Army Times: SOF unleashed on the world

[surgicalcric]

...I think that's part of the problem with SF getting some 'meatheads.'

The trouble with "SF getting meatheads" comes down to the senior officers at SWTG, USASFC, and USASOC saying yes, because the guy that tells the king he isnt wearing pants doesnt get promoted, instead of doing the right thing by the Regiment. We have suffered since the push - thanks Rumsfeld - to create a larger SOF community.

It isnt just us this issue is limited to: Ranger Regiment, 160th, SEALs and "other units," have and will continue to suffer in varying degrees until someone with a set of nuts and concern for the unit and not their career says, enough.

Crip

 

[Brill]

I will use myself as an example. I wanted to do cool guy DA stuff...

...but then "they" found your hidden stash of 5 fingers and fast forward a bit, you end up in the great state of NY. Were you there when Hillary was your Senator?

 

[Brill]

The trouble with "SF getting meatheads" comes down to the senior officers at SWTG, USASFC, and USASOC saying yes, because the guy that tells the king he isnt wearing pants doesnt get promoted, instead of doing the right thing by the Regiment. We have suffered since the push - thanks Rumsfeld - to create a larger SOF community.

It isnt just us this issue is limited to: Ranger Regiment, 160th, SEALs and "other units," have and will continue to suffer in varying degrees until someone with a set of nuts and concern for the unit and not their career says, enough.

Crip

Brother, I believe this "disease" of pussification or call it The Peter Principle has spread to the USG as well as certain sectors of our military. If you rock the boat, your team may love you but the leadership will CRUSH your team and blame the leader of the "insurection". I personally don't want to be associated with any element, USG or mil, that does not allow me to enable others to kill people and/or break their stuff (the ultimate mission of the DOD).

I'm taking my ball and going home....to Homeland f'ing Security!

 

[surgicalcric]

...If you rock the boat, your team may love you but the leadership will CRUSH your team and blame the leader of the "insurection"...

You been talking to my Team Sergeant and Team Leader about me?

Crip

 

[Brill]

You been talking to my Team Sergeant and Team Leader about me?

Crip

HA! No man, I'm going through this myself at "work".

"This is BS and not an effective use of taxpayer funding. It's a waste of the talent and diverse experience we have here."

"You cannot talk to me like that."

"Well, perhaps that is exactly why this shit is so fucked up here. Because nobody has told you the truth or gave you an opposing viewpoint."

"We will see. I warned you about your delivery. Consider this your second counseling."

"No problem dude. I consider this horseshit just like this job and your micromanagement "style". The IG visit should be interesting."

 

[goon175]

...but then "they" found your hidden stash of 5 fingers and fast forward a bit, you end up in the great state of NY. Were you there when Hillary was your Senator?

You guys are killing me....
I swear I wasn't the only one in USASOC that had a pair of them...jeez!

 

[JohnnyBoyUSMC]

HA! No man, I'm going through this myself at "work".

"This is BS and not an effective use of taxpayer funding. It's a waste of the talent and diverse experience we have here."

"You cannot talk to me like that."

"Well, perhaps that is exactly why this shit is so fucked up here. Because nobody has told you the truth or gave you an opposing viewpoint."

"We will see. I warned you about your delivery. Consider this your second counseling."

"No problem dude. I consider this horseshit just like this job and your micromanagement "style". The IG visit should be interesting."

How did that IG visit go anyhow?

 

[JJ sloan]

Not trying to derail the thread, but CSM Merrit told us on my last deployment that he wanted the lowest ranking person in the 75th that is a part of the strike force to be a corporal. I guess it didn't happen on his watch, which is dissapointing, he had some really good, progressive ideas on where he wanted Regiment to go while he was RSM.

I love me some SGM Merrit; however, to say that the lowest ranking member in 75th should be a Corporal is nuts! Rangers are light infantry. The reason they are so successful is that they have are masters of light infantry tactics and enforce extreme discipline in their soldiers. A change of their MTOE would severely disrupt those principles. Why does Army leadership insist on fixing shit that isn't broken? A dude coming to SF from Regiment has instant credibility because SF guys know that he was raised in a certain environment and has been properly mentored.

