Having a PSYOPS and HUMINT back ground I am interested to know why you say "non-lethal?"Originally Posted by glaw
Non-lethal attachments
All,
I'm doing some research concerning the integration of non-lethal attachments (i.e. PSYOPS teams, HUMINT teams, interpreters, contractors) within a brigade combat team. I am researching the integration challenges and solutions. Anyone have any experience from prior deployments?
glaw
Having a PSYOPS and HUMINT back ground I am interested to know why you say "non-lethal?"
Last edited by William F. Owen; 05-06-2008 at 06:01 AM. Reason: too many buttons
Infinity Journal "I don't care if this works in practice. I want to see it work in theory!"
- The job of the British Army out here is to kill or capture Communist Terrorists in Malaya.
- If we can double the ratio of kills per contact, we will soon put an end to the shooting in Malaya.
Sir Gerald Templer, foreword to the "Conduct of Anti-Terrorist Operations in Malaya," 1958 Edition
Glaw, Welcome to the Council ! As time permits you, please go here and introduce yourself.
I'll echo Wilf's comments and I'll assume you're talking about interpreters and contractors herein.
I recommend you check out CALLs IIR on Operations in Mosul, Iraq, Chapter 3 (FOUO).
Regards, Stan
If you want to blend in, take the bus
I forget which doctrinal terms we are using now - non-lethal, non-kinetic, etc. I think you're referring to basic IO, PA, and CA type stuff.
I am not at liberty to discuss my specific experience, but I would recommend that you hit on the following areas in your research, as they are the most common issues that arise...
OPSEC - Too often viewed as an adminstrative function of the S2, it is actually an S3 issue; units need to continually take serious looks at their EEFI's and modify them as appropriate; this sounds like some stale textbook advice, but I practiced it and I am an Infantryman who hated being on staff; no excuse for neglecting this
PSYOP - Not enough teams, not enough print capability in all locations, and a general lack of understanding on the part of commanders, staff, and small unit leaders of how to leverage PSYOP capability; lots of legal mumbo-jumbo that limits their ability to craft certain messages and products; funding issues
Deception planning - Not enough foresight and advance planning in most cases for it to be successful; "throw in some deception" is neither effective integration nor a feasible plan
EW - Not enough assets and a general disconnect between actual capabilities and small unit leaders' expectations; electromagnetic spectrum management is a goat rodeo; tough to stay ahead of the countermeasures that the enemy develops
CNO - Tough to leverage if you don't know the capabilities
Public Affairs - Friction between PSYOP and PA is significant and often borne of a fundamental misunderstanding on the part of each in regard to what the other does; PA needs to have their work screened to ensure no OPSEC breaches and to ensure that it does not conflict with the PSYOP mission (but it does not necessarily need to reinforce PSYOP)
Civil Affairs - Not enough units/personnel, often not large enough to operate independently in hostile areas (not enough firepower/security)
Non-Lethal Attachments
All,
Roger. I know PSYOPS and HUMINT have lethal capabilities. I'm defining non-lethal attachments as any team, section, or individual who's primary function is to provide non-lethal capability or actions to a unit or commander. Yes, the Army is using non-lethal instead of non-kinetic. Non-lethal attachments can be: PSYOPS teams, HUMINT teams, contractors, civilian engineers, media, and interpreters.
glaw
We've now gone to lethal and non-lethal effects based on the first order effect achieved through application of that system. It simple terms if the immediate effect achieved through the application or utilisation of a capability is killing someone it is lethal, if the immediate effect is not killing someone then it is non-lethal.
For a while there we went on the whole kinetic non-lethal, non-kinetic lethal etc mumbo jumbo but no one could ever keep up with what we were trying to achieve.
TO me what you're actually advocating is an IO officer to synchronise and coordinate all of those elements
Makes perrrrrfect Sense
to me
TO me what you're actually advocating is an IO officer to synchronise and coordinate all of those elements
Any man can destroy that which is around him, The rare man is he who can find beauty even in the darkest hours
Cogitationis poenam nemo patitur
Yikes - I wasn't advocating anything. I was just making a quick list of issues that I recall observing.TO me what you're actually advocating is an IO officer to synchronise and coordinate all of those elements
However, if I were to advocate, I would say that I wish that we could just do away with the IO staff billet. It often leads to staffs conducting a non-kinetic line of operation and a kinetic one, rather than one that achieves both, despite the changes in doctrinal terminology. The most effective "IO" that I ever saw was when a squad reacted to contact with more 40mm and AT-4's than small arms. Suddenly, everyone on that street starting waving, smiling, and giving up good information and there was never another issue on that street. They just needed that demonstration of firepower and demonstration of the willingness to use it in order to be won over. It was more effective than handing out PSYOP handbills, drilling a well, broadcasting a radio message, or planting a newspaper article.
I am to low on the totum pole to give you any real help, but all these different sections are in the current BCT I am deployed with. I see them daily as I skulk the halls of the BDE TOC as I get my missions every DAY (BDE PSD PL).
What I have seen is that most of these functions are roled under the EPRT that exist in parrell to the Kinetic Side of the BDE. The EPRT houses CA, LN Contractor Advisors on PW projects, and State Department Functions. They work about rebuilding our AO, providing advise to the commander on how to spend SERP money, and go with us to meet Sheiks and so forth.
PAO and PYSOPS have their own cells but I have no real idea what they do beyond make pamplets and signs for our distrobution and for the ISF and schedule media events around the AO.
The interperters are all contracted local and from the states out of varios companies. Contractors are also apart of most of these different postions serving as the LN face of our efforts. I know they exist for CA, EN, and PAO support.
In the short of it yes all these functions are being utilized at the BCT Level but I think it will take a while before any real or meaningful measure can be made as to there effective inclusion into BCTs. The black cat in the bag, is also how the BDE CDR uses these assests. Some I have seen ignore these various postions just by listening to the water cooler talk and how much product they accutually produce, to others like my BCT in which the BDE CDR works heavily with most of these functions.
Glaw, if you're still looking into this shoot me a message with specific questions.
We had a lot of success integrating these capabilities with each other and within the lethal/non-lethal targeting cycles of two different BDEs and would be glad to help if I can.
Have you posted this RFI in the discussion areas of the various Warfighters' Forums? (i.e. StrykerChat....)
Regarding HUMINT, there is some discussion of the use of HCTs in theater on MI Net.
You may also get some substantive feedback by posting the RFI to the INTELST list-serve.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks