Originally Posted by
Tom Odom
Partly true as an 0-6 will command. But a GO has the training center and the SFA will fall under him. That is the same set up for the Ops Group and it has worked quite well.
Personally I would rather see an active and civilian component approach to the mission. Why? Because when an Army unit stands up with a civilian component (DAC not contractor) that is a statement of probable longevity.
That also addresses some of the issues regarding moving to Louisiana.
I agree with your point that giving SFA in total to the SF community will essentially remove it from the lexicon of the conventional force. I have long argued that the happy bridge between the two needs to be at the MiTT training with SF providing a significant core of instructors. Perhaps that will emerge here once this gets started given our SOF role.
Tom
Bookmarks