Videos

Selecting a Better Green Beret, Interview with Brian Decker, Pt. 2

In the first segment of SpecialOperations.com interview with Brian Decker, we talked about the problem with the Special Forces Qualification Course (SFQC) and the issues that arose from the Special Forces Selection and Assessment Course (SFAS). Brian Decker (‘the smartest guy in Training Group”) was tasked to fix the issues and get the Selection course revamped.

Decker identified that most of the problems that the course was having were social in nature. He realized that the internal drive to succeed is the best indicator for success in SF operators. He learned that each successful candidate responded to stress in their lives with a heightened sense of motivation.

He revamped the third week of SFAS (Team Week) and rather than have a candidate be evaluated as either a patrol leader or as an assistant patrol leader one time during the week, he went to a “leaderless group” exercise, where candidates were given a task as a group and the cadre, would watch and evaluate on how they self-organized around the task and requirement.

He had this to say about the events and assessment of Week 3.

During the events of Week 3, we select the future leaders of the Regiment based on their ability to lead or contribute to the performance of a team in a dynamic and complex environment.

Under Decker’s watch, while the success rate of candidates being selected from SFAS plummeted from around 50 percent to under 30, the candidates that were selected were much more successful in the SFQC with the pass rate rising from 50 percent to closer to 80 percent, which is what the command was looking for.

In the earlier segment of the interview, Decker mentioned the six attributes that the cadre of the SFAS course would look for. Special Forces training in the Special Warfare Center, SWC (referred to as “Swick”) utilized the “Whole Man” Selection Process and the six main attributes that every successful SF Operator should possess include:

Intelligence
Trainability
Physical Fitness
Motivation
Influence
Judgement

So, we’ll pick up where we left off in the interview and talk some more about the changes within the SFAS course. And that was where we had discussed the pass rate for the SFQC had risen to around 80 percent when he left and moved on to his next assignment.

Special Ops: Wow, that is incredibly high, were you surprised?

Decker: It was surprising, and at the time, we thought it might be artificially high by a bit but it reaffirmed to us, that we were doing the right thing in the course. And we felt like, if I had another year to spend at Selection, we’d have taken a lot of the attrition at Selection and put it into a screening method done at home station before they come. So you could greatly reduce it.

But, it ultimately came back to, we had really lost our way. The course had become something where it wasn’t even trying to be a predictor of success. It became just a Rite of Passage, and I’m not saying that it shouldn’t be that, but it must be a validation of the self-worth of the Regiment.

Spec Ops: I think this is a great point going back to the changes in Team Week. Back in the day, like you said a candidate may only get one turn in the barrel as a leader if that event was the second one on the fourth day of Team Week, was he getting a fair shake? I wonder what those percentage of fails were back in our era.

Decker: Right, I think you try to create the course where it is very mentally and physically demanding to want smart, physically capable people. And what makes an excellent Ranger, or CAG operator or SEAL Team Six guy is probably not the same guy who is going to do a great job in an unconventional warfare environment.

It is going to favor different traits, (laughs) Hey, I love shooting too. But that is a much more linear task than setting up the intelligence network or leading an indigenous force to a target in its area of operations.

Spec Ops: The Direct Action (DA) missions will always be big within the Command (SOCOM) because those are more tangible, or are we being too simplistic?

Decker: Yes, look the DA missions are…they’re very easy to measure, they’re very easy to tie results and you know what I’m saying?… It’s very hard in an unconventional warfare environment to capture the quality of the training that you’re doing or measure the impact of the operations.

One of the things I remember when we were in Iraq, we were trying to gauge the impact that the different ODAs (SF A-teams) were having in different areas and people started looking at “who’s doing the most missions? Who’s captured the most weapons?”

And I looked at that and said, you know, the most successful ODA may be where the least amount of stuff is happening. It may just be where that ODA achieved a level of stability in their area and the truth is, we can’t kill our way out of this problem.

Special Ops: How difficult was it to put together a matrix to track all of these guys when they were going thru training and keep track of the pass/fails and why?

Decker: For SFAS? No, it wasn’t difficult at all. We had a software program we called the “Whole Man Program”, that captured all the data and we had the students do their peers in the classroom and that was added. The cadre all had their evaluations that could be done on I-pads, on smartphones and all of that would be captured on a database. And that would spit out a summary.

And how we’d make a decision, in the end, it was interesting, that once you have all that data at the end, it is so much easier to make a decision. It goes back to the 80-20 rule; 80 percent of your success will be attributable to 20 percent of your people. And conversely, 80 percent of your struggles will also be attributable to 20 percent of your people.

And you really saw that. These guys, when you see all four cadre members see that this one guy is the #1, #2, #3 guy on a team, and the peer support are slam dunks. But on the other side, you would also see there was a lot of alignment on who did the poorest.

The question then became, it was a little more difficult to discern on the guys in the middle. And that’s the way most models are. Most models are best at explaining the extremes. And it the way it worked was much easier. We could go thru a Selection Board on about 50 soldiers in a couple of hours. It was very streamlined.

Spec Ops: We tried to write as many assessments for each event and watch not only the leaders but the team members and how well or poorly they supported the leaders.

Decker: One of the interesting things we saw when we changed the Team Week events to the “Leaderless” environment was that the stress level went up significantly. There was no “I got my time in the chute, so all I gotta do is get under this weight.”

We had a couple of guys who had gone thru both systems and they said the leaderless system was exponentially harder because they knew they were always being evaluated. This made it easier on the cadre members.

Spec Ops: How so?

