----------



## DA SWO (Dec 3, 2017)

Raksasa Kotor said:


> We're dealing with a similar issue. Our MQC was completely shut down a few years ago when a previous AFSOC CC tried to divest our capability. When he retired, we were directed to switch back to our primary mission set - but there was no operational pause. MQC was turned back on nearly overnight, but severely curtailed in the interest of throughput. Assessment and selection was non-existent at first, and primarily administrative later. We've since managed to shuffle most of the folks hired during that period off to other assignments, but we're still feeling ripple effects.
> 
> The unit owns A&S, and it has since been completely overhauled into something appropriate. MQC however, is owned by another organization (that also runs courses for other mission sets) - and continues to be a slow fight.





amlove21 said:


> Frustrating, isn't it?
> 
> STTS?
> 
> ...



2 AF?


----------



## Raksasa Kotor (Dec 3, 2017)

DA SWO said:


> 2 AF?


 
Not in our case; still within AFSOC.


----------



## DA SWO (Dec 3, 2017)

Raksasa Kotor said:


> Not in our case; still within AFSOC.


STTS or the new SOW?


----------



## x SF med (Dec 4, 2017)

With the current situation, I fully understand the reasoning behind the need for the "Quiet Professionalism" desired by SOF before the GWOT.  The lack of general knowledge about the SOF and SMU units was a from of defense against the usurpation of training and standards by a politicized leadership. the lack of large scale media exposure (for the most part) was a from of camouflage from the public.  From the 1950s to late 1990s very few non military people were even aware of the SOF units and their capabilities.  Political leaders brought the media attention to these units in order to advance their careers, and since the media was involved, these units became a target for scrutiny by the uninitiated...  a recipe for disaster.  As the media circus grew rings, 'leaders' caved, instead of saying GTFO of my AO.  Instead they said "Come and see the dogs and ponies, they're trained."

It spirals down from there... 

Just my .02


----------



## Raksasa Kotor (Dec 4, 2017)

DA SWO said:


> STTS or the new SOW?



371 SOCTS runs the course under 492 SOW, but they inherited the problem from the early AFSOAWC days. There has actually been positive progress under the new SOW, but we have a long way to go.


----------



## ProbablyJustawannabe (Dec 15, 2017)

U.S. Army Green Berets Accused From Within Of Lowering Standards

 I found this article pretty interesting. Since this forum bears a reasonable amount of anonymity, I was wondering if anyone near or in the career had any thoughts of their own on this?

How Special Forces Bury the True Cost of America's Wars

This article seems to tag along nicely, accusing the blanket (special operating forces) of accepting simply more bodies, “[Special Operations Forces] have doubled in size and been deployed more often and for longer periods than ever before." as well as mentioning “SOF has become the US version of the French Foreign Legion,” said an Army Special Forces sergeant with over 25 years of service—who requested anonymity as he did not have permission to speak to the press. He was referring to the quasi-mercenary French military force that is separate from its national army and made up almost exclusively of non-French citizens. “The legion being ultimately a force that is not French. Ma and Pa in Paris or wherever, they don’t care if a bunch of Legionnaires get killed somewhere around the world because they’re not French anyway. That’s what SOF is like now.”  and the above article a few remarks from anon-Green Berets stating similar things but directly about SF.

Search button....

Threads merged.


----------



## AWP (Dec 15, 2017)

My computer is being stupid....

Anyway, here's the thread. I'm locking this unless another staff member wants to merge the threads.

Thoughts on General Kurt Sonntags email


----------



## Ooh-Rah (Dec 16, 2017)

AWP said:


> Anyway, here's the thread. I'm locking this unless another staff member wants to merge the threads.



Since the OP started his duplicate thread with Links that are not part of this origional thread, I've merged them.


----------



## 256 (May 5, 2018)

Ocoka said:


> Grieving families lash out. Hindsight is 20/20. Mistakes were made. But one AC130 flying overwatch might've made the difference.



I’m going to guess that the whole mission in Africa is much bigger than we’re seeing, for good reason. Big assets bring big attention. Not so much from the media/news stand point. But when an asset gets pullled for something “more important” people start asking questions, then news outlets figure it out through their contacts/connections. 

Anonymous Letter

I read the above letter. It’s pretty scary what some of the SF community are saying about their own community. Related to this incident or not, I have no idea. It’s way out of my league, but it made me wonder.


----------



## TacoTraplord (May 5, 2018)

256 said:


> I’m going to guess that the whole mission in Africa is much bigger than we’re seeing, for good reason. Big assets bring big attention. Not so much from the media/news stand point. But when an asset gets pullled for something “more important” people start asking questions, then news outlets figure it out through their contacts/connections.
> 
> Anonymous Letter
> 
> I read the above letter. It’s pretty scary what some of the SF community are saying about their own community. Related to this incident or not, I have no idea. It’s way out of my league, but it made me wonder.



Reading the first few pages of that letter all I can think is: "sounds like the military as a whole"...


----------



## TacoTraplord (May 5, 2018)

CDG said:


> You are basing this on what? What they said in the explanatory article they released after the blowback from releasing the video?



I don't remember an article. I think it was just a response to someone asking why they released it.


----------



## DZ (May 5, 2018)

TacoTraplord said:


> That "oversized logo" was to cover up the flag that was watermarked on the video, they also removed the audio because there was music in the form of propaganda and fake screams edited into the video.



Sofrep can try and spin it any way they want, at the end of the day they reposted terrorist propaganda with their logo on it in hopes of bolstering their companies revenue. Fuck sofrep.


256 said:


> Anonymous Letter



The author of that letter (who called out operational SF guys by name, but decided to remain anonymous.) is clearly biased. IUW didn't exist 10 years ago, and now it's suddenly foundational to the training of every generation of Green Berets? Like most things, the truth lies somewhere in the middle.

ETA: I went through IUW when gates and land nav were actually graded ie got you recycled for failing (which happened to close to half of my class), instead of how it is now. So I'm not just saying the above out of defense. I think there are problems, I just don't think it's as severe as portrayed in the letter.


----------



## 256 (May 5, 2018)

DeadZeppelin said:


> Sofrep can try and spin it any way they want, at the end of the day they reposted terrorist propaganda with their logo on it in hopes of bolstering their companies revenue. Fuck sofrep.
> 
> 
> The author of that letter (who called out operational SF guys by name, but decided to remain anonymous.) is clearly biased. IUW didn't exist 10 years ago, and now it's suddenly foundational to the training of every generation of Green Berets? Like most things, the truth lies somewhere in the middle.




Ok, he’s biased. But who else would you want to give their opinion on this subject but the NCOs in charge of the selection and assessment process? It seems to me (very little military experience), a guy working in the school house would know if the process isn’t excelling like it should.

When a document like that is intentionally put out, they want people in power’s attention, right? Not only that, you can say it’s anonymous all you want, but the people in that community know what NCO(s) put that shit out. So they took great risk to their career and life style for that information (their opinion) to come out. Probably because they are passionate about the men/teams who they are sending men to. Who would know better if the process is working or not? Certainly isn’t me, it’s only the people involved. My take on the letter (my opinion only) it seems like a cry for help, not a badge protection. We’re not talking about a EIB here (I’ve seen a lot of EIB badge protecting nonsense). We’re talking about the men in place complaining that they MUST put guys through because the demand for unconventional Warfare is so high. SOF (Army SF specifically; direct action, training other nation’s armies, reconnaissance, and name 5 other things) has a very demanding mission set. I’m only curious if members of that community see things happening that these NCOs put out in their 14 page letter. Is there real mission evidence showing lacking skills as put out in the letter? I’m not asking for details or even a yes or no, just my general curiosity.

