Improving PSYOP (and CA as a tangent)

[Voodoun]

That's probably a very accurate appraisal of base rates - given that there are around 1500 Tactical PSYOP and probably 10% of our enlisted ranks have post-graduate educations, the odds are high that there's more enlisted 11b's with MA's, MBAs, and PhDs, than PSYOP. But take for intance the E4 I know in PSYOP with an MBA - I don't think he'd argue that his job is going to require him utilize that education in his job. I don't jack squat about being an infantryman - but Reed does - Reed, would you argue that when the #### hits the fan in *your* tactical arena (bullets flying all around) your frontal cortex is fully engaged? I know mine shuts off when dealing with novel fight or flight stimuli.

I think the dynamic situation that was being described to me was not one in which people were being shot at, but one in which the PSYOPer was caught in a delicate social situation that required him to use cognitive function in a manner that the average infantryman (we all assume, and maybe wrongfully so) doesnt generally.

<the fact that the left leaning among hated anything that tried to put the US in a good light. That same combination of bureaucratic turf battles (which you alluded to much earlier...) and ideology will short circuit the goal in the future (never say never but it is unlikely).>

Bingo. Is this acceptable? We have the power to ratchet past the turf wars, but we seem to lack the political will to confront this 'everything America does is bad' mentality.

an updated USIA would be a good start, that's for sure.

As far as do we want to confront the Salafi ideology? Well, that has certainly been the goal of policymakers at this point. Making judgements about whether thats the right or wrong thing to do is beyond my comfort zone.

[reed11b]

But take for intance the E4 I know in PSYOP with an MBA - I don't think he'd argue that his job is going to require him utilize that education in his job. I don't jack squat about being an infantryman - but Reed does - Reed, would you argue that when the #### hits the fan in *your* tactical arena (bullets flying all around) your frontal cortex is fully engaged? I know mine shuts off when dealing with novel fight or flight stimuli.

One, I am far far from the most experienced war fighter in this counsel. You should make that an open question. My experience is that no, when heavily engaged, I was not 100% cerebral. However heavily engaged was a rarity and most engagements allowed, in fact demanded, a thinking approach.
Two, on top of this, our day to day interactions with non-combatants had secondary and on-going effects, so we constantly had to consider our actions. The hostility towards PSYOPS and occasionally CA is the attitude that PSYOPS is a PSYOPS thing, you grunts wouldn't understand. Try us, we do it day to day.
It is also OK, even encouraged at times to just state that you agree to disagree and drop a topic if no new information is being brought forth.
Reed

[Voodoun]

<The hostility towards PSYOPS and occasionally CA is the attitude that PSYOPS is a PSYOPS thing, you grunts wouldn't understand. Try us, we do it day to day.>

All this from the relatively amused suggestion that maybe the reason we were trained to cuff our sleeves if it was scorching hot was because our jobs were more cerebral and we were less likely to be dealing with hot brass than an 11b.

Its *amazing* how deep some of this animosity runs!

Reed, absolutely - every PSYOPer out there should utilize his supported unit to be a force multiplier for his PSYOP mission.

Now let me turn this around a bit though. A good number of the tankers, MPs, 11b's, etc, that I've come across, are so far from culturally aware its embrassing. On FTX's when I've got the N word being flung around, and rag head this, and camel jockey that, and let me tell you the story about the time I shot a haji in his leg and he fell down 2 stories cracking his head open like a watermelon, and that bitch started wailing 'lulululululululu!" and don't touch 'em cause they've all got #### on their left hands, I find myself sitting off to the side with a couple other guys shaking our heads. I've made it a point to address this with my Unit twice so far, but when we're training with other units, no one is going to listen to one word we have to say - I've seen what happens when an E7 enters a hooch and tries to explain why maybe these sort of antics aren't the wisest move. As soon as he leaves everyone just starts making fun of him. And there's two of us off to the side just looking at eachother, with no idea what to do.

So while PSYOP and CA may come across as arrogant sometime, there's a reason.