Decker: When we’d finish for the day, you’d have to rank your team, first to last. Then you had to rate their attributes and we rated only four attributes during Team Week, this is a “3”, this is a “1”, this is a “5”.

And if you had a guy in the bottom four of your group, you would have to recommend that he not continue on with the course. And you’d have to write a narrative on that…it was very, very quick.

And instead of looking for everything, we’d break down the events like “Between point A and B you’re looking for this attribute.” We designed those events to specifically bring out those behaviors. And it made it easier to evaluate the events.

We also videotaped events and you’d have to watch that and learn to evaluate what we were looking for to get good quality information.

Spec Ops: These were some significant changes, was there any push-back from the Chain of Command on these changes or were they behind on this. I know Ashton (Col. Naylor) had said that he was totally behind this. What about the rest?

Decker: When General (Ed) Reeder came back on board, to SWC, I went thru it all and explained it to him and he said, “Look I don’t get it.” He said, “I’m going to have to see it because I don’t like the idea of the leaderless group, I think someone has to be in charge.”

But once he came out and watched the training, it was only half-way thru the day, he said, “I got it.” He said, “this is brilliant and we should have been doing this a long time ago. This brings out leadership that we’re looking for in the Regiment.”

And that is what it is all about right? We don’t need people who just tell people what to do. We need people that can coach and pull people together.

Spec Ops: This is why I wanted to talk to you. And the cadre were behind it?

Decker: Not at first, they were against it. But once they got used to the changes, it puts the power back in the cadre’s hands. It is a good, balanced, fair process. We would break down the committees and would reassign the committees from one SFAS class to the next.

And we got extremely creative in how we would design the events to bring out the behaviors that we were looking for. We were throwing curveballs at the candidates all the time… By the long-range movement, the guys who were window shopping and thought they may want to be SF are long gone.

If your motivations weren’t in the right place, if you didn’t understand that being successful was a process, then it was going to be difficult for you to be a select. And the difference was if a guy quit on you in say Log PT, it was because he was hurt. But if a guy quits during Team Week it was because he was overwhelmed.

It was much more mental and the ability to handle and manage the complexity of it under duress. I like the physical aspect of this as much as everybody else but what really defines us as a Regiment is what is above our shoulders.

Spec Ops: And the ideal SF operator, he’s adaptable to other lines?

Decker: Yes, well at that time, we’d get 20-25 VIP visits during the course of a year. And many of them were interested in how we selected our operators, especially the methodology. Of course, they were interested in the mental toughness aspect but the traits and attributes that we’re looking for is what many other industries look for as well.

Look, the physical talent of an individual will only take them so far, but what ultimately makes an operator successful is their character, their makeup, their approach. So, what would stop an SF soldier from reaching his full potential comes down to the way they approach their craft.

Having been in the Regiment and served in combat, I understood what constitutes a good Special Forces operator and that was invaluable because you have to know your own line of work.

The most successful people in any profession all have the same attributes. They all have grit, they all have extremely good work habits. They all have the mental toughness, the confidence which comes from practice and preparation and the optimism and belief that they can achieve. They are extremely intelligent. What makes a good operator…there is a lot of similarities with other professions.

A good SF operator, as with other professions, approaches their craft in the same way. Very much with a growth mindset, they’re more intrinsically motivated by internal factors and view success as a process. They tend to internalize feedback rather than externalize it to their environment. They all tend to be smart specifically to what they do.

SF guys can make decisions in a high-stakes environment so rapidly without having the time to think through every outcome which allows them to make sense of their environment.
___________

Any questions or comments can be emailed to me [email protected] or at my Twitter account @SteveB7SFG

Photo courtesy of US Army

SOF Selection PT Preparation 6.2.2017

Friday morning gym day and what better way to prepare for graduation weekend than to kick it off with Leg Day. Starting with Squats – front, dumbbell goblet, and barbell, then some lunges and after the weighted sled push. And we’ll finish the workout off with a five-mile run

Training:

Continue to prep for the UBRR.

3 x Front Squat 20-15-12 reps (lighter weight)

3 x Goblet Dumbbell Squats 20-15-12 reps (lighter weight)

3 x 10 Barbell Squats

3 x 10 Dumbbell Lunges

3 x 10 Romanian Lunges

3 x Weighted sled push

5-mile run

Stretch well after completion

Selecting a Better Green Beret: Interview with Brian Decker Pt. 1

The Special Forces Qualification Course (SFQC) was in a bit of a crisis mode back in 2011. Candidates were failing at about a 50 percent rate which isn’t necessarily a bad thing but the reasons why they were failing was a big concern with the powers in the Special Warfare Center (SWC). The issue was the Special Forces Selection and Assessment Course (SFAS) wasn’t identifying nor culling candidates that weren’t properly prepared to pass SFQC.

There was a disconnect inside SFAS, which hadn’t really changed since its inception in 1988. The John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center Commander (JFKSWC) Gen. Ben Sacolick approached the SWC Training Group about the issue. The SWC Group Commander Col. Ashton Naylor knew exactly who to task to identify and fix the problem. He picked Major Brian Decker, “the smartest guy I knew in Training Group,” Naylor said.

I’ve known Naylor for 25 years and he’s not one to heap praise on those who are undeserving. I first met Naylor when he was a candidate at Selection and Assessment and later went through the Special Forces Officers Course with him. I knew him as an outstanding Detachment Commander of an SF A-team in the 7^th Special Forces Group. He later commanded a battalion of the 5^th Special Forces Group in Afghanistan and then risen to command the SWC’s Training Group.

With SFAS selecting at about a 50 percent rate at that time, the same percentage of candidates failing the SFQC was unacceptable. Decker was told, to fix it, in the SF way,… just get it done. And did he ever. He made sweeping changes to the way the SFAS course was run and while the selection rates of SFAS plummeted to 30 percent or below, the successful completion of the SFQC from candidates selected from Decker’s SFAS classes skyrocketed to 80 percent. That’s exactly what the command was looking for.

How did he do it? Did he just use smoke and mirrors? Nope.

He showed the confidence of Sacolick and Naylor had in him was justified. He quickly learned that one of the best attributes of a successful SF operator, the ability to think quickly and clearly while the stress level is pegged out to the max was missing in the course failures. Worse, many showed that they were incapable of functioning on a small team and not completely devoted to the teamwork necessary on an A-Team.

Every candidate wants to graduate the course, Decker set out to find out who wanted to walk the walk and live the life of an outstanding SF operator. The internal drive, the will to succeed is either there or it isn’t. But how to identify it?

He put together an information-driven program where he identified 1200 data points on each candidate. He could identify a successful SF operator as a guy in his early 30s, with a high I.Q., who came from suburbia. But the one factor that stood out was, each successful candidate responded to stress in their lives with a heightened sense of motivation.

So, who IS Brian Decker? How did he make the changes that made SFAS a much better indicator of success than the one that hadn’t changed in over 20 years? Having been a cadre member of SFAS, I was intrigued…no fascinated by what I’ve read. The SWC and school would frequently have high-level visitors and it wasn’t long before people from all walks of life wanted to talk to Decker. Would his system of identifying successful traits in SF operators work in the corporate world?

The NFL came calling, first the Cleveland Browns and then the Indianapolis Colts who hired him to identify what will make a successful NFL player. But more to that later. I reached out to Naylor and asked him about Decker. “You need to talk to Brian,” he said. “I guarantee that you’ll come away very impressed.” He put us in touch with each other and being a busy man with the NFL offseason workouts in full swing, he arranged a time to talk in the evening.

After quick introductions, I could tell right away that Naylor’s comment about Decker being an extremely smart man was dead on. But I’ve been around smart people before and many spend all their time trying to impress upon you how smart they are. Decker wasn’t like this at all. He was talking about these sweeping changes of his as if he were talking about carrying the groceries into the house. Which made it even more intriguing.

So, here’s part one of the interview I did with Decker as we discussed SFAS, the Q-Course (SFQC), and problems facing the SF guys in combat. Later we just touched on his new career in the NFL and the ground he’s breaking there, but that is mostly proprietary information, and we were there to talk SF.

Spec Ops: We’ll not waste any time here. So how did these changes come about?

Decker: I met with Gen. Sacolick and he said, “we have to restore the image of Selection in the Regiment.” We had only around 50 percent of the soldiers being selected at SFAS completing the qualification course. He told me to spend some time and figure it out.

I had just finished the Naval Postgraduate School and wanted to use that education so I immediately went looking for the data. And what I tried to do was tie that data to outcomes. Passes and fails and find out where we weren’t doing well.

I met a Ph.D. student from UNC whose husband is a Green Beret, she was in the Air Force and I asked that if we took all of the data that we had, how well would we be doing, what would our batting average be?

The organizational efficiency could be maxed out at about 58 percent, so that told me that the answers were probably not quantitative and were probably more qualitative.

Spec Ops: And how did this information get analyzed?

Decker: I took the information from 500-600 course failures, and the data that the school gives about that student gives a short narrative as to the reasons why. We then turned that into a language, passes and fails into something that we can select for. What we really found out was that the failures were really more social in nature.

So, we went back to the leadership assessment during Selection and Assessment and a candidate was getting one patrol during team phase as a patrol leader or as an assistant patrol leader for one of the four days.

As you remember being a cadre member there, those events were taken straight out of the British SAS Selection. We’re going to give them a really difficult task to do and we’re going to punish them for several hours and see how well they can function in a very demanding environment. But demanding in only a very narrow sense. But based upon that one grade, we had to make a determination on whether you were a select in the course. And I saw tons of flaws with that. First, we were basing the entire selection criteria off of the one report of one SFAS Cadre member. On one day, in one event.

I looked at those leadership evals and found that they were negatively correlated to success later in the qualification course.

Creating an evaluation using a “Leaderless Group”:

Spec Ops: So that was a big indicator right there?

Decker: Well we looked at that and said, ‘What is the nature of Special Operations?’ It is complex, it is dynamic. And the biggest thing is we don’t lead from what I tell you to do. We lead from within. We went to what I called a “leaderless group” so the leaderless is a misnomer what we did was, we stopped grading a candidate on the patrols and began grading on attributes.

(Editor’s note: the attributes he mentioned above was a three-year data collection program that Gen. Sacolick implemented at the SWC to identify what were the core attributes that were needed for a successful Special Operations soldier)

So, in the leaderless environment, instead of getting graded on one day during team events, you were getting graded all four days. How it worked is, you’d go to the group and drop this problem in the middle of it and you watch and evaluate on how they self-organize around the task and requirement.

Within five or ten minutes you can tell who the leaders are. And you can tell within those first few minutes based on ability who are going to struggle and the rest of the time you are going to figure out where these other guys in the middle, fit in.

So, now you’ll get four cadre evaluations, peer evaluations and then the candidates grade themselves during this time and everyone gets the same evaluations and you can put together a good 360-degree assessment.

Spec Ops: Those are some interesting changes, so how does that change in the evaluation process?

Decker: Well, we looked at it like, in Week 1 we adjusted the levels where the data was predictive, right? We screened out those who were not smart enough, who weren’t fit enough and weren’t prepared and knocked those out.

In Week 2, we evaluated the candidates’ performance on the Star Exam, (Land Navigation) where the intelligence and physical fitness are highly correlated. Week 2 is more of a practical application of your abilities and we’d screen those out and then the selection decision comes down to Week 3 in Team week.

During the events of Week 3, we select the future leaders of the Regiment based on their ability to lead or contribute to the performance of a team in a dynamic and complex environment.

What we’re looking for is a candidate that isn’t looking for external solutions, you look internally and you look to the group for solutions. And it was at this point that we moved away from the two-event day (during Team Week). Because the solution to any problem in Selection is stability. Because during those events, all you are doing is measuring a candidate’s ability to persevere.

So, we would have days where we’d have 10 events. It may not look like 10 events but you remember the tires and poles right?

Spec Ops: Oh yeah, that was always a tough event.

Decker: What we’d do is, they’d start out where all they have is poles and lashings. And after carrying that for 5ks and after that, we may add three logs and you go another 3-4Ks and then you get tires. So every time you give them something, it forces them to reassess the problem, reorganize and solve it.

We do what we’d call progressive builds and we’d stop them at times during the event and break them into small groups to do construction exercises where they do different things to break them into small groups. And all that while giving that soldier an opportunity.

What we found, with that data-rich environment is that our Selection rate went way down. We went from a little over 50 percent when I got there to ….where we were trending, when I left to just under 30 percent.

But on the inverse side, the selects that we were pushing through at Selection were on track to graduate at about an 80 percent rate in the qualification course when I was leaving.
______________

Tomorrow we’ll continue our interview with Decker and discuss further changes that the Selection and Assessment Course brought and what other attributes the cadre looks for in the successful Special Forces candidate.

Any questions or comments can be emailed to me [email protected] or at my Twitter account @SteveB7SFG

Photo courtesy of ESPN

Massive Suicide Car Bomb Explosion Rocks Kabul, Scores Killed

Kabul, Afghanistan was rocked by a huge car bomb explosion in the diplomatic security area of the capital on Wednesday morning.

According to Afghani Ministry of Health sources, at least 80 were dead and 350 wounded with the majority of those being women and children. It was the worst terrorist incident in the country since the coalition drawdown of troops in 2014.

“The attack demonstrates a complete disregard for civilians and reveals the barbaric nature of the enemy faced by the Afghan people,” the statement continued. “It also highlights the hypocrisy of the enemy who claim that they only target Afghan Security Forces and Foreign forces, yet continue to cause death and suffering amongst innocent Afghans.”
The German Foreign Ministry said German embassy workers were wounded in the blast, and that an Afghan security official who had been protecting the building was killed.
The Taliban on Wednesday denied involvement in the bombing. Both the Taliban and the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) have staged large-scale attacks in the Afghan capital in the past.
The explosion occurred at the peak of Kabul’s rush hour when roads are packed with worktime commuters, Patta reports.
The U.S. Embassy in Kabul warned American citizens to avoid the area of the blast and cancelled all its appointments for routine American Citizen Services for the day.
Afghanistan president Ashraf Ghani’s office condemned the “cowardly attack in the holy Month of Ramadan targeting innocent civilians in their daily life,” while the U.S. Embassy Kabul Special Charge d’Affaires Hugo Llorens said, “This horrific and shameful attack demonstrates these terrorists’ complete disregard for human life and their nihilistic opposition to the dream of a peaceful future for Afghanistan. The terrorists, and those who provide them support in any form, deserve the utter scorn of all civilized people around the world.”
The Green Zone neighborhood is considered Kabul’s safest area, with foreign embassies, press bureaus, and government offices protected by dozens of 10-foot-high blast walls and guarded by police and national security forces.
The BBC said that one of their staff, driver Mohammed Nazir, had been killed in the attack and that four BBC journalists had been injured.

The Taliban denied involvement in the blast that destroyed more than 50 cars and blew out windows in shops and restaurants around a huge area, up to half a mile of the city.

The entire article and interview from CBS News can be found here:

Photo Courtesy of Reuters

Noriega Surrendered to Rock in Panama Invasion 1989

Panama’s former dictator Manuel Noriega died in prison this week at the age of 83. Few, outside of his inner circle of military officers will shed a tear for the man who ruled Panama with an iron hand before his undoing by US forces during “Operation Just Cause” in late December of 1989.

With his military shattered and running out of options. Noriega sought refuge in the Papal Nuncio, the Vatican Embassy in Panama City. Many of his officers and cronies were already arrested and put on planes to Miami to answer to drug charges.

Rather than staying in relative peace and quiet, Noriega was blasted by rock music, loud rock music, around the clock as the US tried to force him to give up. The soldiers playing the music began taking requests from troops coming in from the field.

The favorites included “Welcome to the Jungle,” by Guns N’ Roses, “Wanted Dead Or Alive,” by Bon Jovi, and “The End” by The Doors.
After several days on the run, Noriega was allowed to enter the Vatican Embassy on Christmas Eve. And on Christmas Day, the radio station broadcast only Christmas music.
But with requests streaming in, the U.S. effort ramped up after the holiday.
On Dec. 27, “someone who identified himself as a member of the PSYOPS [Psychological Operations] team from Fort Bragg [N.C.] called to tell us what they were doing with their loud speakers,” the military report said.
U.S. Gen. Maxwell “Mad Max” Thurman had ordered speakers placed as a “musical barrier” around the perimeter of the Vatican Embassy and turned to full volume.
Noriega was reportedly partial to opera. What he got was “Panama,” from Van Halen, “Danger Zone,” from Kenny Loggins, and “Refugee,” courtesy of Tom Petty.
And remember, this was the ’80s. So the strongman also got an earful of Rick Astley’s “Never Gonna Give You Up,” though that may have been intended more for Noriega’s hosts at the embassy.
As the standoff dragged on for days, the playlist became part of the story.
Not everyone was happy with the military’s approach, including the White House, and the music was stopped after several days. President George H.W. Bush’s national security adviser, Brent Scowcroft, said afterward that he thought the use of high-volume music was “undignified.”
On Jan. 3, 1990, Noriega surrendered to the U.S. forces, though not until after he’d been treated to a version of “I Fought The Law.”
Noriega was flown to Miami, tried and convicted of drug trafficking, and spent nearly two decades in U.S. prisons.

The entire musical interlude while waiting for the disgraced strongman to surrender placed a surreal, farcical quality on an operation and short war that never needed to happen. Noriega’s blustering caused the deaths of far too many Panamanians, the exact number may never be known as well as 23 Americans.

The entire article and interview from NPR can be found here:

Featured Photo: AP

Preparing the Special Forces Operator for the Unconventional Warfare Environment

The task of the Special Forces Assessment and Selection (SFAS) course is identifying the candidates who are suitable for Special Forces training. And two of the primary functions of Special Forces are UW (Unconventional Warfare) and FID (Foreign Internal Defense). It is important the schools don’t lose sight of that fact as SF and SOF (Special Operations Forces) have been heavy into Direct Action (DA)/Counter-Terrorist (CT) missions for some time in the ongoing wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Syria among other hot spots.

The basic ten operating activities that Special Operations Forces operate in are spelled out in Section 167 of Title 10 of the US Code. Special Forces were created in 1952 specifically for the role in the UW environment after the OSS were disbanded in 1945 after World War II. The OSS’ Operational Groups and Jedburgh Teams were the forerunners of both Special Forces and the CIA.

But first, to properly prepare prospective SF operators for the UW environment, we have to know what it is. And this has been a frequent complaint from the SF community that the conventional (Big Army) doesn’t understand UW and what it entails. And part of that issue has resided in the SF community itself.

The SF hierarchy has been debating the actual definition of what UW is since 1955 and has had ten different definitions since the original manual was written in that year. There have been tweaks in the definition for 65 years and the current “approved” definition of UW published in 2009 is as follows:

Activities conducted to enable a resistance movement or insurgency to coerce, disrupt or overthrow a government or occupying power by operating through or with an underground, auxiliary and guerrilla force in a denied area.

Many of the activities and operations that the US SOF are undertaking today could be characterized as UW. And the distinction between UW and FID are now described as being the opposite of one another.

UW is characterized by the use of irregular forces to coerce, disrupt, or overthrow a government or occupying power while FID is the use of a nation’s recognized security forces to protect a government.

So how do the schools prepare the future SF operators for operating in the austere environments of the UW arena? They must identify the core attributes that the Special Forces operator must have to be successful in the realm of SF operations. The school used the “Whole Man” approach and identified six attributes necessary for success.

Intelligence
Trainability
Physical Fitness
Motivation
Influence
Judgement

SF operators must have the physical, emotional, and mental stamina to succeed in the UW environment. They have to be able to prepare to conduct the missions assigned. And that doesn’t just mean physically but mentally as well. The amount of time spent studying all the aspects of the target area (history, politics, religious leaders and beliefs, terrain, infrastructure, and local economy etc). The mental aspect is just as if not more important than the physical.

The school must identify the potential operators who have the creativity and mindset to think outside the box and do it without prompting or leadership from above. The ability to problem solve while under tremendous stress is a key indicator of success or failure for an SF operator. To quote a line from a Clint Eastwood film, “Improvise, adapt, overcome.”

One key area to highlight for success in the UW/FID environment is the ability for the SF operator to not just give orders but to get the host nation to follow their lead. So, language training and cross-cultural communication are very important. The key to UW is to convince the target audience that the relationship between them and the US SF operators is mutually beneficial. That requires a great deal of tact, diplomacy, and empathy.

And the bread and butter for SF operators in the UW environment are being in the role of a teacher and instructor. That’s what SF has prided itself on for 65 years and the school must identify the type of individuals that can not only do their job and do it well but have the knowledge to teach it to others, in their language. Ask any SF operator and they’ll tell you the first time you teach a course in the host nation’s language is a daunting task.

When the JFKSWC (John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center) started the SFAS course back in 1988 they identified the core attributes that we were looking for in successful Special Forces candidates. Many years later the candidates that were passing the Selection and Assessment course were failing the SFQC (Special Forces Qualification Course) in high numbers.

The Training Group targeted an SF officer Brian Decker to revamp the Selection Course as to identify those soldiers that were going to have a better chance at having success in the SFQC and in the operational SF Groups after being assigned.

SpecialOperations.com had the opportunity to sit down with him and discuss the changes made to the Selection and Assessment course and how it impacted the candidates’ performance moving forward. Look for that interview in the next few days.

