would be a school for SF, RRC, LRS

General Discussions for all members.

Moderator: Site Admin

User avatar
rangertough
Ranger/Moderator
Posts: 1675
Joined: January 27th, 2005, 3:02 pm

Re: would be a school for SF, RRC, LRS

Post by rangertough »

Rangertom wrote:http://smallwarsjournal.com/jrnl/art/op ... ndo-school
Includes a little LRRP history. It would be a school for SF, RRC, LRS.
Criticisms and discussion always welcome.

As much value as I see in the proposal and the nebulous and hard to quantify benefits of having eyes on...I have to play devils advocate.

You would have to convince top-level "Managers" (at that level you are leading no one) that there's an inherent benefit in Humint over ISR assets.

SF integrating into the local culture and pulling intel in that fashion is a quantifiable benefit that I belive is covered in the SF training model for all of the MOS/Branch (not SF so I'm only assuming).

ISR has the benefit of not risking troops as well as lining pockets of GO's and congressmen.

The proposal is well thought out. I just believe culturally you would have a hell of a time getting traction on it.

Tough
Rangertough
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"
C CO/HHC 2/75 '93-97, Bragg '97-'99, HHC/C CO/A CO 2/75 99'-'01 RS 8-94.
User avatar
Slowpoke
Ranger/Moderator
Posts: 7786
Joined: September 14th, 2003, 9:50 pm

Re: would be a school for SF, RRC, LRS

Post by Slowpoke »

Drones can not snatch prisoners, nor conduct ambush, nor place explosives/booby traps. Drones are great for monitoring troop movements and taking out known targets with missiles. I know SF and Ranger Advisors had pretty good luck operating with indigenous personnel, but I do NOT trust them......especially with my life! Also, I don't see any future in training undercover enemy operatives in LRRP tactics. Other than the last chapter, the author is spot on in my opinion.
I never wore a cape, but I still have my dog tags.

Experienced Peek Freak!!

173rd Abn LRRP...'66/'67
C/1/506 101st Abn
B/2/325 82nd Abn
User avatar
rangertough
Ranger/Moderator
Posts: 1675
Joined: January 27th, 2005, 3:02 pm

Re: would be a school for SF, RRC, LRS

Post by rangertough »

Slowpoke wrote:Drones can not snatch prisoners, nor conduct ambush, nor place explosives/booby traps. Drones are great for monitoring troop movements and taking out known targets with missiles. I know SF and Ranger Advisors had pretty good luck operating with indigenous personnel, but I do NOT trust them......especially with my life! Also, I don't see any future in training undercover enemy operatives in LRRP tactics. Other than the last chapter, the author is spot on in my opinion.

Agreed on what I believe the spirit of your post was but... I was referencing SF working with indigs as a technique to aquire strategic intel on a region not as a substitute to US forces. SF should continue to train locals in FID.

To clarify: I know and you know (and anyone else with half a brain) that the intel recieved from men on the ground is a necessary aspect of any intelligence plan.
However, the days of snatching prisoners is over and boobie traps are too indiscriminate (in point of fact the Army is moving away from even command det mines like Claymores). Also, commanders at all levels are so risk averse that the idea of risking troops when they can just send a drone appeals to them whole heartedly. Like I also said before follow the money on drone tech wnd you will see congressmen, Generals and buisinessmen.

I think the plan has merit and could/should be executed...it just wont be. Military culture just wont allow it. The very idea of a small element of troops without direct Officer oversight makes conventional commanders at best cringe and at worst become apoplectic. Though SOF forces are comfortable with the concept and embrace it as part of thier history they will be working in battlespaces where conventional commanders can provide support only if they are aware of the mission that SOF is performing. Therefore, the conventional BDE commander has a vote on how the mission is executed and I wouldn't put it past a few of them to neglect or refuse to support SOF. This problem is magnified when speaking to Corps and Div LRS elements that are not connected to SOCOM at all but do have an entire CoC that is conventional "Big Army" all the way to the top. Most (if not all) LRS units are assigned to MI higher HQ's with MI BN CDRs that have spent most of thier careers herding MI cats that think they are smarter than they actually are. I can't be sure but I don't believe any LRS units have been used in thier intended role since DStorm.
I just spent the last week working a Corps level WARSIM depicting a "stand-up" fight with great big mothering battles (they depicted a FLOT and everything) air defense assets and a near parity of combat power between the BLUEFOR and OPFOR. Not once was LRS or US SOF forces depicted as part of the Corps plans. UAV's however, were everywhere as well as NGO's like USAID (WTF they're going to do in the middle of two Armor divisions beating the shit out of each other I have no idea). These guys are going to fight the way they train and this concept isn't in the master plan.