What the soldiers/commanders/TL did or didn’t do isn’t anyone’s business unless you’re part of that community OR/ARE in a place to be able to correct the shortcomings.


----------



## AWP (May 5, 2018)

DeadZeppelin said:


> Sofrep can try and spin it any way they want, at the end of the day they reposted terrorist propaganda with their logo on it in hopes of bolstering their companies revenue. Fuck sofrep.
> 
> 
> The author of that letter (who called out operational SF guys by name, but decided to remain anonymous.) is clearly biased. IUW didn't exist 10 years ago, and now it's suddenly foundational to the training of every generation of Green Berets? Like most things, the truth lies somewhere in the middle.



Agree on sofrep.

We've had a few SF members in good standing here echo the author's comments about the process and personnel mentioned. Is the truth in the middle? Perhaps. Not being involved but trusting the word of people I have no reason to doubt, I tend to err on the side of the author. Knowing your background I won't dispute any difference of opinion on this topic, I'll leave that to a team room and 18 series better equipped to handle the discussion. Unless proven otherwise, my otusider's opinion is biased towards the letter's author.

Also, fuck sofrep.

ETA: we have a thread or two on the letter, so we should probably take any discussion on it out of this thread.


----------



## 256 (May 5, 2018)

Was this added to an already started thread or a new one? I can’t find the other threads about it.


----------



## Ooh-Rah (May 5, 2018)

256 said:


> Was this added to an already started thread or a new one? I can’t find the other threads about it.


@256 - I've tried to merge the discussions as much as I could find them.

Rah'


----------



## Ooh-Rah (Jan 16, 2019)

Two Army Green Berets are fighting for their military careers after being associated with an anonymous email that accused their commanders of lowering standards to enable more soldiers — particularly female — to graduate from its prestigious Q-course.

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/...er-anonymous-email-exposed-lowered-standards/


----------



## Cookie_ (Jan 16, 2019)

Ooh-Rah said:


> Two Army Green Berets are fighting for their military careers after being associated with an anonymous email that accused their commanders of lowering standards to enable more soldiers — particularly female — to graduate from its prestigious Q-course.
> 
> https://www.breitbart.com/politics/...er-anonymous-email-exposed-lowered-standards/
> View attachment 26012



I know my knowledge of separation regulations isn't the strongest, but since when can you get discharged because of a GOMOR?



> In December, both Robertson and Squires received word that their GOMORs would stay on their files permanently. And just last week, both were told they were being discharged from the military within 60 days.


----------



## Ranger Psych (Jan 16, 2019)

Cookie_101st said:


> I know my knowledge of separation regulations isn't the strongest, but since when can you get discharged because of a GOMOR?



If you're Indef, pretty sure you're needs of the army when it comes to retention.


----------



## Cookie_ (Jan 16, 2019)

Ranger Psych said:


> If you're Indef, pretty sure you're needs of the army when it comes to retention.



Didn't think of that (it's early here). Looking through the regs/policies;

-The GOMOR triggers the QMP board
-QMP finds SM does not warrant retention
-SM is informed of denial of continued service
-SM has 60 days to submit appeal to their CO. A CO (LTC or higher) has 120 days to submit an appeal on SM's behalf 
-CO has 30 days from receipt of appeal to submit to USAREC
-If SM denies appeal or appeal is denied, they will receive pre-separation counseling
-Discharge will occur 90 days after the Soldier receives pre-separation counseling as required by law (10 USC 1142)


----------



## Box (Jan 16, 2019)

Ok... who wants to be the NEXT troop to question the standards?


----------



## ThunderHorse (Jan 16, 2019)

Isn't the Army trying to expand right now and missing recruiting numbers?


----------



## Box (Jan 16, 2019)

I don't think the Army is trying to expand.  Recruiting problems - absolutely - but based on the view from my foxhole, there is more trimming than there is growing.

The problem is more 'nuanced' than just expanding or not expanding.  When the conventional force trims their numbers - it generally signals a "slight" expansion of SOF troops to make up the difference.
Force multipliers and all that jazz....

The trick is - when the conventional force starts to trim down, it shrinks the recruiting pool for SOF.  It's neat to suggest that we'll just focus on 18X expansion but the truth is, you cant really have a well rounded SOF element that is built form raw recruits.  You NEED service experience to tie things together and when there just aren't that many folks coming into the 'big' Army - there aren't that many folks leaving 'big Army' to join SOF.
As a result - this thing we call 'standards' will begin to dip.

Senior leaders and the troops themselves will lie to themselves and say cute things like - "its harder now than ever before" but most of those people don't spend much time looking at themselves in the mirror every morning.  The other failure is the false truth that "If SFAS is correct, AND WE THINK IT IS, then there is no reason that people should fail the SFQC"

That is an ignorant and arrogant way of pretending that YOUR ideas are the right ideas.  Humor me by considering these two similar but different imaginary troops:
  -One troop can run fast and lift heavy things - they can work through a little pain and discomfort - they don't mind being a little tired and hungry - they are not dragged down by stress - they are intelligent - most important, they can be trusted to think on their feet when things get a little crazy.
These folks will excel at SFAS.
  -One troop runs fast - lifts heavy things - feels no pain - never gets tired - doesn't feel stress - they can think on their feet but the results are usually fleeting; if you press them for TOOOO long the truth will come out - they are just bullshit artists in peak physical condition.  They are hyper competitive but generally only "tolerate" the other guys on the team because the rest of the team doesn't measure up.
Sadly - these folks will ALSO generally do well in SFAS.


*BUT BUT BUT* - you said "_If SFAS is correct, AND WE THINK IT IS, then there is no reason that people should fail the SFQC_"

Well........
SFAS only has a limited time to "weed out" people like Dennis Rodman.  SFAS only has a brief amount of time to watch Terrell Owens before he goes to an ODA and begins to openly talk shit about every single Team Sergeant that he ever works for.  SFAS doesnt have time to wait until someone like Jonathan Papelbon blames everyone INCLUDING THE BAT BOY for the teams performance while accepting none of his own shortcomings.  SFAS doesn't have time to babysit Olympic Swimmers that get arrested for vandalizing public bathrooms.  SFAS is just there to make sure that you are trainable - it was designed to keep folks from PCS'ing to fort Bragg and then QUITTING as an easy way to get stationed on Ft Bragg.

Senior Leaders can pretend that SFAS only needs a couple of weeks to weed-out the folk that simply DON'T MAKE GOOD TEAM MATES - but that is nothing more than proof of their hubris.  On the other hand, the instructors that follow "select-ees" through rest of training are the ones that find out that the guy that runs fast, lifts heavy things, feels no pain, and never gets tired is also a shit bird.  The instructor cadre are the ones that watch these jokers OVER TIME in a way that completes the picture. 

It would seem that some leaders know better than their SME's - maybe - maybe not - but clearly, something is wrong - something is not working the way it should be or we wouldn't be having "Town Hall" meetings that focus on poor discipline.  We certainly wouldn't be reading formal letters from Service Secretaries and GO's that remind us NOT to act like shit bags!!

...because "_if SFAS works (AND WE THINK IT DOES)_" then SFAS would weed out all of these clowns before they had a chance to do fucked up shit.
AMIRIGHT?

The fully trained SF soldier that comes out the back end of the SFQC should be a work of art - a _portrait_ if you will.
SFAS doesnt paint the portrait - SFAS is just a fucking snap shot.

Senior leaders might want to consider that very possibility.  Maybe even - you know - listen to their instructors....


----------



## ThunderHorse (Jan 16, 2019)

Box said:


> I dont think the Army is trying to expand.  Recruiting problems - absolutely - but based on the view from my foxhole, there is more trimming than there is growing.


https://www.armytimes.com/news/your...ment-here-are-3-things-soldiers-need-to-know/
Well, HQDA says they're trying to expand, how well they're executing that is a separate question.


----------



## Devildoc (Jan 16, 2019)

ThunderHorse said:


> https://www.armytimes.com/news/your...ment-here-are-3-things-soldiers-need-to-know/
> Well, HQDA says they're trying to expand, how well they're executing that is a separate question.



The Army is as bipolar as my last girlfriend...raising standards in order to 'right-size', not wanting to grow, but wants to grow the right way, really needs people in SOF, lowering standards for women....


----------



## Marauder06 (Jan 16, 2019)

"...just last week, both were told they were being discharged from the military within 60 days."

I'm not 100% sure this is an accurate timeline.  If it is...


----------



## Cookie_ (Jan 16, 2019)

Marauder06 said:


> "...just last week, both were told they were being discharged from the military within 60 days."
> 
> I'm not 100% sure this is an accurate timeline.  If it is...



I had to look up all the QMP/seperation regs, because that seemed off. I always thought it was 90 days; by regs, it's NLT 90 days.

If they've truly both been informed they are being separated, I'd be attempting to use all the time I have available by regulation to submit my appeal.

They're chances of winning are basically non-existent, but that would extend their time before separation by roughly 60-90 days


----------



## Cookie_ (Jan 16, 2019)

Box said:


> I don't think the Army is trying to expand.  Recruiting problems - absolutely - but based on the view from my foxhole, there is more trimming than there is growing.
> 
> The problem is more 'nuanced' than just expanding or not expanding.  When the conventional force trims their numbers - it generally signals a "slight" expansion of SOF troops to make up the difference.
> Force multipliers and all that jazz....
> ...



There isn't a love icon anymore, but I'd love this if I could.

The Army (and every other branch, I'm sure) has a serious issue with placing "PT/ability to suck it up" above everything else. 

You can get most anyone to a high PT standard, or get them to become comfortable with the uncomfortable; it's a lot harder to teach humility, critical thinking, teamwork, etc.


----------



## Centermass (Jan 16, 2019)

> Gentlemen,
> 
> You have been brought here today so that we can solicit your candid and honest points of view with regards to training and standards.....
> 
> Thank you for your honesty and answers. You're fired.


----------



## Centermass (Jan 16, 2019)

Cookie_101st said:


> I know my knowledge of separation regulations isn't the strongest, but since when can you get discharged because of a GOMOR?



Low hanging fruit Brother. That's the long and short of it when it comes to retention.

Both of these NCO's need to file appeals to the Department of the Army Suitability Evaluation Board (DASEB).

It's on record that in one breath, Sonntagg says that he values the training staff’s input and has not, “and will not, issue a gag order.” But, in his next breath, and as a matter of clear and obvious retaliation in response to his butt hurt over the allegations, refuses the request for a trial by CM and defaults to that dirty little secret weapon known as a GOMOR. It's a bullshit workaround to silence someone or get even, without any evidentiary procedure, that should have been abolished long ago.


----------



## Marauder06 (Jan 16, 2019)

This is a very interesting case.  I read back through the articles to try to make sure I understand everything going on.

Regardless of the situation inside SWCS,  the author(s) of that letter probably deserved an Art15, GOMOR, and/or a ticket out of the Army.  What's interesting to me is that these two Green Berets say they weren't involved.  If that's the case, it seems kind of crappy to cashier them on an allegation that they were developing an app (or whatever) on Army time, unless there's a whole lot more to it than that.


----------



## DA SWO (Jan 16, 2019)

Marauder06 said:


> This is a very interesting case.  I read back through the articles to try to make sure I understand everything going on.
> 
> Regardless of the situation inside SWCS,  the author(s) of that letter probably deserved an Art15, GOMOR, and/or a ticket out of the Army.  What's interesting to me is that these two Green Berets say they weren't involved.  If that's the case, it seems kind of crappy to cashier them on an allegation that they were developing an app (or whatever) on Army time, unless there's a whole lot more to it than that.


Why?


----------



## Marauder06 (Jan 17, 2019)

Why what?  Why do I think that the author deserved UCMJ and admin punishment?


----------



## Ranger Psych (Jan 17, 2019)

Marauder06 said:


> This is a very interesting case.  I read back through the articles to try to make sure I understand everything going on.
> 
> Regardless of the situation inside SWCS,  the author(s) of that letter probably deserved an Art15, GOMOR, and/or a ticket out of the Army.  What's interesting to me is that these two Green Berets say they weren't involved.  If that's the case, it seems kind of crappy to cashier them on an allegation that they were developing an app (or whatever) on Army time, unless there's a whole lot more to it than that.



So what's someone supposed to do when every normal avenue has been approached with regards to command decisions being contrary to making the best special operations combatants for that specific segment of the rainbow wheel?


----------



## DA SWO (Jan 17, 2019)

Marauder06 said:


> Why what?  Why do I think that the author deserved UCMJ and admin punishment?



Why separation from the Army?
The opted for a CM and the CG backed down, opting for a GOMR.


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Jan 17, 2019)

Yeah, to me this sounds like a fucked up officer is butthurt. These kind of reindeer  games is not what you expect from the senior leadership of the Special Forces community.


----------



## Box (Jan 17, 2019)

Nothing is really all that unexpected these days.  Everything is over the top.
Moderation is just a word used in beer commercials.


----------



## Marauder06 (Jan 17, 2019)

DA SWO said:


> Why separation from the Army?
> The opted for a CM and the CG backed down, opting for a GOMR.



That's not what I read.  These two said they weren't involved and I have no reason to doubt them.  I was referring to the individual(s) who wrote that letter.  I think administrative separation is totally appropriate for an individual who went so beyond the pale of what we expect from a serving professional.



Ranger Psych said:


> So what's someone supposed to do when *every normal avenue has been approached* with regards to command decisions being contrary to making the best special operations combatants for that specific segment of the rainbow wheel?



What avenues did they take, other than complaining loudly at a town hall? IG... Congressional... open door with USASOC or SOCOM commanders... what did I miss that they did? It was a rather long letter and it's possible I missed a couple of things.

We never considered vanilla SF to be part of the rainbow.  But it's been ten years so maybe that changed too.


----------



## Ranger Psych (Jan 17, 2019)

Marauder06 said:


> That's not what I read.  These two said they weren't involved and I have no reason to doubt them.  I was referring to the individual(s) who wrote that letter.  I think administrative separation is totally appropriate for an individual who went so beyond the pale of what we expect from a serving professional.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




White's all colors of the rainbow before it hits the prismatic factor...  SF's a funky monkey anyway with regards to the differing classifications/capabilities/taskings between ODA's, etc. 

I don't know what all they did, but the greviances listed in the letter are pretty heavy. I wasn't defending the letter as much as actually wanting to get a clarified response with regards to COA for "shit at that level".


----------



## Gunz (Jan 18, 2019)

As an outsider, I see the recriminations against the CO of the instructor company and the two NCO instructors who say they had no part in the letter as a pretty good indication that the letter's claims had validity. The General is having a Mad Minute on full-auto, spraying the whole tree line hoping to hit the one guy hiding behind a tree.