 

[Brian1/75]

I love me some SGM Merrit; however, to say that the lowest ranking member in 75th should be a Corporal is nuts! Rangers are light infantry. The reason they are so successful is that they have are masters of light infantry tactics and enforce extreme discipline in their soldiers. A change of their MTOE would severely disrupt those principles. Why does Army leadership insist on fixing shit that isn't broken? A dude coming to SF from Regiment has instant credibility because SF guys know that he was raised in a certain environment and has been properly mentored.

Why exactly is it nuts? That Corporal will still be a 'Joe' that will be taught by those senior of him much in the same way SF teaches their junior guys. At one time not everybody in SF was a NCO. The biggest difference is everybody will have gone through RASP and Ranger School, a leadership school, and as far as individual responsibility goes more will be expected of each individual and as a result more respect will be given. Quite frankly nobody at Regiment cares what guys at SF think of guys hopping over there. If they have their way nobody will desire to make that sort of move in the first place. Rangers will still be masters of their trade.

 

[goon175]

He wasn't talking about changing the environment or the mission. Rather, allowing guys to have rank that reflects the responsibility that they hold. The Regiment has changed a lot in the past 10 years, and things are not the same as they used to be. Basically the structure he was going for was shooting for was a SSG Squad Leader (which is already the standard), a SSG ATL, a SGT BTL, and then a SGT and CPL per team. The leadership, discipline, hard training would not change. It's not like any position in the 75th that actually goes out on target is anything like their counterparts in the big army. Comparing an 11b, 13F, or 68W in batt. to someone of the same rank in the big army is not even possible these days, as the skill sets are completely different.

 

[JohnnyBoyUSMC]

He wasn't talking about changing the environment or the mission. Rather, allowing guys to have rank that reflects the responsibility that they hold. The Regiment has changed a lot in the past 10 years, and things are not the same as they used to be. Basically the structure he was going for was shooting for was a SSG Squad Leader (which is already the standard), a SSG ATL, a SGT BTL, and then a SGT and CPL per team. The leadership, discipline, hard training would not change. It's not like any position in the 75th that actually goes out on target is anything like their counterparts in the big army. Comparing an 11b, 13F, or 68W in batt. to someone of the same rank in the big army is not even possible these days, as the skill sets are completely different.

Goon you know as well as I do that NCO's aren't as abundant as they could be. I can't speak from experience regiment wise but what's laid out on paper (Sgt as squad leader and such) doesn't always translate over to real life as well due to man power and traIning. Can always recall it needing to be in the Corps a SSGT for squad leader and such on down but would rarely see that. We had CPL's (E4) as plt sgt's sometimes and LCPL's (E3) as squad leaders in some units. Hell we had a GYSGT (E7) as a platoon cmdr at one point, and when he got reassigned has two CPL's as plt.cmdr and plt.sgt.

 

[Brian1/75]

Goon you know as well as I do that NCO's aren't as abundant as they could be. I can't speak from experience regiment wise but what's laid out on paper (Sgt as squad leader and such) doesn't always translate over to real life as well due to man power and traIning. Can always recall it needing to be in the Corps a SSGT for squad leader and such on down but would rarely see that. We had CPL's (E4) as plt sgt's sometimes and LCPL's (E3) as squad leaders in some units. Hell we had a GYSGT (E7) as a platoon cmdr at one point, and when he got reassigned has two CPL's as plt.cmdr and plt.sgt.

This isn't really an issue in the 75th or the Army in general. The rank structure is already like this for officers. We have CPTs as PLs, Majors as Company Commanders. This would just slide the NCOs in the same direction. Actually the problem right now is having enough Joes to fill out the squads. It would work for the better because now a E-5 from some other unit could show up to Regiment and not fill in a leadership slot and get up to speed in the exact same manner as a brand new guy fixing some of the Joe shortage.

 

[goon175]

And I think the 75th RR is probably the only unit in the military that has E-4 11b's that have SERE, EMT-I, master breacher, CDQC, a Ranger tab, a purple heart, and arcom w/ V (yes, this is an actual person not a made up example). Again, just re-enforcing the need for rank to reflect responsibility and skill set, not to mention combat experience.

 

[JohnnyBoyUSMC]

This isn't really an issue in the 75th or the Army in general. The rank structure is already like this for officers. We have CPTs as PLs, Majors as Company Commanders. This would just slide the NCOs in the same direction. Actually the problem right now is having enough Joes to fill out the squads. It would work for the better because now a E-5 from some other unit could show up to Regiment and not fill in a leadership slot and get up to speed in the exact same manner as a brand new guy fixing some of the Joe shortage.

