Bloodline
Unverified
I left a comment on the article. I'm not qualified to opine about the needs SOF because my knowledge of it is all second hand, and that was my point regarding his opinions as well.
I found the article kind of amusing, because it makes an intellectually interesting proposal, based on a decidedly wrong and simplistic line of reasoning.
But, IMHO, the fact that SOCOM now wants to be more involved in the HR side (promotions etc.) of SOF personnel, plus the delicate SOCOM effort to standardise some/most SOF training, across the Services, kind of begs the question "what could be next".
On the other hand, all over the world, Services are separated by the domain they operate, (Land Sea Air).
The USMC is an exception. They advocate operating at the "seams" and have always felt their existence is threatened.
As an outsider I think that putting USMC under the Navy would not fly and that a fifth Service would be too much.
But as long as we are in this line of reasoning (that steps on an awful lot of toes and traditions), I for onewould find it far more interesting if the USMC was streamlined and merged with SOF.
"A few good men" operating at the seams, with their own logistics/support and special assets (air naval) getting most of the small wars pie etc etc.
Bad idea. Different missions and different skill sets required.
The Corps' primary mission is entrance from/in the littoral zones. Everything else we do can be done by the Army. IME the Corps gets asked to do things the Army does not because we can do it better, but because we can do it cheaper and with less tail. Or at least we could; OIF taught us a lot of bad habits about spending money on "stuff" and logistics tails that will be very hard to unlearn. Also, when we cross that beach/port/coast (whether by AAV, helo, CRRC, or LCAC), we land with everything we need to meet all parts of the threat spectrum; infantry, tanks, artillery, air, NGF, etc, etc. We also have our entire logistics package that supports that entrance, intertwined and commanded by the MAGTF commander. AFAIK, SOCOM units aren't designed to work that way, nor should they.
Combing the Corps and SOCOM will create a beast with too many missions. And we all know what happens to an organization that tries to do too many things well. Hell, Orville Redenbacher had advice for us; maybe if more of our leaders listened to him we'd be better off...
I think the entire military has room to change. I think one military with different sections is the answer. We use to see the planes for everybody developed for one service today they just change the landing gear to fit a launch and recovery from a carrier. We could have a branch called logistics. One called littoral landings and beach head securement. (Marines) Air division within that division if it flies it is yours including ship board aircraft. Heavy weapons section down to the 81mm mortart. Ground assault (Army) Special purpose operations. (Intel secret infiltration and operations) Food section. self evident. Just think of the expertise each section could bring to the table while being supported by the logistics branch who buys and supports one uniform available in summer and winter camo and not camo. Every piece of equipment has the same fuel filter, oilfilter, and air filter. boggles the mind. If it floats you guessed it the afloat section.
One general running the whole show supported by the specific sections required for the mission. No fighting no thirteen different intel departments not sharing their information.Just seems simple to me.
One general running the whole show supported by the specific sections required for the mission. No fighting no thirteen different intel departments not sharing their information.Just seems simple to me.
Not to mention all the Sgt. Majors and Master Gunnery Sergeants dropping dead from aneurysms brought on by too much long hair and hands in pockets at one time.
I don't think it's a good idea, and I don't think it would work well. It smacks of "SOF is awesome and can cure everything" bandwagoning, and it sounds like it comes from someone who has forgotten (or never knew) the 5th SOF Truth. I also don't understand this part:
It seems like the author is saying that if we made SOF a separate service, it would be a less-capable force (which is why Americans would have to "scale back their expectations"). If that is the case, then why are we even having a conversation about this COA when it should be very clear to everyone who is keeping up with the topic that the expectations of SOF are only going to increase?
I have heard some good arguments for establishing SOF as a separate service, this was not one of them.
It seems like the author is saying that if we made SOF a separate service, it would be a less-capable force (which is why Americans would have to "scale back their expectations"). If that is the case, then why are we even having a conversation about this COA when it should be very clear to everyone who is keeping up with the topic that the expectations of SOF are only going to increase?
I have heard some good arguments for establishing SOF as a separate service, this was not one of them.
Scotth
Verified Military
If your looking for a star on your shoulder or a senior NCO slot I think it's a helluva good idea. When hasn't more bureaucracy been the answer?:-"
Nothing he says really changes how the military conducts it business. It doesn't make the military any more lethal all it does is moves the same pieces around on the board and changes the org chart.
If he doesn't like the size of the foot print we had in Iraq and Afghanistan nothing he suggests will change that. We currently have the capability to go in with a large or small foot print it is all a matter of strategy. Creating a new service doesn't change that. Changing that strategy starts at the top of the civilian leadership.
He talks about the declining military budget but then suggests adding more over head to the military. I just don't get that?
