Us old sweats agree on the big stuff but can pick nits for weeks...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bill Moore
Lots of penis envy going around, and I guess that just comes with the turf (pun intended) when you're working with triple type A personalities.
True dat.
Quote:
and of course why they're the only true SOF element) :D
Or only really important war fighting organization -- that attitude's a lot broader than the SOF community...
Quote:
The point you made above, the one I put in bold, is exactly what is holding back the GPF...Want to get ahead in this man's Army you better be mediocre.
I'm afraid you're right -- and also bothered that is so. We managed to stave off disaster long enough to get marginally competent by the end of WW II. That time may not be available in the future.
Quote:
As to your point about SF doing SR and DA (CIF like work), I think it is appropriate if SF does it as part of a indigenous (or foreign force in another country...As for SR, my definition of SR goes well beyond the typical view of small teams sitting in hide sites watching a NAI...That type of SR is hard and requires a lot of training to do it well (you need to do it well if you plan on surviving in a hostile environment).
Agree with all that -- particularly the last bit as you define that variety of SR -- which it was called back in my time but the S then stood for special and it wasn't talked about openly. I, as you probably guessed, was using SR as in Strategic Recon which used to be LRP to LRS and not SR but then it became SR. So now we can do SR (Type II) with specially trained big army guys but must still use SF for their long held SR (Type I) mission due to are focus etc.. Or Foxes or something... :rolleyes:
Where's Dave Maxwell -- his comments about constant changing of terms is on the money... :wry:
Quote:
Dayuhan...Your mind is still free of self limiting doctrinal views.
Yep, enviably so...
If only all book reviews were this helpful!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ken White
Roger Beaumont wrote a book tiled
Military Elites […] The book does illuminate the US Army attitude toward such units. Here's a
LINK. I wouldn't buy it, mildly educational but not that good. A large library will likely have it as will possibly arXiv or other academic databases.
“Worth reading, not worth buying” is one of the better book reviews I’ve ever read. :D Thanks for the recommendation.