----------



## DA SWO (Jan 18, 2019)

Marauder06 said:


> That's not what I read.  These two said they weren't involved and I have no reason to doubt them.  I was referring to the individual(s) who wrote that letter.  I think administrative separation is totally appropriate for an individual who went so beyond the pale of what we expect from a serving professional.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Agree that the authors had to go, but they knew that was coming when they e-mailed the letter to the world.
The collateral damage (Company Commander, and 2 (innocent?) NCO's ) isn't appropriate.
I wonder if the Bn Commander took a hit too, and if not why not?


----------



## Marauder06 (Jan 18, 2019)

DA SWO said:


> Agree that the authors had to go, but they knew that was coming when they e-mailed the letter to the world.
> The collateral damage (Company Commander, and 2 (innocent?) NCO's ) isn't appropriate.
> I wonder if the Bn Commander took a hit too, and if not why not?



We don't know if it's inappropriate or not. The only people talking to the press, and thus to us, are the people under the gun. It may have gone down exactly as they said and the whole situation is BS, or they're leaving something out or downplaying the significance of what they did. It's also possible that they're more involved in the letter than what they let on, or that they may not have "sent" the letter but were somehow complicit in its construction or dissemination. And it's also possible that their situation is the result of a series of things: them developing a for-profit venture on the Army's time; unlawful influence in compelling their students to buy/use/test their app; the letter; their lack of support for the chain of command; the letter. I don't know any of these things to be true, but I think it's at least worth considering.

It's unclear to me why the company commander was relieved. If it was because the letter went out on his watch, that seems a little extreme to me. But it's possible he had some involvement in the situation as well. I've also seen commanders get relieved for things that didn't have anything to do with the underlying issue being investigated. When you're under that much scrutiny for something, it's possible a lot of other things can come to light. For example (because this is completely unrelated), there's an investigation because a sensitive item comes up missing. During the Commander's Inquiry, it comes to light that the company commander is sleeping with his enlisted driver. The sensitive item turns up but the commander still gets relieved.

What would be really interesting is to read the investigation summary, but I don't think that has been released yet.


----------



## Gunz (Jan 18, 2019)

There's been incredible pressure brought to bear for diversity and inclusiveness in combat arms MOSs. I just know--without knowing--that the pressure must have influenced some senior commanders to facilitate the process, to make it happen.

I believe these instructors are genuinely concerned about the degradation of their historically high standards and angry at the changes they see as being force-fed by politics. But one thing we've all learned, the military is not a democracy. Change comes from the top of the chain, not from anywhere else. Unless you outrank the guys who make the rules, you buck it at your peril.

I was really surprised reading about "town meetings" held by senior officers to hear the complaints and suggestions of NCOs. That, in my lowly and cynical NCO mind, is a good way to identify the sea lawyers and malcontents and target them for future recriminations.


----------



## Marauder06 (Jan 18, 2019)

Those are good points.  I've had many of those same feelings as well.  To continue the conversation about the proper means of seeking redress, there are several viable options, to include an IG complaint (not likely to go anywhere, frankly), elevating the issue up the chain of command, and, the thing that I think would really have gotten people's attention, a Congressional.

To produce a letter like this one, with this level of invective, scorn, and disrespect, is begging for an Article 134, at a minimum. 

We did town halls at JSOC and in several other of the units I've been in since. They can be a good way for the senior leadership to get the pulse of the organization. Generally you kind of already know who the malcontents are, they don't need a town hall to be outed. But you can also get some things that are really bugging people out in the open, and the commander can often address them on the spot. 

An unintended consequence is often that you find out who the real idiots are in your unit. I can't count the number of times that I, as a member of the audience and not a leader in the organization, have looked at one of my peers and thought "WTF did you just say?"


----------



## policemedic (Jan 18, 2019)

Marauder06 said:


> What would be really interesting is to read the investigation summary, but I don't think that has been released yet.



I didn't know those were released to the public at all.  Very interesting.


----------



## Ranger Psych (Jan 19, 2019)

Marauder06 said:


> Those are good points.  I've had many of those same feelings as well.  To continue the conversation about the proper means of seeking redress, there are several viable options, to include an IG complaint (not likely to go anywhere, frankly), elevating the issue up the chain of command, and, the thing that I think would really have gotten people's attention, a Congressional.
> 
> To produce a letter like this one, with this level of invective, scorn, and disrespect, is begging for an Article 134, at a minimum.
> 
> ...



The perspective is the same (with regards to your last statement) from the audience.  There's real questions, then there's retarded crap. I liked what our BC/CO's would do rather often when someone derpy asked a dumb question... mic to the audience and an overwhelming roar of the right answer as it was common, briefed, inspectable knowledge. 

Then came the woodline after formation/whatever. lol


----------



## Marauder06 (Jan 19, 2019)

Ranger Psych said:


> The perspective is the same (with regards to your last statement) from the audience.  There's real questions, then there's retarded crap. I liked what our BC/CO's would do rather often when someone derpy asked a dumb question... mic to the audience and an overwhelming roar of the right answer as it was common, briefed, inspectable knowledge.
> 
> Then came the woodline after formation/whatever. lol




It got bad sometimes at West Point. Many cadets asked very thoughtful and useful questions. But from time to time, cadets asked inappropriate or just plan stupid questions. They caught a LOT of crap from their peers when that happened.

I ran a course that the seniors had to take. When I would open the floor for questions, it went a little like this:

"Ok, the Superintendent will now take your questions. So if you have any questions..."

<a bunch of hands go up>

"...that are suitable for lieutenants to ask of a three-star general..."

<most of the hands slowly go down, some cadets' hands are "helped" down by their peers>

"...you may ask them now."


----------



## Kraut783 (Mar 11, 2019)

Damn.....


----------



## DA SWO (Mar 11, 2019)

ShadowSpear said:


> Exclusive: DOD Investigating General Retaliating Against Green Berets




There was a thread where this shit was discussed, including the fact that a GOMR was issued in lieu of an Art 15 or Courts Martial.
If true I hope the retire his ass without a parade.👎
Maybe a mod can merge threads.


----------



## policemedic (Mar 11, 2019)

Wow.


----------



## chickenrappa (Mar 11, 2019)

Read the entire thing, and only thing I can say is wow. I'm at a loss for words, the article looked pretty comprehensive and the evidence is hopefully super damning. I'm only sad to hear that he ruined multiple mens careers all because he wanted to swell the numbers.


----------



## Box (Mar 11, 2019)

What we really need now is a tri-signed letter from the highest levels of command preaching at the troops about how the troops need to tighten their shot groups and put more effort into discipline and integrity.
Then we need to have everyone below the rank of 'senior leader' attend a few hour-long powerpoint classes on ethics and standards so we can nip this culture of lies and deceit the bud.


----------



## DA SWO (Mar 11, 2019)

If true they should revoke his tab.


----------



## policemedic (Mar 12, 2019)

At minimum.  I have friends teaching there, and I can't imagine having to work in that command climate.


----------



## “The Old Man” (Mar 12, 2019)

Just read the article as well as the anonymous email. The whole thing makes me cringe. A comment I made on another thread seems to hold true. In that it would seem as if ALL the standards were being lowered incrementally. Specifically, the integrity and character quality of the SOF troops currently in training or in a group. I am referring to the increased incidents of fratricide amongst SOF operators. I mean if a guy pulls a knife out on an instructor. I would think he would at least earn the Big Chicken Dinner!

   I can remember back to '79 when I had an H4 contract on the DEP. My SAI in JROTC was Lt. Col. Robert Luttrell (SF) and there were a handful of us that got that contract. He personally took it upon himself to ensure that we were prepared . To not only meet the physical rigors of selection. But, to ALWAYS maintain the integrity that made his beloved Green Beret special.