The Army is preparing for fights against hi-tech opponents and completely ignoring the fact that after whatever delusions the country we are fighting had that they could stand up to us (after about four weeks of us kicking thier teeth in) are destroyed they will go straight to an insurgency.

Tough
Rangertough
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"
C CO/HHC 2/75 '93-97, Bragg '97-'99, HHC/C CO/A CO 2/75 99'-'01 RS 8-94.
User avatar
GoldCoast
Ranger/Matchmaker
Posts: 1556
Joined: September 24th, 2006, 6:18 am

Re: would be a school for SF, RRC, LRS

Post by GoldCoast »

rangertough wrote: The Army is preparing for fights against hi-tech opponents and completely ignoring the fact that after whatever delusions the country we are fighting had that they could stand up to us (after about four weeks of us kicking thier teeth in) are destroyed they will go straight to an insurgency.

Tough
I could (and would love to after this deployment is over, in person) discuss and debate ad-nauseum the deleted content from your above quoted post. However, this part right here rings very true in my opinion!
HHC 2/75 (1998- 2000)

Duty a mountain; Death a feather.

One of these days I'll start off slow...
User avatar
rangertough
Ranger/Moderator
Posts: 1675
Joined: January 27th, 2005, 3:02 pm

Re: would be a school for SF, RRC, LRS

Post by rangertough »

GoldCoast wrote:
rangertough wrote: The Army is preparing for fights against hi-tech opponents and completely ignoring the fact that after whatever delusions the country we are fighting had that they could stand up to us (after about four weeks of us kicking thier teeth in) are destroyed they will go straight to an insurgency.

Tough
I could (and would love to after this deployment is over, in person) discuss and debate ad-nauseum the deleted content from your above quoted post. However, this part right here rings very true in my opinion!
Definitely want to have this discussion (a debate in my opinion is when two people's positions are at odds with each other). My position is based upon my experience. Which means I only have one source for basis.

I'm not so emotionally attached to this particular train of thought that I wouldn't accept new data and modify.

Stay safe.

Tough
Rangertough
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"
C CO/HHC 2/75 '93-97, Bragg '97-'99, HHC/C CO/A CO 2/75 99'-'01 RS 8-94.
User avatar
Slowpoke
Ranger/Moderator
Posts: 7786
Joined: September 14th, 2003, 9:50 pm

Re: would be a school for SF, RRC, LRS

Post by Slowpoke »

What the fuck happened to my Army?
I never wore a cape, but I still have my dog tags.

Experienced Peek Freak!!

173rd Abn LRRP...'66/'67
C/1/506 101st Abn
B/2/325 82nd Abn
User avatar
rangertough
Ranger/Moderator
Posts: 1675
Joined: January 27th, 2005, 3:02 pm

Re: would be a school for SF, RRC, LRS

Post by rangertough »

Slowpoke wrote:What the fuck happened to my Army?

Congress?
Rangertough
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"
C CO/HHC 2/75 '93-97, Bragg '97-'99, HHC/C CO/A CO 2/75 99'-'01 RS 8-94.
User avatar
Jim
Rest In Peace Ranger
Posts: 21935
Joined: March 8th, 2005, 10:48 am
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: would be a school for SF, RRC, LRS

Post by Jim »

rangertough wrote:
Slowpoke wrote:What the fuck happened to my Army?

Congress?
Indeed!
Ranger Class 13-71
Advisor, VN 66-68 69-70
42d Vn Ranger Battalion 1969-1970
Trainer, El Salvador 86-87
Advisor, Saudi Arabian National Guard 91, 93-94
75th RRA Life Member #867
User avatar
rangertough
Ranger/Moderator
Posts: 1675
Joined: January 27th, 2005, 3:02 pm

Re: would be a school for SF, RRC, LRS

Post by rangertough »

Tom

I knew what ISR stood for, I just fell into the communication trap of using a term the way everybody else does. Thanks for setting me straight.

As I posted before: This is a solid idea, needing to be implemented.

Tough
Rangertough
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"
C CO/HHC 2/75 '93-97, Bragg '97-'99, HHC/C CO/A CO 2/75 99'-'01 RS 8-94.
User avatar
fatboy
Ranger
Posts: 1058
Joined: November 26th, 2006, 12:30 pm

Re: would be a school for SF, RRC, LRS

Post by fatboy »

LRS units were used in Iraq in 2003 during the pre-invasion build up. I know this due to a buddy that is a member here telling me he was in a hole in the ground outside of Najaf prior to the "Official" start of hostilities.
The comment was made about not letting teams of joes out without Officer (read that as "adult" supervision) and in my experience, that was spot on. As a Pathfinder ATL during the prep for the invasion, we were more or less told there was no way in hell we would be doing any of the long range LZ recon we were trained for in small or large teams, even though my team was destined for a faarp to push aviation assets north to the fight. Recon in force, followed by occupy by force was the order of the day once we got the the faarp area.
And the notion of 10 of us enlisted guys, the majority being Sergeants, with a Staff Sergeant for a Team Sergeant and 2 non-NCO's on the team possibly jumping into enemy territory- well that just wasn't going to happen.
Another issue that kept popping up when I was in was the senior commander using his "special assets" as PSD or his personal SWAT Team. As an example- Super Dave Petraeus made the LRSD from the 101st the PSD section for the division command staff, right up until they were (LRS) were put out training the locals. The Pathfinder Company was tasked with the SWAT type stuff, but that's a conversation for another thread.
The best thing that could happen is to make all ground based recon assets above the Battalion level a part of SOCOM so that someone with a will to use them has the authority to. Another option is to make a dedicated MOS for Recon, so that everyone is qualified and knows how to utilize the assets.
My .10 on the subject, worth about as much as you paid for it.
Pipes dreams, I know. Maybe someday the Army will wise up.
RS 07 and 08-01 (I took the long tour in Florida)

1-508 ABCT
1-327IN
101st Pathfinder DS1
Iraqi Freedom 03-04, 05-06, 07-08
User avatar
goon175
Ranger
Posts: 1087
Joined: July 13th, 2010, 7:55 pm

Re: would be a school for SF, RRC, LRS

Post by goon175 »

The only units that are using, and will continue to use SR in the future will be SMU's (with few exceptions). For everyone else, RSLC is there as far as schools go, but as has been noted above, commanders at the upper levels do not like the idea of sending small teams out to conduct these kinds of missions.
"Far better is it to dare mighty things, to win glorius triumphs, even though checkered by failure... than to rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy nor suffer much, because they live in a gray twilight that knows not victory nor defeat."
-Theodore Roosevelt

1/75 2006 - 2010
KW Driver
Ranger/Moderator
Posts: 6581
Joined: December 8th, 2004, 2:20 pm

Re: would be a school for SF, RRC, LRS

Post by KW Driver »

Doctrinally, I don't recall LRS ever conducting SR. It was always an SF/SOF mission, based on range from the FLOT.

But that's not to dismiss the misuse of LRS, as far back as Dessert Shield/Storm. I was in G/143rd (LRSU), TXANG. We were the III Corps LRSU and they left us home during Dessert Storm.
A Co & HHC 3/75 '93-'98.
RS 10-94.


200 meters of green shit next to a river in the desert does not qualify as a "Crescent of Fertility" -me

"The meek shall inherit the earth, one meter wide and two meters long" -Lazarus Long
Post Reply

Return to “The Mosh Pit”