Featured photo: DOD

SOF Selection PT Preparation 5.31.2017

Wednesday morning is rucking day so get the ruck with a 45-pound minimum weight ready for a 5-miler over varied terrain. Today is a good time to break in that second pair of boots and ensure they’re ready for the course as well. Strive to better the time that is the standard and remember to hydrate throughout the march. Then head over to the gym for some shoulder and back work that will help ease the load in Selection. Be sure to log the progress down in your workout log book.

Training:

More Preparation for the UBRR:

3 x 12 Lat Pulldowns, behind the neck (go as heavy as possible)

3 x 12 Lat Pulldowns, front

3 x 10 Dumbbell Side Raises

3 x 10 Dumbbell Front Raises

3 x 10 Dumbbell Arnold Press

3 x 8 Shoulder Shrugs

5-mile Rucksack march (45lb minimum)

Stretch well after completion

Army Standing Up New “Security Force Assistance” Brigade, Shake and Bake SF?

The US Army is moving forward with their new Security Force Assistance Brigades and has published the requirements that will be needed to be selected and are offering a $5000 bonus for any of the soldiers that re-enlist for the new unit.

Army Chief of Staff General Mark Milley has stated that he wants to field the newest Brigade by October 2017 to advise and assist partner nations with their security force capabilities.

The 529-man Brigade will field officers and NCOs and while the Army falls short of calling it an “elite unit”, they’ve instead taken to calling this a “premiere assignment.”

“Our EP (Enlisted Personnel) and OP (Officer Personnel) divisions have been busy identifying Soldiers that meet all of the stringent requirements outlined by Gen. Milley, and then making the necessary phone calls to pitch the SFAB to them,” said Lt. Col. Corey Brunkow, HRC Enlisted Personnel Management Division Infantry Branch Chief.
“We’re looking for branch qualified noncommissioned officers. That is, we’re looking for former squad leaders as Staff Sergeants, and former platoon sergeants as a Sgt. 1st Class to fill advisor roles which will broaden their horizons and experiences in the Army,” he said.
Basic qualifications include an 85 or better Defense Language Aptitude Battery for primary advisors, a minimum of 240 or 70 points in each event on the APFT, possess a secret security clearance, and maintain a deployable status.
In addition, a Soldiers Physical Profile Serial System, or PULHES as it is commonly referred to as, must be 111221 with only a minor inability in the hearing and ears, and eyes portion.

The training for the SABs is slated to cover six weeks and then the units will be deployable. The Army says it hopes to have six of the SABs fielded by 2024.

This isn’t anything new, the Big Army has been trying to chip away at the FID mission of Special Forces for the past 30+ years. While there should be some conventional military deployments to support the FID mission and ease some of the burden on SF, this isn’t it. Trying to squeeze over a year’s worth of training into six weeks and make a shake and bake Special Forces group isn’t going to work.

And in the process, they’ll rob the conventional Infantry and Armor units of their experienced NCOs and officers. But again, this isn’t particularly new. It will be interesting to see how long this will last before conventional commanders ask to pull the plug because of the drain on their own leadership.

To read the entire article from the US Army website click here:

Photo courtesy DOD

Navy SEAL Dies in Parachuting Accident Over Hudson River

A member of the US Navy’s parachute team, the “Leap Frogs” consisting of Navy SEALs died on Sunday afternoon after his parachute failed to deploy adequately.

This tragedy struck just after noon on the Hudson River during a Fleet Week demonstration jump in front of thousands of spectators. The Navy has not yet identified the deceased sailor pending notification of next of kin.

The accident occurred a few minutes after noon near Liberty State Park, a large New Jersey park across from Manhattan where thousands of people a year catch ferries to the nearby national treasure.
The parachutist, whose identity was not immediately released, was a member of an elite Navy parachute team called the Leap Frogs, a Navy spokesman said. The cause of the parachute malfunction is under investigation.
“I’m terribly saddened,” said Nancy Malinowski, a Cranford, New Jersey, resident who was in Liberty State Park and knew something had gone wrong when she saw a parachute with nobody attached to it descend behind a building.
“I don’t think 90 percent of the people there were aware,” Malinowski said, describing a gathering in the park that included food trucks, a Navy band and lots of small children. “Everybody was out there to support the military.”
She said the parachutist was among four who drifted down from high in the sky from two helicopters. One of the parachutists descended with a large American flag.
In a release, the Navy said the parachutist was rescued immediately from the water by U.S. Coast Guard personnel who were standing by in vessels to support the aerial demonstration that featured the coordinated parachute jump. Local fire department personnel who were also on standby responded as well. The Navy said the parachutist was pronounced dead at Jersey City Medical Center at 1:10 p.m.
The Navy said the identity of the victim would be released after family notifications were completed.
“Our hearts and prayers go out to his family, and I ask for all of your prayers for the Navy SEAL community who lost a true patriot today,” said Rear Adm. Jack Scorby, commander of the Navy Region Mid-Atlantic.

The “Leap Frogs” had promoted the jump and event with a Facebook post on Sunday morning telling New Yorkers “New York City look to the skies at 12:00. We’ll be jumping into Liberty State Park today for Memorial Day Weekend and in celebration of Navy Fleet Week.”

The parachute team is slated to perform at Sail Boston 2017 and at Navy Week in Pittsburgh. Other performances this summer include Minneapolis, Chicago and Salt Lake City, Utah. It isn’t yet known if this accident will curtail any scheduled appearances pending an investigation.

To read the entire article from the Washington Times click here:

Photo courtesy US Navy

Ten of the Best War Films to Watch on Memorial Day

With Memorial Day weekend in full swing, many people have taken to the cemetery of their hometown to place flags on the graves of the soldiers who are no longer with us. Our little down did it last week with the cooperation of the local Veterans Council, VFW, American Legion, the Boy Scouts and Cub Scouts, and local citizens who felt the calling to help out.