When I was in Basic Training I was 30 years old. I had some 18 year old kid decide I must be an al Qaeda spy because I had a funny name, I was brown, and I told him to ease up when he was regaling us all with stories about how he was going to kill dirty hajis. (there was a 40 year old Iraqi 09L in our Company, btw, and I spoke up because this kid was way out of hand). Mind you, this AQ spy thing didnt stop with the one guy, it went on all cycle long.



That sort of thing colors our perceptions. Sure, PSYOP needs to rise above it, but let's be clear, there's some call for what you're seeing on your end.

[RTK]

Reed, would you argue that when the #### hits the fan in *your* tactical arena (bullets flying all around) your frontal cortex is fully engaged? I know mine shuts off when dealing with novel fight or flight stimuli.

Depends on how you deal with stress and process information. Can you integrate the 5 aspects of weather, the 5 aspects of terrain, the 7 forms of contact, safe distance zones, backdrops, weapons effects, mitigation of collateral damage, then look at both the pros and cons of each in a split second while, at the same time, weighing the combat multipliers, organic and inorganic to your unit, and bring them all to bear properly in a reasonable amount of time in order to maximize your element's opportunities for success in closing with and destroying your enemy?

Some see that as cerebral. Others see it as instinct after being well trained. Stress innoculation training, that is, to place Soldiers and Marines in those situations in a training environment that best replicate combat conditions. Others call it OODA. Whatever your thoughts are, warfare is cerebral whether you're yelling "gunner, sabot, tank" or dealing with how best to build a school in an impoverished area.

our day to day interactions with non-combatants had secondary and on-going effects, so we constantly had to consider our actions. The hostility towards PSYOPS and occasionally CA is the attitude that PSYOPS is a PSYOPS thing, you grunts wouldn't understand. Try us, we do it day to day.

I worked with 3 TPTs and 2 CA teams over two years. I can speak to the condescension firsthand. I'm fairly competent and well-read in a number of different areas. It astonished the TPT team that I knew their sole purpose wasn't to dump leaflets all over my 54 villages in my AO. They were speechless when I explained I knew their mission was to demoralize the enemy by causing dissension and unrest among his ranks, while at the same time convincing the local population to support American troops and providing me with atmospherics and the attitudes and behaviors of those I was trying to help and those who I was trying to capture or kill.

I think too many CA and PSYOP teams go into a OPCON/TACON relationship expecting to get the shaft. Many more enter into the relationship believing wholeheartedly they're going to get used and abused. Abused children abuse their own children. I think it's become so expected (and I think wrongly so) that it clouds candid and open discussion from the get go.

If anything, that might be the first thing that needs to get ironed out before all else in the CF/PSYOP/CA relationships.

[Voodoun]

<Depends on how you deal with stress and process information. Can you integrate the 5 aspects of weather, the 5 aspects of terrain, the 7 forms of contact, safe distance zones, backdrops, weapons effects, mitigation of collateral damage, then look at both the pros and cons of each in a split second while, at the same time, weighing the combat multipliers, organic and inorganic to your unit, and bring them all to bear properly in a reasonable amount of time in order to maximize your element's opportunities for success in closing with and destroying your enemy?>

Nope, sure can't. Wouldnt have a clue how to start.

[Stan]

Depends on how you deal with stress and process information. Can you integrate the 5 aspects of weather, the 5 aspects of terrain, the 7 forms of contact, safe distance zones, backdrops, weapons effects, mitigation of collateral damage, then look at both the pros and cons of each in a split second while, at the same time, weighing the combat multipliers, organic and inorganic to your unit, and bring them all to bear properly in a reasonable amount of time in order to maximize your element's opportunities for success in closing with and destroying your enemy?

Some see that as cerebral. Others see it as instinct after being well trained. Stress innoculation training, that is, to place Soldiers and Marines in those situations in a training environment that best replicate combat conditions.

Nope, sure can't. Wouldn't have a clue how to start.

This has been one of literally hundreds of points made thus far. You may refute and argue these issues right up to the point you are in-country for the first 30 days. On that date, even a PhD won't save your alpha.

Diplomats around the globe are quasi centrally-managed because they tend to open their mouth, spout intellect and get the US Military into trouble, but are rarely around thereafter.

