SF training for Scouts?

[Cyberchp]

Interesting read.
http://www.military.com/daily-news/2013/03/21/army-wants-sf-training-for-scouts.html?ESRC=army-a.nl

Maneuver officials at Fort Benning, Ga., want to redesign training for scout units to arm them with battlefield skills often taught to Special Forces teams.
Maj. Gen. H.R. McMaster, the commander of the Army’s Maneuver Center of Excellence, said Wednesday that ground combat units in the future will need to be more adept at understanding the cultures of their battle space.
Reconnaissance units, because they operate forward of the main force, will need more training to help them quickly build relationships that will help the soldiers gather battlefield intelligence.
Scout units will need some skill sets “previously associated with Special Forces, and those are in the areas of foreign internal defense and combat advisory skills,” McMasters said.
“So if there is a Mali-type scenario and a brigade is deploying there, that reconnaissance squadron has the ability to connect with indigenous personnel, develop an understanding alongside those indigenous forces while providing them combine arms capabilities, communications and so forth, necessary to secure an area in advance of follow-on operations or as part of an effort to prevent conflict and shape an environment consistent with our interests,” McMasters said.
McMaster focused on upcoming changes to leader development, training, doctrine and equipping of the Army’s maneuver ground forces in his speech at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C.
McMaster named leader development as the maneuver center’s top priority in the coming years. Fort Benning officials are inventorying “all of the competencies we want to develop in our leaders” and searching for more ways to rely on distance learning and interactive learning as an alternative to live training.
The Army will be updating maneuver doctrine next year to include new threat capabilities that potential adversaries are likely to bring to bear in the future. Maneuver forces will face an enemy armed with stronger networking capabilities and newer, more robust anti-armor weapons, McMaster said.


In the area of combat development and equipping maneuver units, McMaster said the Army is developing some type of mobile protected firepower that would arm light infantry units with a deployable system similar to the Stryker Mobile Gun System.
This is particularly important in forced entry operations, McMaster said.
“We should not have to have the John Abizaid in Grenada [scenario] in the future, a Ranger company commander having to commandeer a bulldozer to close with a machine gun position after jumping in to seize an airfield. We need to provide a mobile protected firepower capability to our infantry formations that is not a 70-ton answer to everything,” McMasters said.
In recent months, Training and Doctrine Command officials have stressed in recent months that the Army must not forget the lessons it has learned in the area of teaming conventional units with a Special Forces Operational Detachment Alpha, known as an ODA.
McMasters said that training scout units to use Special-Forces style techniques is no substitute for working closely with these specialized units.
“There are certain skill sets that only our Special Forces can do and are the best at,” McMasters said referring to unconventional warfare operations. “You are not going to see conventional forces operate in that role.”
But some missions can overlap such as those that involve helping indigenous populations with foreign internal defense and serving in a combat-advisory role in some cases, he said.
“You should think of a scout section in the future – in an Amy brigade that’s 12 soldiers and two Bradley fighting vehicles,” McMasters said. “They ought to have the capability to be an ODA minus … with chain guns and with [communications] and access to joint fires.”

 

[AWP]

And the Army's delusional "We can handle FID/ COIN as well as SF" march continues. Droning forward, oblivious to reality, boots, boots, boots...

 

[Ranger Psych]

I don't even know what to say. I also don't think that today we'd have that John Abizaid in Grenada scenario, considering that if they were a problem we'd just drop 81's or 120's on them now... or pop them with a gustav.

Hey Mortars, tell that asshole over there "Fuck you" for me, wouldja?

"with pleasure"

 

[HALO99]

And the Army's delusional "We can handle FID/ COIN as well as SF" march continues. Droning forward, oblivious to reality, boots, boots, boots...

Very much the same here in PI.

 

[Teufel]

Hey I know this isn't a popular stance but if the SF had a monopoly on FID there wouldn't be any need for Embedded Training Teams. When I was in Afghanistan and Iraq I saw a lot of SOF/SF dudes doing a lot of CT/DA/Raids while conventional forces were doing what I would consider FID but was defined as ETT/MTT. There is way too much demand for FID for the SF to ruck up alone. I don't see any problem with other guys getting additional training.

 

[reed11b]

Army recon units are in heavy need of up-training and being better utilized, this just "feels" like the wrong way to do it.
Reed

 

[reed11b]

Hey I know this isn't a popular stance but if the SF had a monopoly on FID there wouldn't be any need for Embedded Training Teams. When I was in Afghanistan and Iraq I saw a lot of SOF/SF dudes doing a lot of CT/DA/Raids while conventional forces were doing what I would consider FID but was defined as ETT/MTT. There is way too much demand for FID for the SF to ruck up alone. I don't see any problem with other guys getting additional training.

But why would scouts, either 11B on 19D based be the inhouse unit to make FID capable?
Reed

 

[AWP]

But why would scouts, either 11B on 19D based be the inhouse unit to make FID capable?
Reed

My guess is that the army is looking for a unit or units it can keep together and transform in mighty FID fighters. Rather than take armor, artillery, or infantry, and convert those units, scouts are reasonably small in total size. They would also be more "infantry centric" than say ADA which is one other unit "free" to perform a FID mission.