Nothing he says really changes how the military conducts it business. It doesn't make the military any more lethal all it does is moves the same pieces around on the board and changes the org chart.
If he doesn't like the size of the foot print we had in Iraq and Afghanistan nothing he suggests will change that. We currently have the capability to go in with a large or small foot print it is all a matter of strategy. Creating a new service doesn't change that. Changing that strategy starts at the top of the civilian leadership.
He talks about the declining military budget but then suggests adding more over head to the military. I just don't get that?
Wow what idiocracy. Since when does a Ph.D. and studying SOF make you a credible policy maker on such issues? Guy would be no different then an airsofter with a Ph.D.
A SOF branch would be such a mess.
For one the quality of the soldiers will undoubtedly be lowered as the process to chapter out or send the failures to a different branch would become such a nuisance and headache they will decide to just keep them.
The only changes that should happen in this community is a higher degree of liaisonship and some moving around of forces.
Some things that I would change:
- a full fledged CIA office within JSOC at Pope. (shit might even be one, I wouldn't know though)
- a Ranger Battalion in Fort Bragg.. we have such a symbiotic relationship with the SMU that I'm surprised this hasn't happened yet.
- 160th and all their forces at Campbell.. no offense to 5th Group, but it's not really a secret that a JSOC or Ranger overseas objective will receive 160th support before SF does because of the time sensitivity revolving the difference in operational needs. 160th needs to have a presence in Ft Bragg and less of a presence in FCKY.
- 160th is in WA with 2nd Batt, Savannah with 1st Batt, but not Fort Benning with 3rd Batt. I know the logistics would suck, but 3rd Batt and Regimental HQ should make the move to Fort Bragg as should major air elements from Campbell, preferrably 1/160th.
2 cents.
Feel free to disect
A SOF branch would be such a mess.
For one the quality of the soldiers will undoubtedly be lowered as the process to chapter out or send the failures to a different branch would become such a nuisance and headache they will decide to just keep them.
The only changes that should happen in this community is a higher degree of liaisonship and some moving around of forces.
Some things that I would change:
- a full fledged CIA office within JSOC at Pope. (shit might even be one, I wouldn't know though)
- a Ranger Battalion in Fort Bragg.. we have such a symbiotic relationship with the SMU that I'm surprised this hasn't happened yet.
- 160th and all their forces at Campbell.. no offense to 5th Group, but it's not really a secret that a JSOC or Ranger overseas objective will receive 160th support before SF does because of the time sensitivity revolving the difference in operational needs. 160th needs to have a presence in Ft Bragg and less of a presence in FCKY.
- 160th is in WA with 2nd Batt, Savannah with 1st Batt, but not Fort Benning with 3rd Batt. I know the logistics would suck, but 3rd Batt and Regimental HQ should make the move to Fort Bragg as should major air elements from Campbell, preferrably 1/160th.
2 cents.
Feel free to disect
B
Boon
Guest
haha I liked Columbus. It grew on me.
Dknob I like your overall concept. It would take some energetic and forward thinking leaders to make it happen, but I think it would be well worth the move.
I have also wondered why Regiment doesn't colaborate more with SWCS when it comes to training, if 75th moved to bragg, how nice would it be for the ROC to have all the resources that SWCS has as far as conducting RASP, SURT, etc. All the medics that had to go to SOCM would already be right there as well. Again, it would be a bitch to accomplish, but I think it would be worth the effort. The move would also enable all the head sheds of USASOC to be in the same place.
I have also wondered why Regiment doesn't colaborate more with SWCS when it comes to training, if 75th moved to bragg, how nice would it be for the ROC to have all the resources that SWCS has as far as conducting RASP, SURT, etc. All the medics that had to go to SOCM would already be right there as well. Again, it would be a bitch to accomplish, but I think it would be worth the effort. The move would also enable all the head sheds of USASOC to be in the same place.
we did training with 3/160th regularly
Hum, the few times I asked around they were never from 3/160th...matter fact they scoffed at the idea though that I might be like confusing someone from 1/75 with 3/75. I'll be honest in saying they were just a bunch of dudes with black helicopters to me.
Maybe the same people who decided to move 5th Group to Campbell instead of Ft. Bliss or Ft. Huachuca?
If you were flying around in anything smaller than a Blackhawk, chances are it wasn't 3/160 ;)
I'm just talking about training at hunter, not deployments. Going over to there place to do aircraft fam training, elevators, things like that. Main point I'm getting at, is that it wasn't totally useless having 1/75 co-located with 3/160th, as it provided good training opportunities that all the leadership had to do was ask. I have no idea who flew us around overseas other than the fact that they were from 160th.
Nice pretty concept if elephants could fly... The guy that wrote this needs to put the dope down.
Similar threads
