The reason the Regiment was ready on September 11 was Frank J. Toney. He learned it well from Vladimir Sobichevsky -"If you can do UW, then you can do every other SF mission." Honor those that came before.
My grandfather was in the first SF. Trained in Helena,Montana. Joint Canadian/U.S. effort. That got into the family D.N.A. on both sides of the boarder. I love the First Special Forces site! The history, the rosters of names. 😅 And that great old movie with William Holden. I don't think anyone thought to thank the special breed of wives/mothers who knew what her supporting roll was. ❤ The children were a different breed too. Just sayin'. 😊
Special ops matters more in low intensity /CI conflicts than in high intensity. It’s unclear if we are ready for high intensity conflicts. I disagree with this quality over quantity argument. yes quantity of tech talent very much matters when you talk about the new tactics of drone swarms, cyber and ew. You must be able to overwhelm defenses. As we are seeing in Ukraine , numbers matter and favors Russia in the long run.
@@lafan4801 The SgtMaj of the Army made a great observation where he said, he's seen his share of combat but never an all out war with a peer to peer advisory. Someone mentioned in another post that we would never get into a conflict where we are trading artillery fire , tanks or an old school Infantry ground war in today's high tech world. Well, someone tell that to the Russians and Ukrainians. We've fooled ourselves into believing that airpower lone combined with SF is all we need. Amd when was the last time our Navy was tested? WWII maybe? But we have to ask the question, how prepared are our conventional forces? You rarely see especially on an Air Force base, exercises that we had 30-40 years ago where you had aggressors, chem attacks, interruptions of communications or see how fast and proficient we can generate air planes to fly sorties. Basically we are waiting for another pearl harbor to happen which in today's environment will not be easy to overcome.
@@lafan4801 This isn't correct. Allied special operations played a key role in multiple theaters during WW2 and also in Korea (high intensity conflicts). Special operations can shape the battlefield and influence the fight far more than the investment. During the Cold War, SF had strategic reconnaissance, deep targeting, strategic interdiction, and UW missions in Europe - and in support of coalition warfare in Iran in case of a Soviet thrust to the Indian Ocean - and in Korea (Korean War 2). Churchill created the SOE (SSRF, Commandos) and others the SAS and SBS as force multipliers precisely because of the force disparity between the Commonwealth and Nazi Germany - to seize the initiative and put the Germans on the back foot. Soviet Spetsnaz were likewise organized to shape the battlefield at the onset of hostilities, swimming in the European leftist / peace movement sea until activated. Russia had some limited success in 2014 and 2022 (probably not as much as they planned). I spent my life planning and training for the great war in Europe. Apparently all that is forgotten.
Am I wrong into thinking we've become too dependent on our SF? In a near peer conflict with China for example they out number us 3-1 or 2-1 when it comes to ships. How efficient will we be trading artillery with North Korea? Are we not expecting the regular Army and Marine forces not too take update more of an active role such as the out set of the Iraq war. The Air Force role is set in stone for a lack of better words.
Chinese may out number us in ship hulls,but those ships lack the endurance and capabilities of US Navy ships. Its been the plan for years that air power would offset enemy advantages in tanks and artillery. Ask the Iraqis in 1991. It was US tanks and artillery that really smashed Iraqi divisions,it was the USAF.
@@ThomasPrice-g9f They think the national guard can handle that? But it can't. I remember an explorer post could beat them in paint ball. It was a bunch of 16 year olds who worked on individual movement techniques, reacting to enemy fire, 3-5 second rush, leap frog from cover to concealment drills 3 hours a week, one field training exercise a month, and they beat a professional Army National Guard. In fact the Guard never knew that they were explorers. They thought it was a National Guard from out of state.
@@thevet2009 Exactly. But over the last 15 years or so it seems we've become too dependent on SF as though there's an infinite number of them. The SGTMAJ of the Army made a great observation. He said he's seen his share of combat but he hasn't been in an all out war with a near peer such as China, Russia, North Korea or Iran. There's a difference between combat and war.
@@ThomasPrice-g9f Agree, I retired in 09...been in Desert Storm in the mech Inf (1ID) and later did tours in Afghanistan and Iraq. Everyone one of them were different, but all-out war with a near peer enemy (in my estimation) would require focus on conventional fighting forces to win the battles / wars.
Talk about what we don't have in the American military and not about the last war. Where are our hypersonics and drone capabilities? Nonexistent for the most part. How incompetent can a military be in these matters. I guess we have to get committees together and spend hundreds of millions of dollars to get a contract to put together FPV drone capability to rival China or Russia. How about using an element of war, flexibility and just bypass those goof balls and get er done.
