One would only have to look back in history, post WW 1, when Congress asked: Why do we need two Army's. The U.S. Army and the Marine Corps?
The concept was to scrap the Marines! The U.S. Navy liked the idea, more money for ships etc. The Marines went to the public and convinced the American people the U.S. Marines were a needed and a viable fighting force. With public support, the Congress and Navy backed off. The U.S. Marines are alive and well today thanks to the fight to survive years ago. The Marines have never forgotten the lesson learned as illustrated in some of best recruiting advertisements of any service and their combat achievements are well known.
Demise of the Green Berets? Never!!! IF they take their fight to the American people and make their case in the court of public opinion they will prevail. The Army may fail them but I doubt America will.
Sounds like the typical "reinvent" the wheel again! Nothing like a high ranking officer and a politician is there? They do understand, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it.", so what do they do? They reword the operations order to read, "Fix it till it is broke!", way to go rocket scientists... Respectfully, SUNLINER81
The new global expeditionary units need to be in addition to... not instead of.. the existing sf forces.. if anything they need to be made more robust..
LOL....Oh man, this guy is funny as hell....Anyone who took this article serious needs to just stand back and realize the dude that wrote this was smoking crack.....
This article is on the cover of Soldier of Fortune this month. The article isn't all that well written...in my opinion. If SF is about to be phased out, I've got to wonder why new SF battalions are being created. Wasn't it in 2005 that a Democratic senator called for "doubling the Special Forces in X years..." ?
SF has the leading role in the GWOT. SF was created specifically for this type of war.
I don't believe a word of it. If anything, I expect they're merely trying to "blacken" it, to make it all more secretive. The Special Forces branch is the most over-deployed branch in the Army - they're hardly going to be getting rid of them. Every rumor I ever heard in the last three years in D.C. was that they'd be expanding. (I emphasize, I had access to rumors only.)
With all due respect to the SEALS and whatever the Air Force guys call themselves, only the Marines could even make an attempt at replacing ANY of the Army SF teams - the other services just don't have the land-war expertise. And the Marines simply don't have the personnel to field enough of them. Besides, it provides no advancement path for prospective Army supertroops. What do they do with the cream of the Ranger crop if they can't move them on to SF? Turn them into Marines or SEALS? Hardly likely! No, probably somebody got a little frisky with the "Top Secret" stamp and over-classified everything - like the name of the school - so they couldn't put it in that DVD.
When you have field grade Officers in the Army with their only concern is to go to Iraq or Afghanistan to get a Combat Action Badge and to cross their fingers that they get picked up for promotion because they have a combat tour...What do you expect from our leaders???
SF is not going away. This is merely a proposal to reorganize some bureaucracy for briefing purposes and at most will change some briefing charts under "Capstone".
After all, what else do the folks that Duster6 is referring to do while they're waiting to get their box checked for promo.
I for one hopeyou guys are right, and it would only make sense that you are.. of course dod has been known to do things that didn't make any sense.. remember the first generation gunless Phantoms?
Of note: the immediate past Army CoS, GEN Schoomaker, was SF by branch. I doubt his opinion and stock has fallen so low that his input would be disregarded.
JFK authorized the Green Beret itself; as a distinct entity within the Infantry community (at first), it was authorized by an act of the CoS. A few decades later, it became a fully separate branch.
As South America becomes more and more a hot spot, the BGs could definitely have a place there. They have been more "jungle" oriented than other branches - -
If a tree falls in a forest and lands on a politician, even if you can't hear the tree or the screams, I'll bet you'd at least hear the applause. Paul Tindale
It is a very simple proposition to determine. Really! Just march up to the guy who thinks he's in charge, the grand pooh bah, look him straight in the eye and ask: Are ya gunna get rid of the green berets? Yes or no!!
If he answers with a one syllable word, that 's it.
Originally posted by Duster6: When you have field grade Officers in the Army with their only concern is to go to Iraq or Afghanistan to get a Combat Action Badge and to cross their fingers that they get picked up for promotion because they have a combat tour...What do you expect from our leaders???
This ain't 'Nam, they don't rotate in and out as individuals. Lesson learned from 'Nam, they rotate in and out as units now... Respectfully, SUNLINER81
It looks like to me that we are talking about a bunch of Generals that are jealous, because they don't have the guts the Green Beret have. That and the fact that they also don't have told control over them. I think we need to cut the amount of Generals down to a few that really deserve to be a General. Think of the Money the Army would really save. Maybe the Green Beret should be under total and complete control of the President and No one else.
Green Berets...quite alot of training there, my friend just got selected a couple months back, hes going to be an SF Medic.....Which is ironic since he was truly a Ranger who led the Way
