Col. Hackworth on special ops
abcnews.go.com
Trained to Kill
A Chat With Ex-Commando Col. David Hackworth
Will the use of American special forces like the
Navy SEALS and the Army's Green Berets help
win the war on terrorism?
Watch the latest edition of Chris Wallace's
Internet Exposé, featuring an interview with Navy
SEAL legend Dick Marcinko, and read the
transcript of our chat below with former
Commando Col. David Hackworth.
A highly decorated veteran of three wars,
Hackworth commanded special forces units in
Korea and Vietnam. He is the author of the 1989
best-selling autobiography About Face: The
Odyssey of an American Warrior.
Moderator at 2:01 p.m. ET
Col. Hackworth, thanks for joining us.
What kind of physical shape do you have to be
in to join the ranks of America's elite fighters?
Col. David Hackworth at 2:01 p.m. ET
Top shape. Top. The Green Berets and SEALS
are the cream of the cream. They eat nails and
live snakes.
Moderator at 2:02 p.m. ET
Tom asks: "What lessons learned in Vietnam can be applied to the new
conflict?"
Col. David Hackworth at 2:02 p.m. ET
Use the trench knife, not the sledgehammer. Bombs won't win this war. We
must fight it smart.
Rick Clark at 2:03 p.m. ET
How much weight can be placed on the U.S. and British special forces
having served in the Afghan-Soviet conflict? … has too much time passed
for their involvement to provide satisfactory intelligence and operation
possibilities?
Col. David Hackworth at 2:04 p.m. ET
Their experience regarding the weather, the terrain and the enemy — the
three major factors of war — are essential. The old-timers will bring the
new guys up to speed in a hurry. Their experience is priceless.
Jon Cohen at 2:05 p.m. ET
Despite the bravery of our special forces, they took some terrible
casualties in Panama and Somalia caused by poor mission planning and
failed communications. Do you think we have learned enough from these
experiences to prevent similar foul-ups in Afghanistan?
Col. David Hackworth at 2:06 p.m. ET
I hope so. From my discussions with special ops folks, I think they will not
make the same mistakes made in Panama, Grenada and Somalia.
Moderator at 2:06 p.m. ET
A question from CMRobbins: "Can we really decimate this network? Is it a
trap to go in there without doing our homework?"
Col. David Hackworth at 2:07 p.m. ET
The key to fighting terrorists is good intelligence, having great patience
and understanding the only way to win against the terrorist is by
out-terrorizing him.
Moderator at 2:07 p.m. ET
Eric asks: "How many of our operations do you believe are secret and how
much do you think has already been done?"
Col. David Hackworth at 2:07 p.m. ET
They're all secret and if I'd told you what had been done, I'd have to kill
you.
Rich at 2:08 p.m. ET
Dick Marcinko implied in his books that special forces were becoming too
complacent and that old-line military commanders were having too much
influence on the goals and training of these forces. In your opinion, are
the special forces of today the best they can be? If not, what additional
steps need to be taken to get them prepared for all of the risks they may
face now and in the future?
Col. David Hackworth at 2:10 p.m. ET
The U.S. military has been greatly politicized in the interest of political
correctness over the last decade. Unfortunately, some of this kinder,
gentler attitude has crept into the special operations community.
But I think there are enough hard-core pros still running the choo choo
train to prevent what has happened to our conventional army happening
to special operations people.
Brian Meeker at 2:11 p.m. ET
A question from a longtime reader and admirer: How important is it to
educate the public about the nature of the coming battles? This war will
clearly not be won with bombs, missiles, and columns of tanks. It seems to
me that while guerilla actions have always been a part of previous
conflicts (going back to Rogers Rangers in the Revolutionary War), for the
first time the United States is set to engage in a war where
nontraditional/guerilla action is the order of the day. How do we keep the
trust and confidence of an American public that is now accustomed to
seeing its wars play out on the 24 hour news cycle?
Col. David Hackworth at 2:12 p.m. ET
Excellent question. It is essential that we have long range American
support for war that will last as long as World War II.
It will be a new form of war that our nation has never seen. It will be a
cross between World War II, Vietnam, Desert Storm using old weapons
and weapons that are just coming off the drawing board.
But if we learned anything from Vietnam, if the people don't hang in there
and support the war from beginning to end, then like Vietnam, we'll lose.
PD Carrier at 2:13 p.m. ET
What role can the conventional forces (ground) play in the coming
conflict?
Col. David Hackworth at 2:15 p.m. ET
I think more of a security role, i.e. securing launch bases and serving as
reaction forces.
My greatest worry is that our conventional military, less the Marine Corps,
had so much emphasis on such training as "Consideration For Others"
that the standards and discipline and skill of our conventional forces are
more like walking body bags.
They should not be used in a fierce combat role until the standards of the
past have been reestablished.
Dawn at 2:16 p.m. ET
Someone made a comment on TV recently during the aftermath of the
terrorist attacks and said that he could not reveal too much information
because "Osama bin Laden could be watching CNN too." What
advantages and disadvantages do you see in the intense media coverage
of these events and how will such coverage affect our ability to wage an
effective war against terrorism?
Col. David Hackworth at 2:17 p.m. ET
During World War II there was a saying: Loose Lips Sink Ships. I have
been appalled at watching the generals who are recently retired spilling
out their guts to their employers on TV which will end up providing
valuable information to the terrorist enemy.
If I had my way, I would chop these generals tongues out because they're
putting our people in extreme danger. The essence of war is surprise and
you don't have surprise when you give your enemy your game plan.
Rick at 2:18 p.m. ET
Do you believe the United States lacks the required degree of
ruthlessness to effectively eliminate the terrorists themselves and ALL
nations assisting them in any way?
Col. David Hackworth at 2:21 p.m. ET
From the conversations I have heard or read from our leaders from the
president down, the leadership certainly has the resolve to win this
sucker.
My worry is the American people who have this mindset of instant
gratification. Do they have the fire in their belly to see this fight to its
rightful end?
Everyone must understand that this is a total and unconditional war, and if
we don't destroy the terrorists, they will destroy us. They're exactly like
termites in the foundation of a wooden house; you have to one by one
exterminate all of them.
Gene Riccoboni at 2:22 p.m. ET
Could you enlighten us on whatever details you may have about the
military's most cutting-edge weapons. Specifically, I'd love to know how
much more advanced our soldiers' equipment and weapons are vs. the
technology that was available to them during the Gulf War. Considering
that the average PC in 1991 ran at 75 mhz vs. 2.0 ghz, it's clear that the
firepower and accuracy of today's weapons must be truly unimaginable.
Col. David Hackworth at 2:24 p.m. ET
The basic weapons which soldiers use to kill haven't improved that much
since Desert Storm. Some of the bombs are smarter and some of the
high-tech stuff like communications and computers are mind-boggling, but
I've never seen a computer kill an enemy soldier.
What's needed is cold steel, the same stuff we were using in 1776. So the
real secret weapon of any military is not its wonder weapons but the spirit
and ability of its individual soldiers.
Omar at 2:24 p.m. ET
Who's tougher, a SEAL or a Green Beret?
Col. David Hackworth at 2:25 p.m. ET
I wouldn't want to tangle with either. Both are America's best.
Dave at 2:25 p.m. ET
Are drugs and/or torture an effective means of interrogation in the field,
especially when you need to get information quickly?
Col. David Hackworth at 2:27 p.m. ET
There's a rule of war called the Geneva Convention and civilized states
don't employ such techniques. We can expect the terrorists to, and we
know that the Taliban has a habit of frequently skinning their prisoner
alive before they chop him piece by piece into minced meat.
I think most of our soldiers will follow the rule of war and, perhaps more
important, "but for the grace of God there go I" (meaning if you do bad
things, bad things will come back at you).
Jay Pounders at 2:27 p.m. ET
What are the special force's instructions regarding surrender? Are they
instructed to fight "to the death" or are they allowed to surrender
themselves peacefully, if they find themselves in a situation where they
are unable to escape or complete their mission(s) successfully?
Col. David Hackworth at 2:29 p.m. ET
I think under the circumstances of the enemy they're fighting, no one
would surrender. When I was in the Raiders during the Korean War, every
Raider carried a pistol which was his "Go to Hell Weapon" and the last
round was always saved for that soldier.
Tim at 2:29 p.m. ET
Colonel, my hat is off to you for serving our country. A quick question:
Many articles have been comparing the different operation philosophies of
the British SAS and American SF (Green Berets, SEALs, Deltas) in that
the SAS are trained to blend in with the locals, long treks to target, and
surviving for long periods behind enemy line. The Americans, on the other
hand, rely heavily on technology and firepower, use helicopters for
insertion to target and extraction and do not usually stay for extended
period of time behind the lines. What's your comment on this regarding
Green Berets, SEALs and Deltas capabilities?
Col. David Hackworth at 2:31 p.m. ET
Somebody's given you some wrong information. Our special ops people
basically follow the SAS who, I might add, were their original trainers back
in World War II. Both groups use exactly the same techniques.
Moderator at 2:31 p.m. ET
Mike Evans asks: "Do you think women soldiers should be fighting
alongside their male counterparts in Afghanistan?"
Col. David Hackworth at 2:33 p.m. ET
Fortunately, there are no special ops group operatives that are women.
War is a nasty, nasty game that men shouldn't have to endure, let alone
women.
