SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: KLP who wrote (221040)9/25/2007 5:16:55 AM
From: unclewest  Read Replies (2) of 793926
 
I hadn't realized the Generals took out the SF....That makes no sense.... WHY? I'm certainly not doubting you, but simply asking why? Was that a military decision, or a political one?

You ask good questions...who are you gathering Intel for?

The West Point cabal believes the wins should belong to them. Conventional LT Gen Dale Daily was assigned to Afghanistan after SF initially secured the problem. He immediately called for conventional troops to take over saying, "This is the last time Special Forces get out in front." Later he visited Ft Bragg and announced SF are housekeepers.
Let that sink in.

I believe the reason is based on the fact that those generals are untrained in SF skills, thay could not pass SF assessment and selection much less the Q course, and therefore will never be able to command SF units.
Now that unconventional/asymmetrical/irregular warfare is getting so much money they will do anything to get in to increase their power base even if it means denigrating one of our nation's most important strategic capabilities.

And one more question....For every fighting soldier we have in theater, how many others does it take to support him/her? And I am assuming these numbers are included in the total fighting strength of our soldiers....right?

If for instance, the ratio is 1 soldier with 3 others to support...then out of 100,000, we would really have only 25,000 to do the fighting ...??

In conventional wars the ratio hovers around 7:1. It should be lower now because contractors have taken over some support functions. I don't know the exact ratio in Iraq.

In a briefing I recently attended, I jotted down some numbers and later calculated the USSOCOM ratio is around 13:1.
That is ridiculous. An SF Group is <1:1 and all the groups are included in USSOCOM's numbers. That makes SOCOM one big fat (supersized) Headquarters and it shows. With five years under General Brown, they certainly missed the boat in this war.

The constant tinkering with SF by conventional land warfare thinkers is having what may become disastrous effects on SF. I am convinced that what we really need to do to preserve and keep our SF assets intact is create a separate SF/UW command. This would enable SF to manage their own destiny and remain a major player in our armed forces.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News