Our local Memorial Day Parade will kick off, (weather permitting) at 9:20 today. Once that is over, we’ll partake in the traditional Memorial Day activities by grilling some food outside while giving thanks to those who made this all possible.

One of the other traditional fares on Memorial Day is the War Film marathons that are always on television. We’ve compiled a list of our favorites in our household and they’re listed right here. They’re listed in no particular order, so no one film is ranked higher than any other. This list could easily have been tripled. I had no idea I had so many war films on DVD…although my wife would beg to differ.

Feel free to chime in with any of your favorites that may not have made the list.

Tears of the Sun (2003) Bruce Willis, Monica Bellucci, Cole Hauser:
It doesn’t get much better than having a bunch of Navy SEALs laying waste to terrorists in Nigeria while rescuing an American doctor and leading refugees to safety. Bruce Willis is the SEAL Lt. who leads the mission and goes against orders when the see the refugees being raped and slaughtered by the terrorists.

Of course, having the beautiful Monica Bellucci as the doctor makes every scene she’s in a must-see. Eamonn Walker is outstanding as “Zee” Pettigrew the SEAL RTO and grenadier. Cole Hauser as the SEAL M-60 gunner “Red” Atkins is a total badass with a funky hairdo.

It’s an old-fashioned gung-ho film where the American guys are definitely wearing the white hats here and Willis, as the protagonist is shown quite often as the jaded combat vet opening his heart to the refugees. A bit over the top? Sure, but it was characterized as an Antoine Fuqua Navy SEAL shoot ‘em up and with Bellucci in the background…. Play it again Sam.

Sands of Iwo Jima (1949) John Wayne, Forrest Tucker, John Agar:
Classic John Wayne action film, using the backdrop of World War II. Wayne is a battle-hardened tough sergeant, Stryker who has been in the Marine Corps for a decade and he must mold a bunch of recruits into a tough, rifle squad of Marines.

The action takes place first at Tarawa where Wayne’s best friend lies wounded, calling to him in front of the Marines’ positions in the dark. Wayne, won’t go to him for fear of giving away the unit’s position to the Japanese. Some of the men, Agar and Tucker hate Stryker for different reasons but grow to understand and appreciate the sergeant as the man who will lead them thru the tough times.

The film climaxes on Iwo Jima and the famous flag raising is recreated on film using three of the actual survivors of the Suribachi flag raising. The Marine Corps totally bought in on the making of the film, including giving a drill sergeant to the cast to get them ready to play Marines. It was totally filmed on Camp Pendleton.

Battleground (1949) James Whitmore, Van Johnson, John Hodiak:
Made just after the war and the same year as Sands of Iwo Jima, Battleground takes place during the Battle of the Bulge where a group of paratroopers from the 101^st Airborne are rushed from a rest camp in France to the frozen encircled bastion at Bastogne in Belgium. The Germans must take the hub of a major road network and the 101^st must hold at any cost.

This was one of the grittiest war films made up to that point. The airborne troops are dirty, tired, and scared. They’re slugging it out with a determined, well-trained enemy in snow-draped forests where the enemy can be extremely close before they can be seen.

James Whitmore who saw action in the Pacific as a Marine was outstanding as the troops’ Sergeant Kinnie. He’s a grizzled vet who looks like he’d been in combat for a decade. Van Johnson as the scrounger, and wise-cracking rifleman that every infantry platoon since the Roman Legions seems to have. Ricardo Montalban has a small role and Douglas Fowley as the griper and complainer with loose store-bought teeth steals many of the scenes he’s in.

Black Hawk Down (2001) Josh Hartnett, Ewan McGregor, Eric Bana:
The film directed by Ridley Scott was nominated for four Academy Awards and won two and is based on the outstanding book of the same name by Mark Bowden. It stuck very close to the facts and shows the brutal nature of the war in Somalia and the depths of courage that the Delta Force operators had, especially SFC Randy Shughart and SFC Gary Gordon, both of who were decorated with the Medal of Honor posthumously after the battle.

During the early days of October 1992, Task Force Ranger with the Delta operators and the Ranger Bn. along with Task Force 160 aviation elements try to capture Omar Salad Elmi and Abdi Hassan Awale Qeybdiid, two of Mohamad Farah Aidid’s top advisers. That’s when all hell breaks loose. A Blackhawk helicopter is shot down and then another and the Rangers and Delta operators risk it all to get to the pilots and crew out.

The fast roping scenes early in the film were done by members of the 3/75 Ranger Regiment. Scott didn’t spend much time on character development as the action goes fast and furious. But the battle scenes are top notch and Eric Bana as “Hoot” Gibson is outstanding. The film’s score keeps the watcher on edge with a staccato, visceral sadness that permeates the film. Having lost a close friend from the Delta Force operators there, it was tough to watch at first, but it is a first-rate action film.

Gettysburg (1993) Tom Berenger, Jeff Daniels, Martin Sheen:
The film is based on the 1975 work of fiction “The Killer Angels” by Michael Shaara which won a Pulitzer. Since this is the American Civil War, neither side is presented as the “bad guys”. The Southerners are roundly portrayed as men of honor who widely respect and in some cases, love the men they’re fighting against. 5000 reenactors were used as extras in the battle scenes where 50,000 men fell.