In March of 2012 I was having a conversation with Col. Tobin at McCarran international. In which we discussed some of the issues which this article addresses. Particularly the lowering of standards to build numbers.

   I never attended day one of SFAS, so I know shit from shinola. When it comes down to a large part of the inner workings of attending the "Q" or being in group. So these are just some thoughts and opinions.
   I know that SF will bounce back better than ever. It's a fucking shame that this was not looked into sooner.

BTW: SFAS didn't even exist when I signed up. We attended a 2 week program the last summer after graduation. Where as a 17 year old senior. I learned a lot about myself as well as really understanding. The potential, we all had, to really contribute to the community. Col. Luttrell organized it. He cooked it up with people he knew at the Kennedy center. I'm not positive who was watching us. But, we were told we were being "assessed" during this time after we finished.


----------



## LongHiker (Mar 12, 2019)

That's wild. I'd mostly ignored the noise surrounding lowering of standards but those numbers and anecdotes really speak volumes.

A dude got mad in Robin Sage, "killed" his entire G force with blanks and he STILL graduated? If he can't keep his emotions under check in a training environment wtf is this guy going to do when he's in a war zone?


----------



## Centermass (Mar 12, 2019)

DA SWO said:


> *There was a thread where this shit was discussed*, including the fact that a GOMR was issued in lieu of an Art 15 or Courts Martial.
> If true I hope the retire his ass without a parade.👎
> Maybe a mod can merge threads.



Anonymous Letter Discussion and General Kurt Sonntags rebuttal (MERGED)


----------



## Centermass (Mar 12, 2019)

We need a mod to merge this thread to the other thread where that thread was merged with the other thread so that the threads could be merged......


----------



## Devildoc (Mar 12, 2019)

What a shit show.  Kinda hard to be all #silentprofessionals when leadership is acting like brats.


----------



## Gunz (Mar 12, 2019)

I think land nav is still a very necessary skill, despite GPS, especially for small teams operating independently.


----------



## “The Old Man” (Mar 12, 2019)

To this day I carry a lensatic in my EDC.


----------



## Grunt (Mar 12, 2019)

Tinman6 said:


> To this day I carry a lensatic in my EDC.



I trust them _way_ more than I do GPS....


----------



## Box (Mar 12, 2019)

Ocoka said:


> I think land nav is still a very necessary skill, despite GPS, especially for small teams operating independently.



Its almost like _*Humans* _that know how to land navigate _*are more important than hardware* _that is useless without a trained operator.
It also sounds like you are suggesting that the _*Quality*_ of a small team operating independently *is better than* a large _*Quantity *_of troops without direction.
Those are interesting concepts - come to think of it - I would think that _*Special Operations Forces*_ like the type your post describes, _*cannot be mass produced.  *_I certainly hope that the folks in this article feel the same way because *Competent Special Operations Forces* that are able to work in small teams and operate independently _*cannot be created after emergencies occur*_.

...for now though - the SWCS should just focus on getting their graduation numbers up.


----------



## 0699 (Mar 12, 2019)

I love it when generals and celebrities do stupid shit.  Especially illegal stupid shit.


----------



## x SF med (Mar 13, 2019)

Standards are there for a reason, a General changing standards to get his next star for enlarging the force with partially trained and not yet competent soldiers should be fired and brought up on charges of conspiracy to commit murder.  Just my .02.


----------



## Box (Mar 13, 2019)

The timing of this SWCS scandal makes me wonder if Lori Loughlin or Felicity Huffman have any kids serving in SF...


----------



## AWP (Mar 13, 2019)

The best way to prove the "night letter" is true is to react like Sonntag. He played himself and screwed over some good men in the process.


----------



## Box (Mar 14, 2019)

thats not true youre just saying that no standards have changes youre all fucking fired its harder now than ever before i'll take my coat off and whip the lot of you


----------



## Gunz (Mar 14, 2019)

.


----------



## Cookie_ (Mar 14, 2019)

Ocoka said:


> Pulling your uniform shirt off and challenging your subordinates to fight you man to man...my God, that's leadership. 🙄😳



It'd have been hilarious if someone had taken him up on that and whooped his ass.
Not a good career move, but hilarious nonetheless


----------



## 0699 (Mar 15, 2019)

Cookie_ said:


> It'd have been hilarious if someone had taken him up on that and whooped his ass.
> Not a good career move, but hilarious nonetheless


That's why he felt safe saying it; he knew no one would challenge him.  Right out of the bully's playbook.


----------



## Gunz (Mar 15, 2019)

.


----------



## Ranger Psych (Mar 16, 2019)

0699 said:


> That's why he felt safe saying it; he knew no one would challenge him.  Right out of the bully's playbook.



Disadvantage of SF not having any lower enlisted. There would have been a due-to-ETS Specialist that would have stepped up to that plate.


----------



## Brill (Mar 16, 2019)

Ranger Psych said:


> Disadvantage of SF not having any lower enlisted. There would have been a due-to-ETS Specialist that would have stepped up to that plate.



A SPC would have thrown the big black dildo on stage.


----------



## Ranger Psych (Mar 16, 2019)

lindy said:


> A SPC would have thrown the big black dildo on stage.



Or something. I choked my 1SG out at one point during the callouts section of a company combatives competition. Don't "no balls" a SPC, it typically won't end well.


----------



## Brill (Mar 16, 2019)

Ranger Psych said:


> Don't "no balls" a SPC, it typically won't end well.



I believe that is now an entire block of instruction at SLC.


----------



## Centermass (May 4, 2019)

Well, Bye!

Sonntag’s *forced retirement* comes after a series of exclusive reports by Breitbart News that detailed allegations from more than half a dozen current and recent Green Beret instructors.

They alleged Sonntag wrongfully retaliated against instructors who expressed concern over his lowering of standards for the Special Forces Qualification Course, punished instructors seen as too tough on students, and is a toxic leader who created a climate of fear at SWCS.

“He’s a horrible man. He’s an egotistical, horrible man,” said one Green Beret who wished to remain anonymous out of fear Sonntag would retaliate against him and his family.

Sonntag has commanded SWCS for almost two years, a typical assignment length. He had asked to stay for another year, but that request was denied and he was advised to retire, according to several sources.* He was allegedly up for a third star, but that was also deep-sixed, according to a third source.*

Those who feel they were wrongfully retaliated against want those punishments to be placed on hold until an investigation can determine what happened.

“Place all the punishments on hold. Do a true investigation and actually have an outcome,” one Green Beret said. “If they’re removing [Sonntag] just to remove him, that’s not good enough.”



Sources: Army General Who Retaliated Against Green Berets Forced to Retire


----------



## Kraut783 (May 4, 2019)




----------



## Poccington (May 4, 2019)

Good riddance.

A General taking his shirt off and challenging his men to a fight is one of the most absurd things I'd ever heard. I wouldn't follow a cunt like that out of curiosity, nevermind into battle.


----------



## Kraut783 (May 4, 2019)

Just looking at his profile, I wonder where he earned his CIB...I just see staff jobs after 2000. This is not a slam, more of a curiosity since the criteria for CIB has rank restrictions as opposed to the CAB.


----------



## DZ (May 4, 2019)

Kraut783 said:


> Just looking at his profile, I wonder where he earned his CIB...I just see staff jobs after 2000. This is not a slam, more of a curiosity since the criteria for CIB has rank restrictions as opposed to the CAB.



According to the book "Horse Soldiers" (12 strong movie), he was part of the group of SF guys who counter attacked the prisoner uprising at the Qala I Jangi prison near Mazar I Sharif. I believe he was a staff officer and just happened to be in the city when the uprising took place.