A second factor is that we must be very sensitive to the culture and
religion of the Afghani and Arab peoples. One of the things that has really
inflamed the Muslim world was seeing American women soldiers running
around in T-shirts during Desert Storm.
My advice to the generals is for them to take a page from the Israeli army
and leave the women at home when we go into Afghanistan and points
east.
Ron at 2:35 p.m. ET
The president's message to the world that "you are either with us, or you
are with the terrorists" was diplomatic language in its clearest form. Why,
then, are we seeking help from known terrorist states like Syria and Iran?
And how do we plan on dealing with these states when we're through with
Afghanistan?
Col. David Hackworth at 2:37 p.m. ET
I think the president's objective is to bring the whole world together
fighting terrorism. I think he's willing to wipe the slate clean about past
terrorist activity as long as every civilized nation joins the fight against
international terrorism. And I think this is what's happening.
But it won't be locked in concrete. It's going to be a loose coalition that will
take a lot of hard work to keep it together.
Jason Blosser at 2:38 p.m. ET
Walter Cronkite recommended we return to the system of media
censorship used during WW II where journalists accompanied troops into
combat but had to have their stories approved and/or edited for security
purposes. Do you think this might become necessary with the type of
secrecy that must be maintained for covert/special operations?
Col. David Hackworth at 2:38 p.m. ET
Walter is dead on target.
Renee at 2:39 p.m. ET
What role do you think the USMC will play in any retaliation?
Col. David Hackworth at 2:40 p.m. ET
I see the U.S. Marine Corps conducting quick raids in their
reconnaissance units, supporting the special operations effort. I see their
aircraft providing tactical aircraft support or logistical support. I don't see
them slamming ashore a la John Wayne at Iwo Jima.
Trent at 2:40 p.m. ET
Colonel, how likely is it that weapons we supplied to the Afghans to fight
the USSR years ago will be used against us now and should we have
similar concerns about aligning too closely with the Northern Alliance
rebels?
Col. David Hackworth at 2:43 p.m. ET
This has always been our problem. We give a friend a weapon one day,
and that friend becomes our enemy and shoots that weapon at us the
following day. This happened to us in Panama, in the war against Iraq,
and now because we provided the Afghan freedom fighters with weapons,
especially ground to air stinger anti-aircraft missiles, we might see some of
our own stuff coming at us again.
However, on the stinger, I would doubt that of the thousands of such
weapons that we had provided in the war against the Soviets, few would
be operational.
Gene Kraybill at 2:43 p.m. ET
You spoke of "out-terrorizing the terrorists." Is it possible to "out-terrorize"
someone who welcomes death as a martyr's ticket to sexual paradise?
Col. David Hackworth at 2:45 p.m. ET
In a way, you're right. These people are not unlike the Japanese
Kamikaze pilots of World War II.
But once they realize that our effort is so total that there's simply no way
they could win, for many their fanaticism will cool off, just as it did for many
Japanese suicide pilots.
Moderator at 2:46 p.m. ET
Col. Hackworth, thanks for joining us. Do you have any final thoughts on
the current conflict?
Col. David Hackworth at 2:47 p.m. ET
Yes I do. I probably talk to 15 million to 20 million Americans daily around
the nation on radio shows. I sense that so many young Americans are
really frightened. This is their first war and that's understandable.
But we have to remember that what the terrorist is trying to achieve is
fear. So I want to put this in perspective. Can we win this war?
If we go back to Dec. 7, 1941, when the Japanese launched their surprise
attack against us at Pearl Harbor, our nation instantly lost its fleet. It didn't
have an army. The few soldiers that it had were running around with
wooden rifles saying "bang, bang." And the aircraft we had were World
War I biplanes that used flower bags for bombs.
The Japanese controlled the Pacific, from China right across to the
Aleutian Islands by Alaska. The Nazis controlled all of Europe, were
knocking on the gates of Stalingrad, and controlled most of Africa. The
only guys left in the world to fight these monsters were the United States
and the good folks in the British Isles.
We picked ourselves up from the dust and rubble and we whipped them.
And they were not a few thousand terrorists embedded like termites under
rocks around the world. They were a 15 million man army that we were
opposing that had the best equipment and lots of lots of combat
experience. But we whipped them.
So taking on a few thousand terrorists is a piece of cake. As long as we
hang in there and give them the kind of support we're giving them now,
then we're gonna win this sucker!
Moderator at 2:53 p.m. ET
Our thanks to all those who participated in this event!
For years, America's special ops forces have conducted missions around
the world. Many have involved brutal covert activities that have been
criticized by some.
Given the recent attacks on America, should we be less concerned about
how our special forces operate overseas? Weigh in on our message
board.
Plus: Check out the latest edition of Chris Wallace's Internet Exposé,
featuring an interview with Navy SEAL legend Dick Marcinko.
Thanks for joining the live chat. |