Please do us one favor: Get off the hot brass on the forearm already. You've taken it so far out of context.

[ODB]

I am now getting knee deep into FM 33-1-1 and FM 3-05.30 (Psychological Operations). As if I didn't already have enough psycological issues.....

[Ken White]

...would you argue that when the #### hits the fan in *your* tactical arena (bullets flying all around) your frontal cortex is fully engaged? I know mine shuts off when dealing with novel fight or flight stimuli.

As RTK said, if you can't fight and think -- fast -- you're dead. Two wars, several other soirees and I never had a problem doing both. To imply otherwise is patronizing and will not win you allies.

...the PSYOPer was caught in a delicate social situation that required him to use cognitive function in a manner that the average infantryman (we all assume, and maybe wrongfully so) doesnt generally.

Yes, you do assume -- and as they say that make an ass out of you and not me. Snark breeds snark, a PsyOps and internet truth...

That is a bad assumption for both current theaters and a really bad one for a more intense war. Indications are there folks aren't turning off their thinking for visceral / instinctive / drilled reactions. They rarely do, rumors to the contrary not withstanding.

Bingo. Is this acceptable? We have the power to ratchet past the turf wars,

True but only if there is a really pressing need, an existential threat. We do not face such a threat now so the turf battles will continue.

...but we seem to lack the political will to confront this 'everything America does is bad' mentality.

Not bad enough at this point to develop a consensus in opposition. If it gets worse (and it may not once everyone gets over their BDS), pressure from all us moderates and the as goofy as the 'America's wrong' crowd far right fringe will kill it -- or make it hide.

As far as do we want to confront the Salafi ideology? Well, that has certainly been the goal of policymakers at this point. Making judgements about whether thats the right or wrong thing to do is beyond my comfort zone.

If you know that, you're ahead of me -- I have yet to see any goal other than to confront the actors and attack their funding and (to an extent and not too well done) their credibility. IMO, that's not the same thing as attacking the ideology -- which would be futile in any event.

[Ken White]

So while PSYOP and CA may come across as arrogant sometime, there's a reason.

Nah, not really. Far from it, in fact. Some forget what it's like to be an 18 year old right out of high school, perhaps...

I'd also suggest that the stuff you cite doesn't happen in good unit -- well, it does happen, but it gets immediately squashed -- as you'll learn.

[reed11b]

Dang, must learn to type faster... Training is not the unit. Most of it is also hot air from insecure young males, they may laugh at the NCO, but I doubt they will cross him in the field. Also when units get deployed, a lot of that bravado disappears because most soldiers I know are VERY serious about doing a professional job. There are bad units where that behavior persists into a deployment but they are the exception, not the rule. It is also the reason that Ken and Wilf and I , along w/ many others, scream that initial training should be far more involved and that the current truism that real training does not start until a soldier gets to his unit must be placed on it's ear.
Reed

[Voodoun]

Hey, I hope you guys are right about that, but whether they cross him in the field is irrelevant, if their mind set includes 'its ok to use words like Haji that I don't understand in a perjorative manner, and to openly derogate their culture' then it seems natural that a PSYOPer wouldnt necessarily want to spend the time trying to re-educate them.

Again, *I don't know*, I really dont, I'm just thinking out loud.

But sorry, the examples above were not all while in institutional training - I've heard that sort of speech in my unit, and in other units we were training with on FTX

[Steve Blair]

Just a gentle reminder to everyone to lighten up and take a deep breath. We were all new here once. The internet can't capture things like tone and facial expressions, so it can be very hard at times to tell what someone intends to 'say' (or doesn't intend to 'say') through the typed word. That goes for both new folks and those who've been here for a time.

[marct]

Hey, I hope you guys are right about that, but whether they cross him in the field is irrelevant, if their mind set includes 'its ok to use words like Haji that I don't understand in a perjorative manner, and to openly derogate their culture' then it seems natural that a PSYOPer wouldnt necessarily want to spend the time trying to re-educate them.

No worries. BTW, there is always a lot of cross-cultural miscommunication that happens; even with the PSYOPS crowd .

[Voodoun]

hell, cross cultural nothing, there's miscommunication going on rampantly right here!

[Voodoun]

First off, I presented a case that was not MINE, I was RELAYING an explanation, I was not saying one thing was true and one wasnt, I was asking questions to explore a notion, and I was bending over backwards to qualify that discussion with words like 'assume' and 'perhaps wrongfully' but you're still jumping down my throat? Sure thing!


So what have we learned? Don't ask questions, don't be informed or have an informed opinion, because the only thing that matters here is military experience, accept everything presented at face value, never drill deeper for substantiation, absolutely never reject straw men and defend your contention, and most importantly we have just discovered that PSYOP is a job anyone can do, because there's no cognitive difference between being an infantry soldier and a PSYOP soldier, despite what former infantry guys turned PSYOP say about it - and even having the audacity to be curious about this, to simply want to discuss it, is condescending and insulting.

Got it. I'm on board now. How's that for snarkiness?

<If you know that, you're ahead of me -- I have yet to see any goal other than to confront the actors and attack their funding and (to an extent and not too well done) their credibility. IMO, that's not the same thing as attacking the ideology -- which would be futile in any event.>


http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/ar...25/25roots.htm

http://www.nctc.gov/press_room/speeches/20070910.pdf

"We must better coordinate departmental efforts to counter radicalization both at home and abroad"

"Strategic Offense: Analysis to guide national policy and policymakers in countering violent extremism and radical ideology as a threat to our way of life"

And in a scathing critique that cites numerous policy makers, thinktanks, and the president:

http://ics.leeds.ac.uk/papers/vp01.c...339&paper=1803

So yes, when the president calls the GWOT a long lasting struggle with ideology, and launches a campaign directed to "transform Islam", I think its pretty safe to say we were confronting more than just the actors, but attempting to bring transformative change.

But my sleeves were cuffed while I pulled those up, so there's no validity to substantive points made.

I guess I'm just a raging dillhole that has clearly offended many of you with my unforgivable questions and constant reminders that I know very little about soldiering, and am just trying to learn and understand.

SWEET. Got it. <----------- tongue in cheek sarcasm, just to ensure no one misunderestimates my tone and intention

[Ken White]

First off, I presented a case that was not MINE, I was RELAYING an explanation, I was not saying one thing was true and one wasnt, I was asking questions to explore a notion, and I was bending over backwards to qualify that discussion with words like 'assume' and 'perhaps wrongfully' but you're still jumping down my throat? Sure thing!

Relaying hearsay and couching it as fact doesn't draw many backers; if you do it, then you should expect it to be challenged.

So what have we learned? Don't ask questions, don't be informed or have an informed opinion, because the only thing that matters here is military experience, accept everything presented at face value, never drill deeper for substantiation, absolutely never reject straw men and defend your contention...

If that's what you learned from this, you weren't paying attention. You might have, possibly should have, learned that if you ask a question, you'll get an answer and if it's one that you don't agree with, that does not necessarily mean the answer is incorrect. There's nothing wrong with having an opinion and stating that opinion; you after all were welcomed here and encouraged to ask questions and if there's one thing that can be said about this board is that diverse opinions are welcome -- however, when you state an opinion that starts "I've been told..." you're probably going to catch some flak. You can drill deeper for substantiation but when several people confirm what you were originally told and you tell all them they're wrong because you were "told something else." they're going to lose interest in you pretty quickly.

most importantly we have just discovered that PSYOP is a job anyone can do, because there's no cognitive difference between being an infantry soldier and a PSYOP soldier, despite what former infantry guys turned PSYOP say about it - and even having the audacity to be curious about this, to simply want to discuss it, is condescending and insulting.

That's an interesting take on what's above in this thread. I suggest you go back and relook it. The point made was simply that infantry types have cognitive requirements as well -- they differ, certainly, but they exist. RTK tried to point out a few of them and your response was a dismissive "Nope, sure can't. Wouldnt have a clue how to start." Not exactly top of the line discussion.

