Special Warfare, Special Operations and SOF (US) before Trump

[WVO]

Once again, this article raises the (since Vietnam ever-present) question of the appropriate role of policy makers in Washington in determining targeting at the operational and tactical levels. From where I stand, that role ought to be extremely limited. If policy makers and senior, not in theater people are unhappy with Gen Petraeus's results, then they should find somebody else to do the job.

On a related note, any strong feelings about the appropriate level of involvement for national-level, strategically focused intelligence agencies in Iraq and Afghanistan? Should agencies like CIA be concerned with the Iraq HVI list?

[jcustis]

Should agencies like CIA be concerned with the Iraq HVI list?

They already are, to the point where it's like clownshoes.

[Bill Moore]

One would think having a highly trained and nimble force that can quickly and effectively respond to emerging intelligence concerning high value insurgents/terrorists is a good and needed capability. However, after four plus years of these decaptitation missions has the security situation notably improved or worsened? I have no doubt that these raids are saving lives in the short run (but perhaps putting more lives in danger in the long run, if the IO campaign can't justify them to the Iraqi population), yet the situation continues to worsen, so I think it is appropriate for those in Washington to question (not directing like LBJ did) if our targeting strategy is correct. I too wonder if we're going after the right people. I think it is possible for those close to the fight to be focused on the trees, and it sometimes helps to have a back seat driver looking at a map suggesting alternative routes to the same end point.

[Tom Odom]

One would think having a highly trained and nimble force that can quickly and effectively respond to emerging intelligence concerning high value insurgents/terrorists is a good and needed capability. However, after four plus years of these decaptitation missions has the security situation notably improved or worsened? I have no doubt that these raids are saving lives in the short run (but perhaps putting more lives in danger in the long run, if the IO campaign can't justify them to the Iraqi population), yet the situation continues to worsen, so I think it is appropriate for those in Washington to question (not directing like LBJ did) if our targeting strategy is correct. I too wonder if we're going after the right people. I think it is possible for those close to the fight to be focused on the trees, and it sometimes helps to have a back seat driver looking at a map suggesting alternative routes to the same end point.

Excellent points, Bill. The map analogy works well...

Tom

[Jedburgh]

Washington Post, 6 Sep 08: U.S. Teams Weaken Insurgency In Iraq

.....a novel anti-insurgent operation that plays out nightly in Baghdad and throughout much of Iraq. U.S. intelligence and defense officials credit the operation and its unusual tactics -- involving small, hybrid teams of special forces and intelligence officers -- with the capture of hundreds of suspected terrorists and their supporters in recent months.

The "fusion cells" are being described as a major factor behind the declining violence in Iraq in recent months. Defense officials say they have been particularly effective against AQI, which has lost 10 senior commanders since June in Baghdad alone, including Uthman.

Aiding the U.S. effort, the officials say, is the increasing antipathy toward AQI among many ordinary Iraqis, who quickly report new terrorist safe houses as soon as they're established. Fresh tips are channeled to fast-reaction teams that move aggressively against reported terrorist targets -- often multiple times in a single night.

The rapid strikes are coordinated by the Joint Task Force, a military-led team that includes intelligence and forensic professionals, political analysts, mapping experts, computer specialists piloting unmanned aircraft, and Special Operations troops. After decades of agency rivalries that have undermined coordination on counterterrorism, the task force is enjoying new success in Iraq with its blending of diverse military and intelligence assets to speed up counterterrorism missions.....

[davidbfpo]

Hopefully the right thread for this.

Hat tip to al Sahwa blog for this reflective commentary on continuing US and Iraqi SOF actions - when an Iraqi warrant is required before action.

At the onset of the new year (January 2009), units deployed in Iraq could no longer capture and detain insurgents without a signed warrant from an Iraqi judge. The transition was a painful but necessary process. Collectively, we put our heads together to develop ways to prolong our pressure on the terror network under this new system. Prior to Jan 2009, if we had actionable intelligence on any insurgent, we simply put together a plan and executed it. The exploitation from the detained individual would usually lead us to our next operation. This targeting model became unsustainable post Jan. 2009.

Link:http://al-sahwa.blogspot.com/2010/04...raq-model.html

[Bob's World]

Bill,

Good comments. Often what is sold as "decaptitation" is really much more "kneecapitation" if one really looks at what is going on, targets, effects, etc.

As to debates of if policy types, Battle Space owners, or SOF leadership should have control of these target lists, the answer is probably all of the above, in a very open targeting forum that is constantly looking at the picture from many levels and perspectives and adjusting accordingly.