Basically, you have a relatively small piece of a division which you can train in FID and free up your 11 series guys to presumably also conduct FID like everyone's done here in OEF-A. As OEF-A draws to a close, I suspect the Army's efforts to train scouts in conducting FID will be more horrific than the dumpster behind Planned Parenthood. "FID" is a great buzzword now, but in 5 years Big Army will forget about it unless it stays engaged in places like Africa.

I could go on and on, but to be brief I think the Army doesn't know what the hell to do with its manpower. That results in bizarre half-measures such as this as it scrambles to convince itself units are interchangeable regardless of the mission.

I suspect the ETT vs SF story is an ugly one that would expose conventional and unconventional leadership's piss-poor decisions from the 03-04 timeframe.

 

[reed11b]

My guess is that the army is looking for a unit or units it can keep together and transform in mighty FID fighters. Rather than take armor, artillery, or infantry, and convert those units, scouts are reasonably small in total size. They would also be more "infantry centric" than say ADA which is one other unit "free" to perform a FID mission.

Bet you could have dedicated reserve or guard units, that would (A) be better at it then gung-ho 19 year old battalion scout platoon and (B) cheaper.
The only advantage of trying to do that crap in-house in a brigade is that maybe then those units would have actual fire support when needed unlike the bastard children ETTs. Not advantage enough from my view on the CF side. I'm sure the SOF side can add many more reason's why this sounds like an idea gone full retard.
Reed

 

[surgicalcric]

SF doesn't have a monopoly on training foreign troops whether in a semi-combat or JCET environment. Its the concurrent activities that make what we do different. And then again there is always the reason the GCC or other government official wants SF in the area...

With regards to the article, I just see it as them trying to get a piece of the (money) pie and remain relevant in a time where the cuts are going to hurt readiness at all levels.

 

[DA SWO]

Conventional units doing FID would be a disaster waiting to happen.

They could do the right thig and designate a company (per Bn) as their FID Co, train them in FID, then task that company; but they won't.
Doing it that way would fuck up their DRF Rotation, so the unit on DRF9 will get the FID tasker, 4 weeks to get ready, and BAM!!! off to do the job.

Will GO's ever figure out that plug and go doesn't work?

 

[DA SWO]

SF doesn't have a monopoly on training foreign troops whether in a semi-combat or JCET environment. Its the concurrent activities that make what we do different. And then again there is always the reason the GCC or other government official wants SF in the area...

With regards to the article, I just see it as them trying to get a piece of the (money) pie and remain relevant in a time where the cuts are going to hurt readiness at all levels.

FID also means letting the Embassy know what you are doing.
Do you want your average 2Lt Plt Ldr briefing your Ambassador?

 

[Viper1]

If they want regional alignment with Big Army units, they need to look at PACOM as a model. The same units get opportunities to attend Balikatan, Cobra Gold, etc. If they want BIG Army involved with foreign countries, those big exercises and others like BRIGHT STAR etc are good ways to go.

I just briefed a RAND representative on this and gave her an earful. Big Army doing FID is ridiculous and SF needs to fight to utilize the capability it already has. It isnt' about how many Soldiers/units/etc that do FID. It's about competence and results.

 

[Marauder06]

SF doesn't have a monopoly on training foreign troops whether in a semi-combat or JCET environment. Its the concurrent activities that make what we do different. And then again there is always the reason the GCC or other government official wants SF in the area...

With regards to the article, I just see it as them trying to get a piece of the (money) pie and remain relevant in a time where the cuts are going to hurt readiness at all levels.

That's kind of what I was thinking. "We have these guys who we don't know what to do with... Wait, I know! We'll put them against this requirement we have as an ad hoc solution, instead of doing the right thing and going through the process to make the organizational and cultural changes necessary to ensure we fix it right for the long term." Kind of reminds me of how CRD guys in Group got saddled with the detention and exploitation mission instead of the intel guys.

 

[surgicalcric]

...Do you want your average 2Lt Plt Ldr briefing your Ambassador?

I would rather he talk to the Ambassador than the Chief of Station.

 

[Marauder06]

I would rather he talk to the Ambassador than the Chief of Station.

MEGA-"agree"

 

[x SF med]

Most 2LTs need their mouths crazy glued shut and their eyes crazy glued open... just my .o2

 

[DA SWO]

Most 2LTs need their mouths crazy glued shut and their eyes crazy glued open... just my .o2

Listening is another important skill set.

 

[Teufel]

But why would scouts, either 11B on 19D based be the inhouse unit to make FID capable?
Reed

That I don't know.

Scout units will need some skill sets “previously associated with Special Forces, and those are in the areas of foreign internal defense and combat advisory skills.

I guess everyone takes issue with this statement. I think they are looking for combat advisors more than anything, which correct me if I'm wrong, is a skill the SF have but is not a skill unique to SF.

 

[goon175]

You have to think outside the box to train foreign troops from a foreign culture with foreign customs, and big army does not like or let its soldiers to think outside of the box.

That is why this will fail.