| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: WoT |
| Plan Seeks More Elite Forces to Fortify Military |
| 2006-01-24 |
| A top-level Pentagon review of defense strategy calls for bolstering the U.S. military with thousands more elite troops skilled in fighting terrorists and insurgents and partnering with foreign forces -- as part of a decades-long plan to expand efforts to thwart terrorists worldwide, according to U.S. officials and military analysts familiar with the review. The increase would bring the ranks of Special Operations Forces -- which include covert Delta Force operatives, Rangers, Navy SEALs and Army Special Forces -- to their highest levels since the Vietnam War while adding billions to the budget of the 52,000-strong U.S. Special Operations Command, based in Tampa, over the next five years, said the officials and analysts, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the final document has not been released. One of the largest gains would be in Army Special Forces, or Green Berets, soldiers trained in languages and navigating foreign cultures who work with indigenous forces and operate in 12-man "A-teams." Special Forces would expand by one-third -- from 15 to 20 active-duty battalions -- creating about 90 more A-teams to deploy to regions considered vulnerable to terrorist or extremist influences, the officials and analysts said. Currently, the bulk of Special Forces teams are rotating into Iraq and Afghanistan. Increasing Special Operations Forces is one of the most significant elements of the 2005 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR), which sets U.S. defense strategy, guides plans for forces and military hardware and has a major influence on defense spending. The QDR was timed for release along with the fiscal 2007 budget on Feb. 6, according to Pentagon and congressional officials as well as military analysts familiar with it through drafts and briefings. Implementing the strategy will occur primarily through the longer-range defense spending plan for the next five years, Pentagon officials said. The 2005 QDR -- the first comprehensive look at military strategy and requirements since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks -- attempts to predict the major security challenges the United States will face in the next 20 years, Ryan Henry, principal deputy undersecretary of defense for policy, said in an address last week. The latest review sets four major goals: defeating terrorist extremism; defending the homeland; influencing nations such as China that are at a "strategic crossroads" in their world role; and preventing hostile states or actors from acquiring nuclear, biological or chemical weapons, Henry said. It emphasizes devoting greater resources to preparing for "irregular" "catastrophic" and "disruptive" attacks -- such as insurgencies, strikes by terrorist groups with biological weapons, or an attack on U.S. information systems by China -- as compared with traditional military threats. One major question for the Pentagon's future strategy, military experts and officials say, is how to best fight and prevent the spread of terrorist and extremist groups over the long term in nations where the United States is not at war. The increase in Special Forces teams, trained specifically to work with foreign militaries, is one way to gain an ongoing presence and military influence in regions where it is lacking. "This will be the largest increase in the number of SOF since the Vietnam War," said Michael Vickers, director of strategic studies at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments in Washington, who has been involved in the QDR and was a member of a team of experts probing U.S. weaknesses. The QDR also envisions a significant boost of several hundred civil affairs soldiers, who specialize in post-conflict rebuilding, along with smaller increases in soldiers who engage in psychological operations. The ranks of Delta Force operatives, who work in covert "special mission units" tracking the most valued military targets such as terrorist leaders, will also grow by about one-third, officials and analysts say. Army Rangers, highly trained infantry troops, will gain three companies, or more than 400 troops. In an effort to keep an unblinking eye on potential terrorist activities in sensitive regions of the world, Air Force special operations will create a unit of unmanned aerial drones able to maintain watch for long periods. |
| Posted by:Steve White |
| #5 what if we give them all berets?....oh, wait... |
| Posted by: Gen. Eric Shinseki 2006-01-24 14:38 |
| #4 If everybody's "elite", then nobody is. |
| Posted by: mojo 2006-01-24 13:24 |
| #3 I thought the plan for fighting China was to sink their troop transports crossing the strait to Taiwan, and wipe out their missile capacity? Of course, I s'pose they might choose to start their war somewhere else... |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2006-01-24 13:04 |
| #2 As they say 'Deja vu all over again' For insightful reading of events which have meaning today may I recommend, Frontier Regulars: The United States Army and the Indian 1866-1891 by Robert M. Utley. The perspective of a small and overtaxed military establishment conducting operations in a demanding environment, physically and politically, while bringing ‘civilization’ to the vastness of the west can be related to the contemporary operations on the world stage today. Of particular note would be chapters three: The Problem of Doctrine, four: The Army, Congress, and the People, and eighteen: Mexican Border Conflicts 1870-81. Some excerpts: Chapter 3: The Problem of Doctrine. “Three special conditions set this mission apart from more orthodox military assignments. First, it pitted the army against an enemy who usually could not be clearly identified and differentiated from kinsmen not disposed at the moment to be enemies. Indians could change with bewildering rapidity from friend to foe to neutral, and rarely could one be confidently distinguished from another...Second, Indian service placed the army in opposition to a people that aroused conflicting emotions... And third, the Indians mission gave the army a foe unconventional both in the techniques and aims of warfare... He fought on his own terms and, except when cornered or when his family was endangered, declined to fight at all unless he enjoyed overwhelming odds...These special conditions of the Indian mission made the U.S. Army not so much a little army as a big police force...for a century the army tried to perform its unconventional mission with conventional organization and methods. The result was an Indian record that contained more failures than successes and a lack of preparedness for conventional war that became painfully evident in 1812, 1846, 1861, and 1898. Remember there is a force level ceiling mandated by Congress. Someone has to be the personnel bill payer for this. Take too much out of the line for special ops means that conventional forces will be less prepared for the in your face action, ie China. There is no perfect answer. |
| Posted by: Claviling Unomoting8510 2006-01-24 09:35 |
| #1 Sniff. sniff - GO AIRBORNE, RANGERS, and DELTA. |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2006-01-24 01:42 |