Battle of Qala-i-Jangi - Wikipedia

I have some choice words about the whole situation, but don't really want to post them on the internet..


----------



## Gunz (May 4, 2019)

RIP Mike Spann.

And adios Sonntag.


----------



## Marauder06 (May 4, 2019)

Kraut783 said:


> Just looking at his profile, I wonder where he earned his CIB...I just see staff jobs after 2000. This is not a slam, more of a curiosity since the criteria for CIB has rank restrictions as opposed to the CAB.



COL and below.  I’m pretty sure he was a MAJ or LTC in 5th Group when I was a CPT there 2003-2005, so he would have been well within he window.


----------



## Kraut783 (May 4, 2019)

Thanks DZ, appreciate the info.


----------



## AWP (May 4, 2019)

DeadZeppelin said:


> According to the book "Horse Soldiers" (12 strong movie), he was part of the group of SF guys who counter attacked the prisoner uprising at the Qala I Jangi prison near Mazar I Sharif. I believe he was a staff officer and just happened to be in the city when the uprising took place.
> 
> Battle of Qala-i-Jangi - Wikipedia
> 
> I have some choice words about the whole situation, but don't really want to post them on the internet..



I've heard from a guy who was once on the 5th Group staff (while Mitchell was an LTC and 5th Group XO that MAJ Mitchell's DSC was rather overblown, so I'm not surprised. He stated that working with Mitchell was not the best experience of his career, but declined to elaborate. I know that's RUMINT, but "where there's smoke there's fire" makes me think there's something to his comments.


----------



## bvvanes (May 6, 2019)

As I think about what just occurred in SWC and in particular, SF standards. I was initially struck when asking what has been accomplished? 
In the sprit of transparency, I have to admit as an enlisted man, my interactions with officers were never noteworthy except my interaction with the IG in my short Division stint. In SF the officers I dealt with were closer to the admonishment given in the "US Army Officers" guide of 1894 where it stated: *Enlisted men* are,,,, extremely cunning and sly and *bear* considerable *watching*." then the EMs I dealt with over the years, both as an EM and as an Officer.
I'll admit during my training in SF most of that knowledge base I acquired came from EMs which by design is the way that training is instilled in newbies. The officer corps lost an excellent opportunity to 'spit shine' their image. Additionally, later in my career as an officer, I did meet some officers that did have that SF spirit, where the mission took priority over their badges/career aspirations. I had great respect early on, for those Os that would jump in and teach a class with the EM instructors and to hell with ticket punching.
With all that said, what occurred is not just that a very senior officer, a bevy of junior officers and at least 2 combat-tested EMs from Mackall have lost a career (I'm not judging the individuals involved since I never met any of them) but that the standards for S & A have been put under the microscope where it should be to avoid "mission creep". Oh, these 2 EMs from Mackall, they embody the spirit my earlier post mentioned: 'the 18A that would sit in the GB club and drink a beer with the team. The ones with a touch of larceny in their collective hearts, the ones that prioritized mission over self. I wonder what would Bargewell, Beckwith and Rowe say if they weighed in on this debacle?


----------



## DA SWO (May 6, 2019)

He needs to retire as a BG, not MG.
His "forced" retirement is nothing more then the Army covering it's ass, and the Flag Grade Protective Society circling the wagons around one of the anointed.


----------



## amlove21 (May 6, 2019)

bvvanes said:


> I'm referring to the Sonntag v S&A standards issue. Since I didn't see this mentioned earlier, I thought I would weigh in on it.


Gotcha- there are a couple different threads on this one. 

Pentagon Investigating Army Two-Star General for Retaliation Against Green Berets

And 

Anonymous Letter Discussion and General Kurt Sonntags rebuttal (MERGED)

@Ooh-Rah thanks for the work!


----------



## Ooh-Rah (May 6, 2019)

amlove21 said:


> Gotcha- there are a couple different threads on this one.
> 
> Pentagon Investigating Army Two-Star General for Retaliation Against Green Berets
> 
> ...


Okay - the 3 current Sonntags threads have been merged into one again.

@bvvanes


----------



## bvvanes (May 8, 2019)

If you haven't read the breitbart article, it's probably best that you do if you want the total bru-ha-ha that's swirling the toilet. Again, allegedly those things in the article happened, but if in fact they did, what a sorry state of affairs. As once was said: power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely. the breitbart url is: Exclusive: DOD Investigating General Retaliating Against Green Berets


----------



## EqualReaction (May 10, 2019)

I just have a few questions to some SF guys, or people who understand what is going on.  How does removing language school from the Q course make it more linear? I know they are still supposed to go to LS after graduation but isn’t the ability to learn languages part of what makes a Special Forces soldier? So what happens if a newly minted Special Forces soldier goes on to language school and fails? Does he recycle or does he go to a team without language training? Also, with the optempo as it is for SF is there a danger that guys will end up having to push language school off to deploy? I have read an article by a Marine Raider that said they are supposed to go to language training after ITC, but that because of the optempo many of them aren’t able to. I’m just curious if the same thing might happen to SF.


----------



## Devildoc (May 10, 2019)

Poccington said:


> Good riddance.
> 
> A General taking his shirt off and challenging his men to a fight is one of the most absurd things I'd ever heard. I wouldn't follow a cunt like that out of curiosity, nevermind into battle.



Patton challenged some of his men, though I suspect without taking his shirt off.  But methinks Sonntag is no Patton.


----------



## CryptoLingUSMC (May 10, 2019)

.


----------



## Board and Seize (May 10, 2019)

How Sonntag's challenge to fight went down in my head cannon.






edit: my head cannon version ends immediately after Rico lands that first punch - unfortunately I can't set an end time to the video...


----------



## Gunz (May 10, 2019)

.


----------



## DZ (May 10, 2019)

EqualReaction said:


> I just have a few questions to some SF guys, or people who understand what is going on.  How does removing language school from the Q course make it more linear? I know they are still supposed to go to LS after graduation but isn’t the ability to learn languages part of what makes a Special Forces soldier? So what happens if a newly minted Special Forces soldier goes on to language school and fails? Does he recycle or does he go to a team without language training? Also, with the optempo as it is for SF is there a danger that guys will end up having to push language school off to deploy? I have read an article by a Marine Raider that said they are supposed to go to language training after ITC, but that because of the optempo many of them aren’t able to. I’m just curious if the same thing might happen to SF.



Language is still part of the Q course. After Robin Sage, there is the Regimental First Formation, where you don your beret, and get your tab.. but no paper work to back it up. Your paperwork is held hostage until after you finish Language. If you fail language you won't get your paperwork/ grad certs, and it will be like you never graduated.


----------



## Devildoc (May 10, 2019)

DeadZeppelin said:


> Language is still part of the Q course. After Robin Sage, there is the Regimental First Formation, where you don your beret, and get your tab.. but no paper work to back it up. Your paperwork is held hostage until after you finish Language. If you fail language you won't get your paperwork/ grad certs, and it will be like you never graduated.



For educational purposes, if one does this--fails language after the Q and Robin Sage and all--what happens to him?


----------



## DZ (May 10, 2019)

Devildoc said:


> For educational purposes, if one does this--fails language after the Q and Robin Sage and all--what happens to him?


You will likely get 1 or 2 recycles, and if you still can't pass you'll be dropped from the course and go back to your previous MOS.


----------



## Devildoc (May 10, 2019)

DeadZeppelin said:


> You will likely get 1 or 2 recycles, and if you still can't pass you'll be dropped from the course and go back to your previous MOS.



Would you necessarily go back to the same language, or go to perhaps an easier language to try to recoup the financial investment of the soldier?

I'm just thinking about the investment of time and money just to turn someone back to a previous MOS.   

Do you know a percentage of men with whom this happens?  Can't imagine it's a big number.


----------



## DZ (May 10, 2019)

Devildoc said:


> Would you necessarily go back to the same language, or go to perhaps an easier language to try to recoup the financial investment of the soldier?
> 
> I'm just thinking about the investment of time and money just to turn someone back to a previous MOS.
> 
> Do you know a percentage of men with whom this happens?  Can't imagine it's a big number.


It doesn't happen to a large number of guys. More guys end up recycling or being dropped due to failing PT tests during language. I know that now, especially with Sonntag in charge there is a lot more hand holding.
As far as language changes, I'm not too sure.


----------



## Ooh-Rah (May 10, 2019)

Devildoc said:


> For educational purposes, if one does this--fails language after the Q and Robin Sage and all--what happens to him?


This is something I have always wondered about, but never asked. Knowing the additional part about 'required language' makes earning a Green Beret that much more elusive; not only do you need to be a physical stud and mentally sharp, a person can go through everything and still not be able to play with the big kids if they can’t learn a language!


----------



## Devildoc (May 10, 2019)

DeadZeppelin said:


> It doesn't happen to a large number of guys. More guys end up recycling or being dropped due to failing PT tests during language. I know that now, especially with Sonntag in charge there is a lot more hand holding.
> As far as language changes, I'm not too sure.



Thanks.  This has been educational.  Always interesting to see how other units and services do business.


----------



## EqualReaction (May 10, 2019)

DeadZeppelin said:


> Language is still part of the Q course. After Robin Sage, there is the Regimental First Formation, where you don your beret, and get your tab.. but no paper work to back it up. Your paperwork is held hostage until after you finish Language. If you fail language you won't get your paperwork/ grad certs, and it will be like you never graduated.


Thanks for the information!


----------



## moobob (May 10, 2019)

CryptoLingUSMC said:


> Language training for SOF has never been a serious priority, some SMU's excepted. On paper, everyone is on board with the need, and language is part of the marketing of SOF being special. In reality, it is the first thing to get pushed to the right because it isn't cool and language proficiency is damn hard to acquire and sustain, especially for alpha males who would much rather do kinetic things.


It's not a major priority for the one SOF element (SF) where it should be a huge deal. They have raised the standard, to 1/1, and talk about raising it more, but they either don't know the real solutions to the problem, or are unwilling to actually solve the problem. Probably the former. 

There used to be an SF detachment at DLI. SF also used to have a lot of Lodge Act soldiers who were native speakers of foreign languages. 

Unpopular opinion: The only Group with major success in a UW/FID/COIN type mission that can't be majorly attributed to JTACs and air power is the only Group that still has a ton of native foreign language speakers. SF has a lot of great soldiers, but I don't think they have the right ones.

If you look back at the origins of SF between WW2 and Vietnam, and what the organization has morphed into... It is a very different beast in terms of mindset and organizational focus. If you throw in pressure to meet quotas... you end up with a bunch of guys that want to get their gun on, but are organized in too small of an element to be the optimal force to do so.


----------



## Devildoc (May 10, 2019)

@moobob , my father died in 1977, when I was 8. My neighbor, a history teacher at the local high school, took me in as one of his own sons. Many years later he was also my history teacher and vice principal.

Anywho, he was retired army, retired in the early seventies, spent 20 out of 22 years in Special Forces.  Do the math, he was around when it was in its infancy.

Through the years he introduced me to several of his friends who had retired around Ft Bragg. None of them native Americans (not "Native American", you know what I mean).  They were all Germans, Eastern Europeans, a couple Russians.  

Even when he was mentoring me in high school, he wanted me to go into Special Forces. This was mid/late 80s.  My heart was drawn elsewhere, but even then he understood that the world in Special Forces was evolving and it was not what he knew it to be.

he died a few years ago. He understood that everything changes, nothing is the way it used to be, and he was largely fine with that. But he was bemoaning the changes in Special Forces training and the direction it was going.  I think it's natural for everyone to look back and feel that way, I certainly do about the things in the Navy, but just two cents on another perspective.


----------



## Brill (May 10, 2019)

CryptoLingUSMC said:


> Language training for SOF has never been a serious priority, some SMU's excepted. On paper, everyone is on board with the need, and language is part of the marketing of SOF being special. In reality, it is the first thing to get pushed to the right because it isn't cool and language proficiency is damn hard to acquire and sustain, especially for alpha males who would much rather do kinetic things.



Which make language support guys sexier.


----------



## NikNifSik (Jul 17, 2019)

CryptoLingUSMC said:


> Language training for SOF has never been a serious priority, some SMU's excepted. On paper, everyone is on board with the need, and language is part of the marketing of SOF being special. In reality, it is the first thing to get pushed to the right because it isn't cool and language proficiency is damn hard to acquire and sustain, especially for alpha males who would much rather do kinetic things.




I respectfully disagree with your statement of language not being a priority for SOF. At 5th, it has been prioritized since 2009, and only gets supported more and more by the year. Of the 10 guys, Alpha Males, on my team, every single one understands the importance of language and the doors it opens for us. I also know even the non-18 series guys over the fence take it more serious these days as well. The only people not taking it serious are the guys not in harm's way.


----------



## NikNifSik (Jul 17, 2019)

AWP said:


> I've heard from a guy who was once on the 5th Group staff (while Mitchell was an LTC and 5th Group XO that MAJ Mitchell's DSC was rather overblown, so I'm not surprised. He stated that working with Mitchell was not the best experience of his career, but declined to elaborate. I know that's RUMINT, but "where there's smoke there's fire" makes me think there's something to his comments.



I have heard the same, from credible sources. Mitchel is not thought of and remembered in a good light by those of us who served under him.


----------



## Marauder06 (Jul 17, 2019)

NikNifSik said:


> I respectfully disagree with your statement of language not being a priority for SOF. At 5th, it has been prioritized since 2009, and only gets supported more and more by the year. Of the 10 guys, Alpha Males, on my team, every single one understands the importance of language and the doors it opens for us. I also know even the non-18 series guys over the fence take it more serious these days as well. The only people not taking it serious are the guys not in harm's way.



Glad to hear it.  I ran the Group Support Company back in 2004 or so, and based on the language training stats, there definitely wasn't an emphasis back then.


----------



## Brill (Jul 17, 2019)

Marauder06 said:


> Glad to hear it.  I ran the Group Support Company back in 2004 or so, and based on the language training stats, there definitely wasn't an emphasis back then.



We had a steady flow of their 35-series guys rotating through an office I know during the defeat ISIS campaign. I know E-4s that had full access like their civilian counterparts.  They’d learn national stuff, train national folks how they operate, then take the experience AND contacts forward.  GSB SI Chief made it all happen.

A lazy ass civilian works their ass off when colleagues are mixing it up out forward.


----------



## CryptoLingUSMC (Jul 17, 2019)

.


----------



## Centermass (Jul 18, 2019)

Curious as to what the current status is of SFC Robertson and Squires?

Were they chopped or on standby, waiting until a change of command before a decision is made?


----------



## Ooh-Rah (Oct 13, 2019)

Not qualified to comment on whether or not this is a good idea or not, but I thought the article was well written and covers  number of the discussions in this thread.

Changes to Green Beret course draw scrutiny as troops are tested in NC woods


----------



## x SF med (Oct 14, 2019)

Every day an assessment, every task a test.  That's the life.


----------



## Box (Oct 15, 2019)

Unless I was grossly misinformed, Robertson and Squires both had their ART-15 charges dropped as well as the threat of a Court Martial proceeding but they were still both given a General Officer Letter of Reprimand - the kiss of death.  
The last I heard (earlier this year) the railroading was complete and they were both being discharged form the Army.

The article addresses a few things that have already been beat to death but doesn't really address any "changes" to the course in any real context.  Otherwise, I'd say the time for blaming Sonntag for what is going on in SWC has passed - he is gone and wont be commanding any more active duty troops.   Even though he was cleared during the investigation looking into charges of his abuse of power and manipulating standards to look good on paper, when he asked for an extension to his command of SWC, they declined his extension and decided NOT to offer him a follow on assignment.   Now he is on his way to the private sector where I am sure he will quickly transition into a career as a military consultant that sells his senior leader snake-oil right back to the Army for an elevated price

The new commander, MG Pat Roberson was my Group Commander for a few years and from my experience with him during that time and since, he is a good man.   He does not display the same "I am the boss and I am smarter than the rest of you" type of arrogance as the guy he replaced.


----------



## Viper1 (Oct 15, 2019)

Box said:


> Unless I was grossly misinformed, Robertson and Squires both had their ART-15 charges dropped as well as the threat of a Court Martial proceeding but they were still both given a General Officer Letter of Reprimand - the kiss of death.
> The last I heard (earlier this year) the railroading was complete and they were both being discharged form the Army.
> 
> The article addresses a few things that have already been beat to death but doesn't really address any "changes" to the course in any real context.  Otherwise, I'd say the time for blaming Sonntag for what is going on in SWC has passed - he is gone and wont be commanding any more active duty troops.   Even though he was cleared during the investigation looking into charges of his abuse of power and manipulating standards to look good on paper, when he asked for an extension to his command of SWC, they declined his extension and decided NOT to offer him a follow on assignment.   Now he is on his way to the private sector where I am sure he will quickly transition into a career as a military consultant that sells his senior leader snake-oil right back to the Army for an elevated price
> ...


I second the comments about MG Roberson. Solid and unassuming; highly competent, a quiet professional who leads quietly.

I do resent some of the hand wringing about the Q course from  officers who also were adamantly opposed to sending their junior officers and NCOs to SWCS assignments. The common retort from them seeing it on a soldier’s timeline was, “Why do you want the SWCS stink on you?” That was 2011-2015.

SF strives for continuous improvement; we will get this right.


----------



## Box (Oct 16, 2019)

Viper1 said:


> I do resent some of the hand wringing about the Q course from  officers who also were adamantly opposed to sending their junior officers and NCOs to SWCS assignments. The common retort from them seeing it on a soldier’s timeline was, “Why do you want the SWCS stink on you?”


Ageed - the same folks looking down their nose at SWC will complain that they arent happy with the end product.  
Garbage in = Garbage Out

That in no way is meant to imply that there is a problem with the instructors as a whole - but it does mean that only sending folks to SWC to get them off your books is a sure fire way to spoil the sauce and cheat the GREAT instructors out of the hard work that they put in.


----------



## ThunderHorse (Oct 16, 2019)

Box said:


> Ageed - the same folks looking down their nose at SWC will complain that they arent happy with the end product.
> Garbage in = Garbage Out
> 
> That in no way is meant to imply that there is a problem with the instructors as a whole - but it does mean that only sending folks to SWC to get them off your books is a sure fire way to spoil the sauce and cheat the GREAT instructors out of the hard work that they put in.


What I never understood on the Army side when compared against the Marine Corps was how we as a Force look down on Instructor time and it's all about staying in FORSCOM for as long as possible.  Whereas, as I understood it from several people, every officer instructor in the Marine Corps is carefully selected and is usually one of the best within that MOS.


----------



## Gunz (Oct 16, 2019)

ThunderHorse said:


> What I never understood on the Army side when compared against the Marine Corps was how we as a Force look down on Instructor time and it's all about staying in FORSCOM for as long as possible.  Whereas, as I understood it from several people, every officer instructor in the Marine Corps is carefully selected and is usually one of the best within that MOS.



NCO and officer instructors in the Corps have to be the best. For NCOs, Drill Instructor School is one example. Having said that, some of the best instructors I had were the Special Forces NCOs at Ft. Sherman's Jungle Operations Training Center.


----------



## Devildoc (Oct 16, 2019)

Ocoka said:


> NCO and officer instructors in the Corps have to be the best. For NCOs, Drill Instructor School is one example. Having said that, some of the best instructors I had were the Special Forces NCOs at Ft. Sherman's Jungle Operations Training Center.



"Back in the day" (my dad's time) you had a choice in your career:  DI school, or recruiter school.  If you wanted to promote, you did one or the other.  Given the Corps is so small, if you make it 20 years, you will likely have taught something at some point.

It helps when you have people who like teaching.  Few things are worse than having an instructor who makes it clear he is disinterested and does not want to be there.  Me, I love teaching (it's what I do now).


----------



## Box (Oct 16, 2019)

I loved my time in the school house (of course I had a good job jumping out of planes) but even where I worked, there were quite a few guys that didn't hide the fact that they didn't want to be there and couldn't wait until their time was up.

Some guys love doing a little time at the school house, some - not so much


----------



## Viper1 (Oct 16, 2019)

ThunderHorse said:


> What I never understood on the Army side when compared against the Marine Corps was how we as a Force look down on Instructor time and it's all about staying in FORSCOM for as long as possible.  Whereas, as I understood it from several people, every officer instructor in the Marine Corps is carefully selected and is usually one of the best within that MOS.


In maneuver branches, school house time as an instructor was the “feather in the cap” assignment. Best officers were usually selected for those jobs, especially at Benning and Knox.


----------



## AWP (Oct 16, 2019)

I can't fathom a mentality where NOT sending your best is a good idea. I don't care what careerfield you're talking about, if you aren't sending your best then you're practically guaranteeing a substandard product.


----------



## SpongeBob*24 (Oct 17, 2019)

Outside looking in, post 9/11:

SWCs biggest 2 problems.......?

1) It's on Ft Bragg. 
TED, Super fit sexxxxy SF dude, let's say 18E....."Honey, do you wanna go back to Fayetteville, I got a chance to teach?..."
MELISSA, Super hot trophy wife of 18E......"are you bleep bleep kidding me you piece of bleep bleep sorry bleep piece of bleep bleep...I will leave you if you drag me to that bleeping town one more time!!!!!"

2) It was deemed a career move during the war.
TED, Same 18E from above.."Hey JOHN [ TM SGT], I really wanna go back to the school house and teach young 18E's, I have 47 deployments and thank it will help the future of SF!"
TM SGT JOHN...."sure, go work on making E8, the rest of your team is going to WARDAK province in a month....don't feel bad we are expecting 78% casualty rate...good luck byeeeeee traitor."

Point being, there are good instructors and then there are great instructors.  All 18 series are good, but those who wanna teach and have experience and backing from friends and family and 100% wanna be there can go that extra mile to really mentor young trainees into the force we need tomorrow.


----------



## Kaldak (Oct 18, 2019)

SpongeBob*24 said:


> Outside looking in, post 9/11:
> 
> SWCs biggest 2 problems.......?
> 
> ...



So, what I'm hearing is go 18E and you get a super hawt trophy wife.


----------



## policemedic (Oct 18, 2019)

I never minded Bragg.


----------



## Devildoc (Oct 18, 2019)

policemedic said:


> I never minded Bragg.



I feel that way about Lejeune, especially over Pendleton.

Teaching/instructing should be part of a career.  It makes you better at your craft, and allows the SME to pass invaluable information.


----------