Personally I like that. As a NCO your expected to show up with a certain skill set and level of maturity but some don't take into consideration your in a new playing field operations wise or that you might have been out of the loop in another area of expertise for awhile, so that make sense to me as it gives the NCO the ability to adapt to new surroundings/doctrine/training and learn from there. It's a smart move and one I whole heartedly support. Personally I'd prefer to see it more like that in all branches. I've worked with many a fine 2nd LT in the Corps but from a infantry perspective they are too green and inexperienced to be leading men into combat. Giving them a smaller unit of men like a sqd to get familiar with that many men and moving up seems like the right way to me. Just one more reason my heart is set on becoming part of yorker brotherhood.

And I think the 75th RR is probably the only unit in the military that has E-4 11b's that have SERE, EMT-I, master breacher, CDQC, a Ranger tab, a purple heart, and arcom w/ V (yes, this is an actual person not a made up example). Again, just re-enforcing the need for rank to reflect responsibility and skill set, not to mention combat experience.

That is a good point, and one I won't argue. While it does happen in other units/branches it is rare to come across a skill set like that in units with NCO's like that outside the regiment.

 

[JJ sloan]

Why exactly is it nuts? That Corporal will still be a 'Joe' that will be taught by those senior of him much in the same way SF teaches their junior guys. At one time not everybody in SF was a NCO. The biggest difference is everybody will have gone through RASP and Ranger School, a leadership school, and as far as individual responsibility goes more will be expected of each individual and as a result more respect will be given. Quite frankly nobody at Regiment cares what guys at SF think of guys hopping over there. If they have their way nobody will desire to make that sort of move in the first place. Rangers will still be masters of their trade.

I was raised in 2/75... I know what guys over there think of SF. That was not my point. Again, Rangers are light infantry. What light infanry unit has that type of MTOE? I think that young soldiers who have not been damaged by the regular Army are a large part of Regiment's success. Start importing Corporals and let's see where that goes. Don't fix shit that isn't broken. Dudes have to be content to put in the work required to acheive rank and status rather than expect it to be given to them because they went to "hooah school" and RASP.

And I think the 75th RR is probably the only unit in the military that has E-4 11b's that have SERE, EMT-I, master breacher, CDQC, a Ranger tab, a purple heart, and arcom w/ V (yes, this is an actual person not a made up example). Again, just re-enforcing the need for rank to reflect responsibility and skill set, not to mention combat experience.

I see your point; however, the expample you provide is an E-4 with those skillsets. Are corporals not E-4s? So, by your standards, he has acheived the rank and status that he deserves (no disrespect intended toward him). The soldiers in Regiment that bear extended responsibilities, for the most part, do not hold slots on line squads. As for combat experience, I know young privates in the 101st that have a shit ton of combat experience. Maybe we should make all infantry units NCO heavy. Afterall, they go to Ranger School too!

This is just my point of view. I have nothing but the utmost respect for 75th Ranger Regiment and its roster of stellar individuals.

 

[JohnnyBoyUSMC]

I was raised in 2/75... I know what guys over there think of SF. That was not my point. Again, Rangers are light infantry. What light infanry unit has that type of MTOE? I think that young soldiers who have not been damaged by the regular Army are a large part of Regiment's success. Start importing Corporals and let's see where that goes. Don't fix shit that isn't broken. Dudes have to be content to put in the work required to acheive rank and status rather than expect it to be given to them because they went to "hooah school" and RASP.




I see your point; however, the expample you provide is an E-4 with those skillsets. Are corporals not E-4s? So, by your standards, he has acheived the rank and status that he deserves (no disrespect intended toward him). The soldiers in Regiment that bear extended responsibilities, for the most part, do not hold slots on line squads. As for combat experience, I know young privates in the 101st that have a shit ton of combat experience. Maybe we should make all infantry units NCO heavy. Afterall, they go to Ranger School too!

This is just my point of view. I have nothing but the utmost respect for 75th Ranger Regiment and its roster of stellar individuals.

All units, from combat to support need good NCO leadership. NCO heavy? Not necessarily, plenty of young warriors not NCO who have plenty of combat experience, but in time they'll make good NCO's who have that combat experience to back up their rank and training.