There is no one answer, updated weapons platforms, recruitment issues, etc… we are SLOWLY handling weapons platforms ( hypersonic being built, more drones, etc… until the power for all that goes down), our recruitment issues… we need to recruit/appeal to warriors( especially STEM grade warriors ) instead of the 1 or 2% of the population that is a mental health social experiment ( and paying for it …)… we need to harden up, and attract the hardened up… not people that don’t know what bathroom they want to enter for today…
Also we had goals during WW2, not fighting for twenty years… and then just folding up shop, and RUNNING away from an area we spent billions of dollars( still are…), ran out on allies that counted on us( we abandoned ), and give away equipment and ground that we BLEED and DIED that we are going to have to go back and deal with again…
And as hinted previously… this is all … ummm… “ Word Salad “ when the plug is pulled, and toilets stop flushing, and we are reduced to hitting each other with eaten clean thigh bones( I mean the suicide rate when people’s phones don’t come on anymore, will be astronomical….)
None of them answered the "solving the recruiting" issue... They need to recruit from directly to athletes like wrestling, football, baseball, swimming, mma etc... utilize social media, youtube and in person booths at wrestling tournaments, games/ summer camps, liason with coaches at D1-D3 colleges to visit and speak to them etc.
That won't work. The ONLY people who are willing to pay the ultimate sacrifice in service of the country are traditional Americans. Traditional meaning, they try to conserve Americas traditions so that the next generation experience America the way they did. Traditions like: -The Bill of Rights -The Declaration of Independence -Love of US history and the Founder's -Viewing America as exceptional -Love of Country If you don't love the country, if you view it as evil (rac*st, wh*the supremac*st, etc) you won't be willing to pay the ultimate sacrifice. That half, (the traditional half) doesn't wish to serve this administration. Because of the Afghanistan withdrawal, no consequences were placed on he leaders who did that, it brought a massive amount of dishonor to the country and made it hard to fight a future war on terror. We primarily place people onto witness protection for helping us find the terror*st, well we abandoned them during the withdrawal. Who, will trust us in the next conflict, who will come forward and identify who we are tracking? They also did not wish to do the mandate, and they have been called wh*te suprem by Lloyd Austin. They are not going to join. They need to start changing their entire approach on this. I would basically say, if you can serve in Jury Duty, you can join. Make basic training a lot longer to adhere to all all the guys who can't pass a PT test. Create a massive teacher/tutor unit and state that if you wish to get promoted to Specialist, you need to go through the course to get your high school diploma. Change the age limits, change some of the haircut standards, for low level beefs make the military an option for some folks going to prison. Why? Because the current administration/White House is not going to apologize to any conservative, and they don't want them in the military. Not that they would serve this Commander in Chief. Now, you may not like that but it's the only options we have, with our present day factors. And you could do the d-word.
The challenge in Army SOF recruiting is not physical. Selection currently overemphasizes the physical. A physically fit lunkhead can carry a rucksack. A Special Forces Soldier (and a Psychological Operations Soldier) has to be able to think - creatively and flexibly. That is hard to find. Especially in a world where deliberate stupidity is celebrated. The other aspect is a smaller pool to draw from. In 1980, the active duty US Army had a strength of 777,036. In 2001 it was 480, 801. Today its 450,000ish. In 1980, there were 3 active duty SF Groups (5th, 7th, 10th). Today there are 5 (1st, 3rd, 5th, 7th, 10th) . You'd have to go back to the 1960s size US Army to support that many SF Groups. Our military is too damn small.
@@mikemurley8656 uh I get what your saying HOWEVER all the sport's I mentioned above all those young men are already athletic/ strong/mentally strong from playing those sports. Meaning they have far greater chance to pass than someone who is not. Remember most young Americans are not interested in the military or cannot not even make the bare minimum physically.. They need to recruit straight from sports that I listed about due to the mental qualities/athleticism/ being in shape and mental and physical toughness that these young men accrue over the years.
these girly men do not know what a war is they have been fighting goat herders and vietnam peasants for the last 60 years, they simply call in drones to incinerate family's driving their cars, or having a wedding. They are truly cowards.
The CSM is a wise and brave man. Highest respect. He and his fellow servicemembers deserve better civilian leadership from us.
The reason the Regiment was ready on September 11 was Frank J. Toney. He learned it well from Vladimir Sobichevsky -"If you can do UW, then you can do every other SF mission." Honor those that came before.
My grandfather was in the first SF. Trained in Helena,Montana. Joint Canadian/U.S. effort. That got into the family D.N.A. on both sides of the boarder.