You provided three links; none of them refuted what I said:

"" If you know that, you're ahead of me -- I have yet to see any goal other than to confront the actors and attack their funding and (to an extent and not too well done) their credibility. IMO, that's not the same thing as attacking the ideology -- which would be futile in any event.""

The first is from 2005 when we were groping (we still are IMO, your mileage may vary --and that's okay); the second doesn't change much and the third sort of seems to agree with me citing 23 reasons given for the various wars...

So, you said

"So yes, when the president calls the GWOT a long lasting struggle with ideology, and launches a campaign directed to "transform Islam", I think its pretty safe to say we were confronting more than just the actors, but attempting to bring transformative change.

But my sleeves were cuffed while I pulled those up, so there's no validity to substantive points made."

You quote a man who has given 23 different reasons for his actions -- which is irrelevant because all I did was state my opinion and suggest that attempts to attack an ideology would not succeed. history is pretty much on my side on that, I think...

Conversely, if one were to try to wean people away from an ideology, a quite different thing, one might succeed. Attacking ideologies (we've done it before) will get you a few fellow travelers and the marginally involved, it will not change the true believers an iota. That was my point.

So what you took as a personal attack wasn't even close to being one; I was merely making the point that no matter what was said, it's unlikely to happen.

I guess I'm just a raging dillhole that has clearly offended many of you with my unforgivable questions and constant reminders that I know very little about soldiering, and am just trying to learn and understand.

SWEET. Got it. <----------- tongue in cheek sarcasm, just to ensure no one misunderestimates my tone and intention

It might help if you wouldn't try to impress everyone with your wit (my wife gets on me about that constantly for some reason... ) and would realize that no one here started there day with the mantra "Get Voodoun.' You ask questions, get answers, assess them, make up your own mind on what to retain and what to discard -- but if you respond to answers that you don't like with sarcasm or condescension, you're likely to get it right back and if you get overly defensive about flak you've almost invited -- and you did -- then things spiral out of control. Your choice.

No one's trying to pick a fight with you. How about you?

[hdc_bst]

I signed up for the board primarily so I could jump into this thread.

In particular I want to share my thoughts on this little bit...

... and most importantly we have just discovered that PSYOP is a job anyone can do, because there's no cognitive difference between being an infantry soldier and a PSYOP soldier, despite what former infantry guys turned PSYOP say about it - and even having the audacity to be curious about this, to simply want to discuss it, is condescending and insulting.

As a CAPOC comrade, I think I can understand where this bit of sarcasm is coming from. It is pretty disheartening to hear that the time you sacrificed at SWCS does not make you a uniquely valuable asset. I will agree with the other posters (RTK and Ken White, I believe) that PSYOPs, and also CMO, can be performed by any soldier, they are not some arcane art.

So, why bother having a TPT or CAT-A anyway? Because someone somewhere (probably in Virginia) thought a TPT or CAT-A would be a valuable asset to a BN commander. It's up to you as a TPT or CAT-A member to prove them right, . You do this by being a SME - sure anyone can do PSYOPs, but you need to be able to do it more effectively. As a SME you can be assigned critical PSYOP missions, and assist identifying potential applications/effective tactics.

In my opinion CMO is very difficult to teach in a classroom environment, and I expect that PSYOP is similar. I seem to recall that you're relatively new - in which case it's very unlikely that you are the SME you need to be. If this is the case, let me encourage you to go into sponge mode. Learn as much as you can about tactical psyops from the NCOs leaving your unit, and from other sources outside of CAPOC, such as perhaps this board. Learn what people have done, what's worked and what hasn't. When you're deployed use your critical thinking skills, and figure out why things do or don't work as you experience them.

Oh yeah, and I'd recommend keep the knowledge that as a member of CAPOC you're on average more intelligent, better educated, and better looking than the rest of the armed forces internalized. Myth or reality, it's good for esprit de corps in the unit, not so much when playing our support role.

[Ken White]

he said grudgingly...

Good post hdc_bst. Like somebody said, we're all in this together. Your advice on becoming the SME is important. Credibility is won by competence and little else. What one know counts not nearly as much as what one does...