who left a Group to go to the Agency. Different jobs...
Agree with you -- and so would several guys I know
who left a Group to go to the Agency. Different jobs...
Ummm
Any ODA's beating down the door to get an Agency guy on the team? IMO looks like another one of those survival tactics. HUMIT, well you guys can fill in the rest, will not go into details.
I got a thought, why not utilize SF as the Agency's Ground Branch?
I do believe I read/heard somewhere that McCain wanted to transform the 2 into some kind of hybrid organization, going back to the OSS days.
I will stay with my initial assessment, survival.
Lastly, why does everyone want someone else's piece of the pie? Everyone wants to be shooter nowadays.
ODB
Exchange with an Iraqi soldier during FID:
Why did you not clear your corner?
Because we are on a base and it is secure.
Not me, I'm opposed
to violence....
Have heard
ODB
Exchange with an Iraqi soldier during FID:
Why did you not clear your corner?
Because we are on a base and it is secure.
Interesting, thanks for the link.
Shooter oriented from the word go...
He advocate more SF oriented to the Arab World and the ME/South Asia. he also notes that it takes time to build SOF people -- one presumes he's given some though to the facts that by the time his reorganization is complete, it may no longer be needed and that his total focus on the Islamic issue -- which is not our only problem -- may lead us into not being ready elsewhere.
That's a shortsighted and wrong headed approach.
I did get a laugh out of this quote:"Additionally, the 75th Ranger Regiment and 160th SOAR frequently operate under the control of JSOC."
See some things differently
He does but I took it to be tinged with sarcasm:he also notes that it takes time to build SOF people
I did get a laugh out of this quote:What makes SOF special? The short answer to this question
is: carefully selected, highly trained personnel that can conduct
challenging missions that often exceed the capabilities of
general purpose forces. However, the rigorous and lengthy
selection, assessment and training required to create SOF has
a downside: small force size. A truism within the SOF community is that special operators cannot be mass-produced. (Bold for my emphasis)
Quote:
"Additionally, the 75th Ranger Regiment and 160th SOAR frequently operate under the control of JSOC."
Oh, if only most knew what was truly happening within JSOC these days, goes back to my previous statement: Lastly, why does everyone want someone else's piece of the pie? Everyone wants to be shooter nowadays.
I cannot agree with the shifting of forces focus as well. When one looks globally, Russia is awakening, Central/South America are running right up there with ME, so I personally do not see reorganizing focus as a good thing.
Finally, many know my thoughts on MARSOC, and my belief that it was a money grab........still wondering about this....maybe someone can enlighten me.
Looks a lot like organizations already in existence.Marine Corps Forces Special Operations Command (MARSOC)
• MARSOC is a recent addition to SOCOM
• Still not fully stood up
– Currently at around 1500 personnel
– Building to 2600
• Will eventually consist of three primary elements
– Marine Special Operations Advisory Groups (MSOAGs)
• Formerly know as Foreign Military Training Units (FMTUs)
• Focus on FID
– Marine Special Operations Battalions (MSOBs)
• Organized into deployable companies that focus on DA and CT
– Marine Special Operations Support Group (MSOSG)
ODB
Exchange with an Iraqi soldier during FID:
Why did you not clear your corner?
Because we are on a base and it is secure.
Nowadays? This is hardly a recent phenomenon. Everybody wants to be John Rambo when they join SF. Most adjust to the reality of what we do. Some don't. Some don't have to.Originally Posted by ODB
SFC W
Last edited by Uboat509; 03-10-2009 at 02:13 AM.
Marsoc
I'm not a MARSOC apologist or even part of them. I did serve in Force Recon back in the 90's. From what I was told by some, one reason for MARSOC was to get the DA and more importantly Deep/Distant Reconnaissance specialty of Marine Recon. Also remember the Marine Corps back in the eighties opted not to send anyone to USSOCOM as it feared it would lose those assets to USSOCOM. Fast forward to the 2000's, Det 1 was tested under NSWG and was very successful however was DA not FID or the such. The Marine Corps had the opportunity to become part of USSOCOM and opted for it, so now you have MARSOC. We now have our SOF, which wasn't the case with Marine Recon as it wasn't a USSOCOM asset, even though Force Recon was pretty comparable to other SOF type organizations. I know from speaking to some there, they are constantly evolving and I don't think the final version of MARSOC has shown itself. Hope this helps.
Boot
Policy, Policy, Policy. ODB, Long But pls read Thru
MarSoc wasn't about money but a much more Powerful Motivator, Policy.
Its Policy that sets what is a Conventional Force, what is a Special Operations Force, what is a General Purpose Force... Its Policy thats says XYZ conventional units are Rapid Deployment Forces & can deploy immediately on the word of the President.
...It was Policy that the Marine Corps successfully used to argue to keep its SOF capable Forces fr/ being chopped to SoCom in the '80s. Arguing that unlike the other services the Marine Corps as a whole is listed as a GPF who's missions can border whats defined as S-O. Also unlike the other services, its SOF capable units are Totally integrated in the day-day Operations of the MAGTF on all levels.
At the time, a successful argument on the Grounds of Policy.
It was The USMC that found itself on the wrong side of Policy in the yrs leading up to MarSoc w/ a SecDef (Rumsfeld) set to write New Policy regarding SOF & their usage in the future of the GWOT.
W/out getting into the details, as some of you already know, that SecDef changed Policy & said that in Matters of the Pursuance of Terrorism the T-SOCs in each Theater Command would be the Lead Commander. ALL other Theater Deputy Commanders including the Theater Commander Himself were to be in a Supporting Role.
This was a major Policy shift for the Marines. Prior to this it was standard practice for the Theater Commander to use Marines, usually already on scene Forward Deployed on a MEU(SOC), as an In-Extremis(time sensitive) SOF until a SoCom/JSOC sponsored force, usually CONUS, could be assembled.
This POLICY changed w/ Rumsfeld who made all things Terror related strictly the Purview of SoCom's T-SOCs.
But for the Marine Corps the writing was already on the wall. This was already known to them since the opening days of A'stan when their MSPF's were constantly denied High Priority Missions & their highly trained Raiding Companies on the MEU(SOC)'s were often relegated to guard duty by the T-SOC who was mostly running & assigning the early missions.
Rumsfeld's Policy change, in I believe '06, would make that kind of tasking in the long run in Terrorism Assignments... OFFICIAL.
To add INSULT to INJURY after using the MEU ships & an empty Carrier as a Launch Pad & early Base of Operations, SoCom began looking into developing a FwdDep'd Composite SOF Strike Force that they hoped could be based on the MEU's ARG ships, much like the old SEAL Strike Plt.
SO the MARINES went Proactive. In '02 they signed the MOA that established Joint Ops w/ SoCom & re-established the by then defunked USMC-SoCom Board which was supposed to meet every 6mths since SoCom's inception.
In '03 the Marines tried to get ahead of the proposed Composite Strike Force by Proposing another MOA that was a Proof of Concept for a Test Unit that would prove its MSPF Concept as capable of filling this role, which became DET-1.
HQMC was not however originally looking to begin a New Command under SoCom or turn over any forces, but just establish that its MSPF was as or more capable of running various Spec Ops as any Tier II Force and therefore should be competitive for all High Priority T-II Missions.
This was constantly repeated by the Commandant when asked if the Corps was trying to create a new SOF & his answer was, "The Marine Corps does not like Headquarters on top of Headquarters." & that "Present relationships were fine". This was echoed by Rumsfeld who repeatedly stated he had to literally force the Marines hand.
You see the Marine Corps as a whole faced being BLANKED out of the whole Global Fight against Terrorism in any Proactive & Meaningful way. So It provided MOA's to Prove it could provide units that could play on SoCom's level & Rumsfeld forced the Merger b/c it was a good fit.
SoCom was not going to sign off some of its future Global Hi-Pri Missions to Marine units they don't control & disbands every 18mths & is not totally dedicated to S-O; they won their arguement.
The Corps was determined not to permanently lose its Marines & have an Operational Structure that put other(Traditional) Marine Units in a position to play a part in future SOF Missions; they won theirs.
There's more detail to it but that about sums it up.
I could go on & on from here but would rather just go back & forth.
Also___ The Idea that the Corps was after SoCom's money is baseless, its really something that gets batted around on Discussion Boards then PARROTED until it becomes GOSPEL.
The USMC is asked by Congress every yr to greatly expand its budget but it declines. Could they use more money, sure, but that ignores the long history of fiscal discipline the Corps is known for. There've been some exceptions for some must have big ticket items, but even that was few & frugal compared to the other services.
This move was about Policy, plain & simple.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks