Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: Transition Teams in the Field

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    74

    Default

    Concur with JCustis 100%. Strongly recommend putting something together for the Gazette. Check out the site for the Gen Hogaboom writing contest: http://www.mca-marines.org/gazette/hogaboom.asp. I think you'd be very pleased with the response an article discussing the issues raised in your initial post would receive. Equally important, things rarely change without thoughtful critique and recommendations for a better way forward. Best of luck. Semper Fi!

  2. #2
    Council Member Cavguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawaii
    Posts
    1,127

    Default

    Interesting, I don't doubt it, but it does vary by AO. A little history ...

    In 2006, my CO HQ was located in Tal Afar on the same combat outpost as my IA BN HQ. (1/2/3 IA) My TOC was 200m from the IA TOC. The MiTT lived with the IA BN HQ. We had constant interaction between the three elements. My men shared perimeter duty with the IA, and all but one of the IA companies were spread in COP's across west Tal Afar. (due to leave, an IA company is really an overstrength platoon)

    We were under 101st at the time. That summer, the CG of the 101st (at least that's who I was told ordered it, the ADC(S) gave the word to me personally) ordered all MiTT's back to the FOB's for force protection. I was ordered to establish an ECP between my HQ and the IA for the same reason. This came straight from the top, because one MTT somewhere was attacked inside of the compound. The PTT living at the Tal Afar IP station was also withdrawn. We protested, but a two star is a two star. We complied (mostly, my ECP to the IA HQ never was fully completed)

    Once done, these policies are hard to reverse, esp given the risk-adverse culture of the Army that is left over from the 90's. No one wants to be the first to explain why a MiTT was murdered while sleeping in his IA compound.

    I will say that Diayla and Ninewah were the former 101st AO, not sure if it is everywhere. A good friend leading a PTT in Samarra right now is living at his partnered IP station, but the previous PTT would/could not. However, his active partner unit thinks he is crazy. (Which he is, in a good way)

    Sad but true.
    Last edited by Cavguy; 04-13-2008 at 11:47 PM.
    "A Sherman can give you a very nice... edge."- Oddball, Kelly's Heroes
    Who is Cavguy?

  3. #3
    Council Member jkm_101_fso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Kabul
    Posts
    325

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cavguy View Post
    We were under 101st at the time. That summer, the CG of the 101st (at least that's who I was told ordered it, the ADC(S) gave the word to me personally) ordered all MiTT's back to the FOB's for force protection. I was ordered to establish an ECP between my HQ and the IA for the same reason. This came straight from the top, because one MTT somewhere was attacked inside of the compound. The PTT living at the Tal Afar IP station was also withdrawn. We protested, but a two star is a two star. We complied (mostly, my ECP to the IA HQ never was fully completed)
    Once done, these policies are hard to reverse, esp given the risk-adverse culture of the Army that is left over from the 90's. No one wants to be the first to explain why a MiTT was murdered while sleeping in his IA compound.
    I'm pretty sure you and I were there at the same time. I think that decision by the CG (Turner) may have only applied regionally. I know that of the 4 "out of hide" MTTs in my BDE (1st), two lived with the IA, many miles from any other CF. My MTT was on a small Iraqi base that had just been turned over by CF in DEC 05. We had our own little compound that we stayed in, but the base was guarded by the IA. Of course we were also augmented by a Platoon for FP, maybe that was the difference...and we also had to have an ECP between our compound and the IA; although I'd offer that we were pretty liberal and let the IA come and go to "our side" as they pleased. I say that on many overnight ops, as little as 5 or 6 of us slept in a hasty patrol base with a Company-sized element with the IA. I guess if they wanted to kill or kidnap us, that would have been a good opportunity. I always felt 100% safe with them.

    Further down south, one of the other MTTs also live with the IA. Since you were in Tal Afar, considering the mission and scope, maybe that is why the decision was made, I don't know. Not that I agree with it...I think all MTTs should live with their IA counterparts. I really don't know how you could do it otherwise; for all of the times my Motorola went off at 0300: "Can CPT Jake please come over here to help us?" When I did go over, it was always by myself. Depending on who the IA battle captain was, I would take a 9mm or my M4 with me sometimes. Otherwise, I went over unarmed.

    I've never heard of a MTT being overrun or anything like that. I didn't know if that had actually happened. We had heard the story at the Phoenix Academy about a MTT in Anbar in '04 that was held at gunpoint while all of their weapons and vehicles were stolen by the IA. I think the story is BS, just a tale invented to scare new MTTs when they arrive into theater. Maybe someone on here had heard that tale at Phoenix, also.

    Any policies degrading the MTTs ability to assist and advise their IA counterparts should be scrutinized heavily. I hope they have lifted some of the silly and unnecessary requirements for Force Pro. If the MTT is truly the "pointy tip of the spear", then there are just going to have to be inherent risks involved. I know that will be hard for some of the "zero defect" types, but they just have to get over it.
    Last edited by jkm_101_fso; 08-22-2008 at 03:36 PM. Reason: opsec
    Sir, what the hell are we doing?

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •