60 Minutes special on SF in A'stan

[Schmedlap]

Neil,

This is not a dig at SF, but I would just say that "Elite" and "Special" are not synonymous. "Special" is about a set of capabilities. "Elite" is a degree of skill or proficiency.

Speaking of 2005, I recall doing a joint op with my Infantry unit and an ODA. My Soldiers were a little more motivated than normal because they were working with an ODA. After the mission ended, they were all extremely disappointed and I asked what the problem was. They thought the SF guys were going to be doing some crazy, hollywood super-Jedi-knight-elite crazy stuff. But, "sir, they did the same thing we do. They just have better equipment." The look of disappointment in that Soldier's eyes made me think of how a child feels when he learns that Santa isn't real.

[Ken White]

...But, "sir, they did the same thing we do. They just have better equipment."

and that is just part of it. They're also to an extent at least more trusted to do risky things simply because the death of Joe Tentpeg or even LT Butterbar may arouse a Mother's ire but the death of SFC Rock, SOF warrior is tolerated because he opted for work that was (supposed to be) more dangerous. Plus he's been doing it for a while so the folks at home are hardened a bit in comparison to families of the 'kids.' Add the fact that he's from an organization that gets more training dollars and is smaller so the knowledge of skills is enhanced and thus trust is more willingly given

It isn't more dangerous really. It may be slightly so for a brief period but there's a lot more down time away from troop units so less total exposure in time. Consider then that a great many of your 'kids' had / have more combat time and dare I say combat experience than most of those SOF folks. A number of them have as much or more combat capability also.

We're all supposed to be in this together but we sure weren't back in my day and it seems worse now. Shame.

[politicsbyothermeans]

Setting aside, for a moment, that this little piece of "journalism" is about Green Berets, I mean Quiet Professionals, I mean US Special Forces, any American professional soldier that watches this report must feel some disgust and/or shame. For example there's a classic laugh or cry? moment when the knucklehead getting ready to smoke the Commandos flags his terp. There are the excuses made after cool guy pops two kids in the back of a van. I felt bad about myself, and my chosen profession, when he next pulled the ugly American move of screaming "Get off the bike" in English... because, you know, the guy on the bike probably speaks a lot more English than Dari or Pashtu.

Look, I'm not armchair quarterbacking these guys. There's no way to condense two months with a team into a 15 minute article. But there was some really amateurish stuff going on there and I can't help but wonder who gave this thing the green light.

I don't know any of those guys. What I do know is that they are all young and I do have a pretty good feel for young soldiers. What I remember back in the good old pre- 9/11 days was that the average age of an ODA was typically on the other side of 30. Further, I was a young dumb soldier once. Older smarter soldiers made me a little less dumb. I didn't see any older smarter soldiers in that video that could help those guys stop being dumb. SOF truths anyone?

I think this may have actually unseated the tank crew ventilating a car with their sidearms as "Most embarrassing 60 minute piece ever".

[Seabee]

What I remember back in the good old pre- 9/11 days was that the average age of an ODA was typically on the other side of 30.

Indeed, I remember in Desert Storm, we had 4 5th SFG NCOs attached to us. 2 were Vietnam vets, the other two also over 30.

[JMA]

Neil,

This is not a dig at SF, but I would just say that "Elite" and "Special" are not synonymous. "Special" is about a set of capabilities. "Elite" is a degree of skill or proficiency.

Speaking of 2005, I recall doing a joint op with my Infantry unit and an ODA. My Soldiers were a little more motivated than normal because they were working with an ODA. After the mission ended, they were all extremely disappointed and I asked what the problem was. They thought the SF guys were going to be doing some crazy, hollywood super-Jedi-knight-elite crazy stuff. But, "sir, they did the same thing we do. They just have better equipment." The look of disappointment in that Soldier's eyes made me think of how a child feels when he learns that Santa isn't real.

I have not seen the TV item.

I do have an understanding of what your men thought as it was similar to my experience in Rhodesia.

I wonder how many people here have access to a copy of Slim's "Defeat into Victory"? In the last chapter "Afterthoughts" he deals with his views on 'special forces' in less than complementary terms. Worth the effort to dig up.

One comment of his certainly rang a bell, "To begin with, they usually formed by attracting the best men from normal units by better conditions, promises of excitement, and not a little propaganda." So true.

The RLI (my regiment) suffered in this way as the best NCOs went across to the Selous Scouts and the SAS and left us constantly playing catch up in the corporal and sgt departments.

A typical SAS 4 man would comprise say an officer, a sgt, a cpl and maybe a trooper. For the strategic 'classic SAS role' this would be understandable like when on Op Cheese they took some bridges out 750km north of Salisbury in Zambia. But over the period of the war these strategic tasks were not that frequent. They also had time to prepare for such ops.

I remember being pulled out of the field and told that I was needed to do a recce on a possible base camp in Mozambique. Would be joined by 2 Selous Scouts that day and would deploy the following night. I took my sgt with me. 24 hours warning and straight off an op. Very different to the normal SF build up for a deployment.

I looked at it like two overlapping circles. There were common areas where we could and did similar tasks. Then there were routine type ops they never did and then there were other tasks they did which we would never attempt.

I never decry the ops these guys did but where I had problems with them was rather their attitude and not any professional jealousy. In fact I can't remember any instances where we worked with them where it did not leave me with a bad taste in the mouth for some reason on another.

They seemed on the one hand to love the "secret squirrel" image while on the other hand yearned to let everyone know what they were up to to achieve the personal recognition (with the glory and adulation). I actually felt sorry for them in many ways. Here you had first class, brave and dedicated soldiers starting to behave like prima donnas. The system allowed them to do that.

[jcustis]

The RLI (my regiment) suffered in this way as the best NCOs went across to the Selous Scouts and the SAS and left us constantly playing catch up in the corporal and sgt departments.

JMA, I am curious what some of the central reasons were for those guys going over. I have read numerous passages saying that the special ops elements nipped troops in the process, but the screening process was so exhausting I can only imagine strong volunteers went forward successfully.

Was the enticement a combination of better equipment, facilities, and pay, or some of the other intangibles like less emphasis on "conventional mindset" soldiering? Or was it typically a combination of all of the above?

[JMA]

JMA, I am curious what some of the central reasons were for those guys going over. I have read numerous passages saying that the special ops elements nipped troops in the process, but the screening process was so exhausting I can only imagine strong volunteers went forward successfully.

Was the enticement a combination of better equipment, facilities, and pay, or some of the other intangibles like less emphasis on "conventional mindset" soldiering? Or was it typically a combination of all of the above?

I seem to remember the SAS attracted them early on as corporals or even troopies and the selection took no prisoners. Those that made it stayed on. A few who passed did come back saying that they wanted the regular action the RLI saw than the more exciting ops with longer gaps in between.

The Scouts selection was more difficult than the SAS (I believe) and there were those who dropped out but even those were absorbed into training and even admin/stores posts in Scouts.

There was a lot of the people wanting to become "heavies" as we termed it (moving to special forces and growing a beard), there were others who needed a change after years of the same and facing years more in a high combat environment (they needed a break which few could look forward to). Then there were the senior corporals and sgts with a hundred contacts or more under the belt taking one look at their new 18/9 year old officers and deciding now is the time to make a move. In a lot of ways going to Scouts pass or fail the selection was a good move from a family point of view and seeking a less stressful environment with more time at home. As the fire force took off the periods of boredom between the moments of intense excitement got shorter and shorter and by the end the fire forces were being called out twice a day (not everyone being directly involved in a contact of course)

So yes most of the best NCOs moved on and so did the "not the greatest" but pretty experienced as well. Fortunately the way the fire force operated it was a tight closely controlled environment where the commander could mange the various personalities to the best effect.

Hope that helps.