 

[Brian1/75]

I was raised in 2/75... I know what guys over there think of SF. That was not my point. Again, Rangers are light infantry. What light infanry unit has that type of MTOE? I think that young soldiers who have not been damaged by the regular Army are a large part of Regiment's success. Start importing Corporals and let's see where that goes. Don't fix shit that isn't broken. Dudes have to be content to put in the work required to acheive rank and status rather than expect it to be given to them because they went to "hooah school" and RASP.

I wasn't trying to talk crap about SF, just stating facts about 75th leadership. What light infantry unit has that type of MTOE? Well shit the 75th would. I think you would agree no other light infantry unit exist like it. The MTOE is already non-standard as it is. The equipment is already non-standard as it is. Everybody has longer hair, different attitudes, different training, different mission etc. I think saying the rank structure should be the same because all other units are like that when everything else is different is pretty foolish. Will some of the imports suck? Yeah sure, but so did some of the homegrown guys. I mean shit half my RIP class got RFSed in the first year. They were all homegrown. Part of the lack of respect towards imports is 1. They weren't Privates and didn't go through the suck. 2. They're sucking up a leadership position from someone else, and don't know what they're doing. Once everybody is tabbed and a E-5 gets to be a Joe and mentored by those around him, it'll be a non-issue. I mean are you telling me all the guys from the 75th that are now in SF suck and are not trainable? The 75th is also having manning issues. It needs to be a more attractive environment to work in. No offense, but hard-headed CSMs that want it to be 1989 are part of the problem. Shit quite honestly is broken.

I see your point; however, the expample you provide is an E-4 with those skillsets. Are corporals not E-4s? So, by your standards, he has acheived the rank and status that he deserves (no disrespect intended toward him). The soldiers in Regiment that bear extended responsibilities, for the most part, do not hold slots on line squads. As for combat experience, I know young privates in the 101st that have a shit ton of combat experience. Maybe we should make all infantry units NCO heavy. Afterall, they go to Ranger School too!

Well yeah sure when 100% of the 101st is tabbed out, and that's the goal for the 75th, they can consider all being NCOs. The 75th is just better trying to align themselves with others in SOCOM. It's quite literally the only unit with non-NCOs.

This is just my point of view. I have nothing but the utmost respect for 75th Ranger Regiment and its roster of stellar individuals.[/quote]

 

[Brian1/75]

I meant that to read '...all the guys not from the 75th that are now in SF...'

 

[0699]

And I think the 75th RR is probably the only unit in the military that has E-4 11b's that have SERE, EMT-I, master breacher, CDQC, a Ranger tab, a purple heart, and arcom w/ V (yes, this is an actual person not a made up example). Again, just re-enforcing the need for rank to reflect responsibility and skill set, not to mention combat experience.

If the lowest rank in the 75th was an E-4, does this mean the Ranger Regiment would no longer "grow their own?" From what I've learned, there is a major stigma attached with coming to Regiment as an NCO; how would this be changed?

 

[goon175]

I see what you are saying JJ, but I think we just have two different opinions on the issue, which is what makes this site great!

Edit:

Again, Rangers are light infantry. What light infanry unit has that type of MTOE?

The way Regiment works today has really moved away from a standard infantry MTOE, and even the Regimental leadership does not see the 75th as just light infantry anymore. I will touch on MTOE first. We now have 7 man squads, as opposed to 9 man, which is standard MTOE, each battalion has its own support company, which is not standard infantry MTOE, as brian brought up, the lowest ranking officer is a Captain now, and we also have organic dog and TSE sections, which is not standard for an infantry battalion.

This is the beginning for my premise that the Ranger Regiment is a special operations unit, not a light infantry unit, and should be manned in a similar fashion as other special operations units. If you look at FM 3-05.50 (2008), you will see that they are labeled as a special operations direct action force, that CAN BE employed as light infantry, if properly augmented. Light Infantry operations are a capability, not a primary mission. The primary mission reads:

The mission of the 75th Ranger Regiment is to plan and conduct special military operations against strategic and operational targets in pursuit of national or theater objectives.

What I am really trying to get at here, is that the 75th Ranger Regiment is as much light infantry as SEAL's are just navy divers, or PJ's are just medics.