Sam Elliot has an excellent cameo as Union Cavalry Brigadier John Buford who slows the Confederate advance just long enough to allow the Army to reach the high ground. Jeff Daniels steals the show as Joshua Chamberlain, the 20^th Maine’s commander. He basically saved the Union’s bacon at Little Round Top. That battle sequence alone is worth watching the film for.

Tom Berenger as Longstreet and Richard Jordan were both outstanding as well. Sheen as Robert E. Lee however awfully wooden. George Lazenby, the former James Bond for one film, (On Her Majesty’s Secret Service) had a brief cameo as NC Brigadier General J. Johnston Pettigrew

We Were Soldiers Once (2002) Mel Gibson, Greg Kinnear, Sam Elliot:
This is an intense film that graphically shows the nature of the close combat that the troops fought in Vietnam. Gibson portrays LTC Hal Moore the commander of the 7^th Cavalry at LZ X-Ray in Ia Drang Valley early in 1965. This was based on the book of the same name by Hal Moore.

Sam Elliot steals every scene he’s in as CSM Plumley, a decorated WWII vet who has no tolerance for the typical Army BS. Plumley is a total badass whose men are more afraid of him than the enemy. Greg Kinnear is superb as the chopper pilot “Snake” Crandall. The clichés get a bit thick at times as with many war films but the filmmakers at least put a human face on the enemy. They’re not the mindless, savages from Tears of the Sun or Blackhawk Down.

This was the first major battle of the Vietnam war and shows the suffering and carnage that both sides will suffer for pieces of earth that mean nothing in the large scale of things.

A Bridge Too Far (1977) Sean Connery, Robert Redford, Anthony Hopkins:
A breathtaking, sweeping film with an all-star cast that gets a bit long at times but with the jump sequences and action scenes top notch. It covers the blunder by the Allied High Command to allocate all of their airborne forces to lay an “Airborne Carpet” along a single highway seizing the key bridges from Holland into Germany. Even after they learn that the area is filled with German SS Panzer divisions.

Sean Connery and Robert Redford stand out…as usual with their performances. Anthony Hopkins is outstanding as Operation Market Garden’s final puzzle piece LTC John Frost. He’s the man tasked to take the final bridge at Arnhem.

The soundtrack was a bit hokey but it is a classic war film with several great cameos…especially James Caan, Elliot Gould and Liv Ullmann. Interestingly enough, the film was panned in the US for the audacity to show the blunder of the high command. Gene Hackman’s Polish accent was atrocious but the rest of the movie was a classic war film.

The Great Escape (1963) Richard Attenborough, Steve McQueen, James Garner:
Another All-Star cast, another must-see film. Based on a true story, this is a fictionalized account of the massive British escape from Luft Stalag III in Lower Silesia, Germany, now Zagan, Poland. The characters are based on real men and in a few cases, composites of several POWs. However, no Americans were present at the camp, that is a fabrication and an excuse to land McQueen on the cast.

The film for some odd reason omits the Canadians who in reality played a big part of the escape. In fact, it was the Canadians who were the “Tunnel King” characters played by Charles Bronson and John Leyton. The POWs are moved to an “escape-proof camp” where they quickly adapt to dig several tunnels where they hope to free 250 of their own men.

McQueen steals the show in every scene he’s in. The 4^th of July moonshine scene was excellent but his motorcycle stunt riding scene where he’s being chased by the German military on bikes cemented him as an international film star.

The Longest Day (1962) All-Star Cast:
The film was an epic undertaking being almost a docudrama leading up to the D-Day Invasion of June 6^,1944, and thru the events of that very first, very long day. It shows the events from both sides and what entailed leading up to and during the invasion. The film was shot in black and white as to give an authentic look to the newsreels of WWII.

The cast is all top notch with British actor Richard Todd playing Major John Howard the man responsible for seizing “Pegasus Bridge”. Todd was actually on the assault during the war and lends a tremendous amount of realism to the production. The producers had military consultants from all of the countries involved and several of the consultants were officers who took part in the battle.

This would be the quintessential WWII film is they took the opening beach scene from Steven Spielberg’s “Saving Private Ryan”, converted it to black and white and placed it on the battle scenes here. The Rangers scene at Pointe du Hoc was well done but could have been better.

The Green Berets (1968) John Wayne, Aldo Ray, David Janssen:
John Wayne was concerned by the anti-war/anti-military movement in the United States and decided to portray the American involvement in a very positive light with the Green Berets which was loosely based on the book by Robin Moore.

The clichés are thick, as with most John Wayne war flicks but the Camp A-107 scene, filmed at Ft. Benning was based on the real battle of Nam Dong where Roger Donlon was awarded the Medal of Honor. Critics excoriated the film which they saw as a flag-waving pro-war film. But it was a box-office success.

The film was Wayne’s ode to the Special Forces troops, not the war which was lost in translation of the virulent anti-war sentiment at the time. Wayne was quoted as saying “what a magnificent job this still little-known branch of service is doing. … I wasn’t trying to send a message out to anybody,” he reasoned, “or debating whether it is right or wrong for the United States to be in this war.” He did, however, have a line which has become a classic. John Wayne’s character Col. Kirby tells David Janssen, “Out here, due process is a bullet.”

Honorable Mentions:
Some other favorites that didn’t make the cut but are very worthwhile films include:
Stalag 17, Twelve O’clock High, Downfall, Lawrence of Arabia, Defiance, The Battle of Britain, Tora, Tora, Tora, and Kelly’s Heroes.

Let’s turn on the DVD player, …. Which one goes on first?

Photos/videos courtesy of IMDB