I love the First Special Forces site! The history, the rosters of names. 😅 And that great old movie with William Holden. I don't think anyone thought to thank the special breed of wives/mothers who knew what her supporting roll was. ❤ The children were a different breed too. Just sayin'. 😊
Chief looks like he stopped showing up to PT after he commissioned 😂. Chief is gonna chief. Haha
Special ops matters more in low intensity /CI conflicts than in high intensity. It’s unclear if we are ready for high intensity conflicts. I disagree with this quality over quantity argument. yes quantity of tech talent very much matters when you talk about the new tactics of drone swarms, cyber and ew. You must be able to overwhelm defenses. As we are seeing in Ukraine , numbers matter and favors Russia in the long run.
@@lafan4801 The SgtMaj of the Army made a great observation where he said, he's seen his share of combat but never an all out war with a peer to peer advisory. Someone mentioned in another post that we would never get into a conflict where we are trading artillery fire , tanks or an old school Infantry ground war in today's high tech world. Well, someone tell that to the Russians and Ukrainians. We've fooled ourselves into believing that airpower lone combined with SF is all we need. Amd when was the last time our Navy was tested? WWII maybe? But we have to ask the question, how prepared are our conventional forces? You rarely see especially on an Air Force base, exercises that we had 30-40 years ago where you had aggressors, chem attacks, interruptions of communications or see how fast and proficient we can generate air planes to fly sorties. Basically we are waiting for another pearl harbor to happen which in today's environment will not be easy to overcome.
@@lafan4801 This isn't correct. Allied special operations played a key role in multiple theaters during WW2 and also in Korea (high intensity conflicts). Special operations can shape the battlefield and influence the fight far more than the investment.
During the Cold War, SF had strategic reconnaissance, deep targeting, strategic interdiction, and UW missions in Europe - and in support of coalition warfare in Iran in case of a Soviet thrust to the Indian Ocean - and in Korea (Korean War 2).
Churchill created the SOE (SSRF, Commandos) and others the SAS and SBS as force multipliers precisely because of the force disparity between the Commonwealth and Nazi Germany - to seize the initiative and put the Germans on the back foot.
Soviet Spetsnaz were likewise organized to shape the battlefield at the onset of hostilities, swimming in the European leftist / peace movement sea until activated. Russia had some limited success in 2014 and 2022 (probably not as much as they planned).
I spent my life planning and training for the great war in Europe. Apparently all that is forgotten.
Am I wrong into thinking we've become too dependent on our SF? In a near peer conflict with China for example they out number us 3-1 or 2-1 when it comes to ships. How efficient will we be trading artillery with North Korea? Are we not expecting the regular Army and Marine forces not too take update more of an active role such as the out set of the Iraq war. The Air Force role is set in stone for a lack of better words.
Chinese may out number us in ship hulls,but those ships lack the endurance and capabilities of US Navy ships. Its been the plan for years that
air power would offset enemy advantages in tanks and artillery. Ask the Iraqis in 1991. It was US tanks and artillery that really smashed Iraqi divisions,it was the USAF.
@@TheLAGopher Maybe, but I watched the Admiral in charge of the Pacific Fleet say something to the effect this keeps him up at nights.
@@ThomasPrice-g9f They think the national guard can handle that? But it can't. I remember an explorer post could beat them in paint ball. It was a bunch of 16 year olds who worked on individual movement techniques, reacting to enemy fire, 3-5 second rush, leap frog from cover to concealment drills 3 hours a week, one field training exercise a month, and they beat a professional Army National Guard.
In fact the Guard never knew that they were explorers. They thought it was a National Guard from out of state.
SF is only a part of the equation of success on the battlefield.
@@thevet2009 Exactly. But over the last 15 years or so it seems we've become too dependent on SF as though there's an infinite number of them. The SGTMAJ of the Army made a great observation. He said he's seen his share of combat but he hasn't been in an all out war with a near peer such as China, Russia, North Korea or Iran. There's a difference between combat and war.
@@ThomasPrice-g9f Agree, I retired in 09...been in Desert Storm in the mech Inf (1ID) and later did tours in Afghanistan and Iraq. Everyone one of them were different, but all-out war with a near peer enemy (in my estimation) would require focus on conventional fighting forces to win the battles / wars.
@@ThomasPrice-g9f SF is definitely little over hyped.
@@thevet2009 Agree. I use to be that the SF argumented the regular conventional forces. Now it seems the other way around.
Lalo! 👏 💪
Talk about what we don't have in the American military and not about the last war. Where are our hypersonics and drone capabilities? Nonexistent for the most part. How incompetent can a military be in these matters. I guess we have to get committees together and spend hundreds of millions of dollars to get a contract to put together FPV drone capability to rival China or Russia. How about using an element of war, flexibility and just bypass those goof balls and get er done.
