@Teufel for SOCOM CDR
Review of SOF Structure and Culture
- Thread starter USNSCC_Guru
- Start date
.
Last edited:
Yep. There is one team in particular that seems prone to extreme acts of criminality and unprofessionalism.
.
Last edited:
I don't think they would ever deactivate the unit in question. Like @Arf said, the Navy would never go for it and I don't think SOCOM can mandate that kind of thing. I would just kick them out of SOCOM. No more SOCOM funding or association until they clean their act up. That would be a powerful message. No more sensing sessions. Make a statement. SOCOM could still request NSW support through GCC tasking, particularly some of the niche underwater stuff, like TSOCs occasionally does with Marine Recon when the MEU rolls through their AOR.
Publicity, fame and the prospect of money poisoned the atmosphere. When everybody in uniform is a hero to the masses, then certain highly glamorized units take on an almost superhuman aura. It's hard to resist the temptations of public adoration (Rob O'Neill et al). Healthy esprit de corps morphs into unhealthy entitlement.
I think you'd also have to consider the effects of multiple combat deployments on some people. Once the savage is loose he's hard to contain (Gallagher et al).
I also wonder if the drive to ramp-up special operations numbers after 9/11 occasionally allowed questionable individuals to slip through the vetting/training pipeline? (DeDolph et al).
Back when the public treated the military with disdain it gave incentive to keep one's mouth shut.
I think you'd also have to consider the effects of multiple combat deployments on some people. Once the savage is loose he's hard to contain (Gallagher et al).
I also wonder if the drive to ramp-up special operations numbers after 9/11 occasionally allowed questionable individuals to slip through the vetting/training pipeline? (DeDolph et al).
Back when the public treated the military with disdain it gave incentive to keep one's mouth shut.
Devildoc
Verified Military
Publicity, fame and the prospect of money poisoned the atmosphere. When everybody in uniform is a hero to the masses, then certain highly glamorized units take on an almost superhuman aura. It's hard to resist the temptations of public adoration (Rob O'Neill et al). Healthy esprit de corps morphs into unhealthy entitlement.
I think you'd also have to consider the effects of multiple combat deployments on some people. Once the savage is loose he's hard to contain (Gallagher et al).
I also wonder if the drive to ramp-up special operations numbers after 9/11 occasionally allowed questionable individuals to slip through the vetting/training pipeline? (DeDolph et al).
Back when the public treated the military with disdain it gave incentive to keep one's mouth shut.
In just about any business where your required staffing levels explode 500% because the workload explodes 500% the standards have to take a hit. I know, I know..."Four Truths" and all, but there is a paradigm shift from the Four Truths as organizational framework and as an operational standard.
Once upon a time, the SOF teams, ALL teams--NSW, SF, et al.,--were small and tightly managed and led, truly the Quiet Professionals, but that time, around Panama and certainly 9/11, is in the rear-view mirror and ain't never coming back.
The post-Panama/GWOT time has seen an unprecedented explosion of publicity and fame, good and bad, and when people in some of the heretofore mentioned units started writing books and appearing in movies, it opened Pandora's box which cannot be closed without extraordinary and meaningful means.
The full report is well done. I’ll write an article about it this weekend. One theme is that it is akin to blaming the student for the curriculum.
Case in point: CT.
Report stated SOF/SOCOM became too CT focused.
Well that’s what happens when CODELS and STAFFDELS are interested in ... CT.
Case in point: CT.
Report stated SOF/SOCOM became too CT focused.
Well that’s what happens when CODELS and STAFFDELS are interested in ... CT.
Found this response
'They want us to be choirboys': Special operations troops mock order to behave
There might be a case to be made that the top brass wants the "commercial-like" perfect soldier, sailor, or Marine at the expense of operational lethality; but I'm definitely interested in your guy's takes on it.
'They want us to be choirboys': Special operations troops mock order to behave
There might be a case to be made that the top brass wants the "commercial-like" perfect soldier, sailor, or Marine at the expense of operational lethality; but I'm definitely interested in your guy's takes on it.
Devildoc
Verified Military
That's effing bullshit. Not choirboys, but how about QPs? How about police your own, and do what's right? How about having the balls to call out the BS?
What idiots. This kind of behavior is certainly not helpful. The SOCOM CG doesn’t want everyone to be choirboys. He wants them to stop popping up in the press for illegal, immoral, or unprofessional reasons. Like this for example.
Brill
SOF Support
So what do We do with all these jacked & tan dudes with sleeve tats?
policemedic
Verified SWAT
Honestly we could probably say the same thing about all SOF at this point. It made sense to grow SOCOM during the GWOT but it might be time to right size the force. Cut unnecessary missions back, shrink headquarters, and re-evaluate entry level standards. It seems like they may have slipped in some cases to help meet rising demand for SOF over the past 20 years.
ThunderHorse
Verified Military
I about spit out my breakfast reading that. I don't want choirboys just as much as I don't want murderers if you get me?
Last edited:
Sure are alot of people on the outside on this thread commenting about a culture of a team they have never been a part of.
i don't need to be Afghan to realize there are some really distasteful aspects of their culture, like the way they abuse children. The same applies here. I imagine many of the posters here have worked alongside many of their sister SOF units and have insights into their particular cultures.
Last edited by a moderator:
policemedic
Verified SWAT
I didn't see your response before you edited it, so I'm just throwing this out in the blind. If you're taking this personally--don't. It's just discussion and your point of view is interesting.
Ordinarily I'd agree with you. I've worked with most flavors of SOF in one way or another, but my entire time in the service was in conventional units. Therefore, I don't usually voice an opinion on SOF matters and leave it to the guys with the green tags.
The thing is, when a sufficient number of an identifiable group--let's say SEALs--choose to act the donkey and their bullshit gets out into the public domain, I think it's fair game for anyone to comment on their conduct. That goes for civilians too, because the last time I looked the military was under civilian control. If, for example, Chief Gallagher's pre- and post-trial conduct strikes people as egregious, they have a right to comment on it and wonder whether there is an organizational component to how a Sailor like that becomes who he is. Is it fair to wonder if there is a lack of discipline or an absentee command climate? Maybe.
Same-same for questioning the necessity of certain units. I don't have the answer to whether we have enough or too many SEALs, but for a number of reasons I think it's something those with more insight at the command level should consider.
By the same token, unless you have a Trident you should probably refrain from pontificating about who should be a SEAL, their training, their daily activities, the intricacies of their secret underwater handshake...
At least, that's the way I see it.
Similar threads
