| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: WoT |
| Does The United States Still Need USSOCOM? (Updated) - Small Wars Journal |
| 2009-12-15 |
| The establishment of United States Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) in 1987 with the passage of the Nunn-Cohen Amendment to the Defense Reorganization Act of 1987 was designed to fix the problems with Special Operations that were brought to light after the failed Iranian hostage rescue attempt at Desert One in 1980. Congress did what the military establishment would not. This legislation provided unity of command and control for Special Operations Forces and elevated Special Operations to a near peer with the Services giving it "service-like" responsibilities as well as a little used Combatant Command authority. However, in 2009, perhaps it is time for Congress to review their handiwork. Of course many outside the military establishment are enamored with the myth and romanticism of Special Operations. There are so many "groupies" among staffers and in academia that it is hard to see Special Operations for what it really is and what it has become. And within the military, Special Operations has been "hijacked" by a group of hyper-conventional Ranger types and other supporting elements that Special Operations and most important, its heart and soul -- Special Forces - has lost its way. There are so many in and out of the military who claim ties to Special Operations that it is unlikely that there will ever be a critical look at USSOCOM and what it has become. There is no doubt that Special Operations Forces, including from across the spectrum: the hyper-conventional Special Mission Units including the Rangers and Special Operations Aviation, as well the SEALs, the Air Commandos, the MARSOC Marines and the intellectual, indirect approach experts in Special Forces such as Civil Affairs, and Psychological Operations, have made tremendous contributions to the United States' fight against terrorists and insurgents. However, it is important to note that they have done this working for the Combatant Commanders (formerly regional Commander in Chiefs) and Ambassadors and not under USSOCOM. So let's take a broad look at USSOCOM and specifically focus on its headquarters and what it has done for our nation since 9-11 and what it has become. Congress might want to delve into some of these issues and ask some hard questions. |
| Posted by:Besoeker |
| #3 Compare wid PAKISTANI DEFENCE FORUM > MARY DEJEVSKY: NATO'S DISSOLUTION IS LONG OVERDUE. |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2009-12-15 18:35 |
| #2 "Yes, they did liberate Afghanistan, but what did they do _this week_?" |
| Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain 2009-12-15 14:14 |
| #1 A lot of sour grapes here. SOCOM has its fair share of warts, no question about it but there is no where else in DOD where these mission profiles exist. And certainly we can not afford as a nation to train every unit and commander to be able to execute these missions or to understand how to command and employ these mission sets. |
| Posted by: 49 Pan 2009-12-15 13:47 |