Recruitment is a bigger issue. Human Resources and the lack of it.
There is no one answer, updated weapons platforms, recruitment issues, etc… we are SLOWLY handling weapons platforms ( hypersonic being built, more drones, etc… until the power for all that goes down), our recruitment issues… we need to recruit/appeal to warriors( especially STEM grade warriors ) instead of the 1 or 2% of the population that is a mental health social experiment ( and paying for it …)… we need to harden up, and attract the hardened up… not people that don’t know what bathroom they want to enter for today…
Also we had goals during WW2, not fighting for twenty years… and then just folding up shop, and RUNNING away from an area we spent billions of dollars( still are…), ran out on allies that counted on us( we abandoned ), and give away equipment and ground that we BLEED and DIED that we are going to have to go back and deal with again…
And as hinted previously… this is all … ummm… “ Word Salad “ when the plug is pulled, and toilets stop flushing, and we are reduced to hitting each other with eaten clean thigh bones( I mean the suicide rate when people’s phones don’t come on anymore, will be astronomical….)
Hypersonics and drones are not Army SOF.
None of them answered the "solving the recruiting" issue... They need to recruit from directly to athletes like wrestling, football, baseball, swimming, mma etc... utilize social media, youtube and in person booths at wrestling tournaments, games/ summer camps, liason with coaches at D1-D3 colleges to visit and speak to them etc.
That won't work. The ONLY people who are willing to pay the ultimate sacrifice in service of the country are traditional Americans. Traditional meaning, they try to conserve Americas traditions so that the next generation experience America the way they did. Traditions like:
-The Bill of Rights
-The Declaration of Independence
-Love of US history and the Founder's
-Viewing America as exceptional
-Love of Country
If you don't love the country, if you view it as evil (rac*st, wh*the supremac*st, etc) you won't be willing to pay the ultimate sacrifice. That half, (the traditional half) doesn't wish to serve this administration. Because of the Afghanistan withdrawal, no consequences were placed on he leaders who did that, it brought a massive amount of dishonor to the country and made it hard to fight a future war on terror. We primarily place people onto witness protection for helping us find the terror*st, well we abandoned them during the withdrawal. Who, will trust us in the next conflict, who will come forward and identify who we are tracking? They also did not wish to do the mandate, and they have been called wh*te suprem by Lloyd Austin.
They are not going to join. They need to start changing their entire approach on this.
I would basically say, if you can serve in Jury Duty, you can join. Make basic training a lot longer to adhere to all all the guys who can't pass a PT test. Create a massive teacher/tutor unit and state that if you wish to get promoted to Specialist, you need to go through the course to get your high school diploma. Change the age limits, change some of the haircut standards, for low level beefs make the military an option for some folks going to prison.
Why? Because the current administration/White House is not going to apologize to any conservative, and they don't want them in the military. Not that they would serve this Commander in Chief. Now, you may not like that but it's the only options we have, with our present day factors.
And you could do the d-word.
@TheBlueSkye0311 Can you see both posts that I wrote?
Especially since not all of them will make it in sports and will be looking for the next transition
The challenge in Army SOF recruiting is not physical. Selection currently overemphasizes the physical. A physically fit lunkhead can carry a rucksack. A Special Forces Soldier (and a Psychological Operations Soldier) has to be able to think - creatively and flexibly. That is hard to find. Especially in a world where deliberate stupidity is celebrated.
The other aspect is a smaller pool to draw from. In 1980, the active duty US Army had a strength of 777,036. In 2001 it was 480, 801. Today its 450,000ish. In 1980, there were 3 active duty SF Groups (5th, 7th, 10th). Today there are 5 (1st, 3rd, 5th, 7th, 10th) . You'd have to go back to the 1960s size US Army to support that many SF Groups.
Our military is too damn small.
@@mikemurley8656 uh I get what your saying HOWEVER all the sport's I mentioned above all those young men are already athletic/ strong/mentally strong from playing those sports. Meaning they have far greater chance to pass than someone who is not.
Remember most young Americans are not interested in the military or cannot not even make the bare minimum physically..
They need to recruit straight from sports that I listed about due to the mental qualities/athleticism/ being in shape and mental and physical toughness that these young men accrue over the years.
these girly men do not know what a war is they have been fighting goat herders and vietnam peasants for the last 60 years, they simply call in drones to incinerate family's driving their cars, or having a wedding. They are truly cowards.
Post war on terror eh? I feel like the last 20 years were just the pregame.
🌞
We made it past the tens of viewers 😂