Guest CharlieDontSurf Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 (edited) In a recognition of special operations forces’ reliance on their conventional partners for “enabling” capabilities such as intelligence analysis and engineering, U.S. Special Operations Command head Adm. Eric Olson is rehabilitating a long-lost “truth” that acknowledges the contribution non-special ops forces make to missions. SOCom and its subordinate commands have long touted four “SOF Truths” that encapsulate the command’s self-image. These four statements have become enshrined in special operations lore, frequently quoted by special ops officials. But few special operators know that the SOF truths were written by a non-special operator, or that a fifth truth went missing for more than 21 years. The author of the SOF truths was John Collins, a retired Army colonel who enjoyed a second career in the Congressional Research Service and in 1987 found himself writing a publication titled “United States and Soviet Special Operations” for a House Armed Services Committee subcommittee chaired by Rep. Earl Hutto, D-Fla. The report “had to do with what special operations are all about,” Collins said. “When we were through, Hutto wrote the forward to this report — I wrote it for him, he signed it. Having gone back through everything I’d done, I came up with the five SOF truths. Those were the tailpiece of what Hutto signed.” Those “five SOF truths” included the original four, plus a fifth: “Most special operations require non-SOF assistance.” The details of what happened next are murky, but by 1988 then-Brig. Gen. Dave Baratto, the commander of the John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center and School at Fort Bragg, N.C., was wrestling with the challenge of how to codify special operations’ unique “operational considerations.” “SOF was new and it was joint and my job was to try and incorporate those [considerations] across all services,” Baratto said. That led Baratto and his staff to draw up a list of “SOF imperatives” that sought to articulate what made special operations forces different from conventional forces. The SOF truths “came up as sort of a derivative of that, and I don’t know exactly where they originated … but they sort of went hand in hand with the imperatives,” Baratto said, adding that his staff “may have” picked up the truths from Collins’s ghostwritten introduction signed by Hutto. But Baratto, who retired as a major general in 1995, remembers discussing the SOF truths “and whether we ought to codify them and embrace them as an institution” with Wayne Downing, the general who took command of Army Special Operations Command in 1991. Downing, who died in 2007, was receptive to the idea, Baratto said. However, Collins’ fifth bullet about most spec ops missions requiring “non-SOF assistance” made an early exit in the debate. The first Collins knew of SOCom’s adoption of four of his five truths was in 1993, while he was researching another special ops report, this time for Sens. Sam Nunn, D-Ga., and Bill Cohen, R-Maine. “The first stop was Fort Bragg and the Army Special Ops Command,” where Downing was still in charge, Collins said. “And Wayne gives me a dog-and-pony show of slides and ... very proudly he pops up a slide with the ‘SOF Truths’ on it — four of them. “I said, ‘I think they’re great — I wrote ’em.’ ” “The fifth truth got dropped simply because ... it said special ops needs some help,” he said. “I have told everybody I can get my hands on since then that it’s too bad the fifth truth got dropped,” he said. “Its omission encourages unrealistic expectations by poorly tutored employers and perpetuates a counterproductive ‘us versus everybody else’ attitude.” Olson apparently agreed with Collins, because after a December e-mail exchange between the retired colonel and the four-star, the admiral said that he was re-instating the fifth truth into the SOCom canon. Olson explained his reasoning in a statement e-mailed via Col. Tim Nye, the SOCom spokesman: “The SOF Truths have provided time-tested guidance to the special operations community for daily activities as well as long-range planning. When they were originally penned, there was a fifth truth that was never published — ‘Most special operations require non-SOF assistance.’ It’s being included now so that we all understand the importance of force enablers and the contributions they make to mission success. To think otherwise would levy unrealistic expectations as to the capabilities SOF bring to the fight. “The operational effectiveness of our deployed forces cannot be, and never [has] been, achieved without being enabled by our joint service partners. The support Air Force, Army, Marine and Navy engineers, [explosive ordnance disposal] technicians, intelligence analysts, and the numerous other professions that contribute to SOF, have substantially increased our capabilities and effectiveness throughout the world.” Article: http://www.armytimes.com/news/2009/0...ruths_081509w/ Edited October 8, 2009 by CharlieDontSurf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitman Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 6th SOF truth: CleardHot cannot be mass produced Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M2 Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 Wow, looks like the Air Force isn't the only branch being pussified... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest CharlieDontSurf Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 6th SOF truth: CleardHot cannot be mass produced I thought they assembled him out of spare body parts at OTS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClearedHot Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 I thought they assembled him out of spare body parts at OTS. Blasphemy, I am a AFROTC grad because I was too dumb to join the Guard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BQZip01 Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 adding the 5th SOF truth is like adding the sixth "SOF forces need to be able to breathe air". It's a given. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nsplayr Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 Dumbness. The four SOF truths are treated like gospel while we at AFSOC go and break them at will, so wtf will adding a 5th truth do? “Most special operations require non-SOF assistance;” that will just start a new pissing contest over dudes saying "Well my mission is the most special, WE don't need help and etc. etc. Every time I see a slide with the 4 truths I chuckle because me and my bros are the physical embodiment of their being broken. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HerkDerka Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 Makes about as much sense as tits on a bull. HD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murph Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 6th SOF truth: CleardHot cannot be mass produced My mistake, I thought it was TechnoVikings cannot be mass produced. Learn something new everyday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HerkDerka Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 My mistake, I thought it was TechnoVikings cannot be mass produced. Learn something new everyday. Your praise does not amuse the Techno Viking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LJ Driver Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 Dumbness. The four SOF truths are treated like gospel while we at AFSOC go and break them at will, so wtf will adding a 5th truth do? “Most special operations require non-SOF assistance;” that will just start a new pissing contest over dudes saying "Well my mission is the most special, WE don't need help and etc. etc. Every time I see a slide with the 4 truths I chuckle because me and my bros are the physical embodiment of their being broken. Don't go disparaging the entire command with that crap. You knuckleheads in the 319th and others may do it and give us a bad name, but that doesn't mean we all do that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murph Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 (edited) Don't go disparaging the entire command with that crap. You knuckleheads in the 319th and others may do it and give us a bad name, but that doesn't mean we all do that. It's happening command wide, and directed by those in charge. Maybe not to you, but for the guys who don't have wings that'll fall off in a year (319th, 318th, 524th?, and 73rd), they're all staring at the "SOF cannot be mass produced" truth in amazement. I mean, come on, taking a squadron of airdrop guys and turning them into gunship dudes in a few months?! If that doesn't violate a SOF truth, I don't know what does. When in rome... Edited October 9, 2009 by Murph Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zrooster99 Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 When in rome... Go on... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donkey Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 Go on... Oh... do as the Roman's do. It's an old expression. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest CharlieDontSurf Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 I mean, come on, taking a squadron of airdrop guys and turning them into gunship dudes in a few months?! If that doesn't violate a SOF truth, I don't know what does. Look, I'm not turning this into a pissing contest just want to clear somethings up. It's a bit more complex than that. Is there a gun, sure, but there are things that have never been put on a 130 before that are going on our birds. Its less, 'lets take an MC squadron and turn them into an AC squadron' and more 'here is a brand new concept, lets develop it'. There will still be airdrop...and AFSOC/CC is still trying to get TF for the W. Hardly turning MC dudes into just 'gunship dudes'. I can't go into any more detail. Again I simply want to clear things up, I know there are alot of rumors running around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murph Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 Again I simply want to clear things up, I know there are alot of rumors running around. Bahaha, ok man... whatever you say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WheelzUp Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 Look, I'm not turning this into a pissing contest just want to clear somethings up. It's a bit more complex than that. Is there a gun, sure, but there are things that have never been put on a 130 before that are going on our birds. Its less, 'lets take an MC squadron and turn them into an AC squadron' and more 'here is a brand new concept, lets develop it'. There will still be airdrop...and AFSOC/CC is still trying to get TF for the W. Hardly turning MC dudes into just 'gunship dudes'. I can't go into any more detail. Again I simply want to clear things up, I know there are alot of rumors running around. Holy crap dude!!! Get over yourself. Wheelz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest CharlieDontSurf Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 Bahaha, ok man... whatever you say. ??? Holy crap dude!!! Get over yourself. Wheelz huh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClearedHot Posted October 10, 2009 Share Posted October 10, 2009 ??? huh? Dude they are trying to make the point that you are saying you will be airdrop guys AND gunship guys. Remember gunship guys train for years just to do CAS and there seems to be a perception that the W's will not only master that cape, but remain current at the same time they are doing airdrop currencies. It does nto make sense and someone WILL get killed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest CharlieDontSurf Posted October 10, 2009 Share Posted October 10, 2009 (edited) Dude they are trying to make the point that you are saying you will be airdrop guys AND gunship guys. Remember gunship guys train for years just to do CAS and there seems to be a perception that the W's will not only master that cape, but remain current at the same time they are doing airdrop currencies. It does nto make sense and someone WILL get killed. Okay...got it. Listen dudes we are just doing what we are being tasked to do, this isn't me whipping out my dick. We have gunship guys that have trained for years to help with the transition. Is it perfect, of course not, is it any of our choices, nope. Edit: Back to topic, I really do not understand how the 5th SOF truth is applicable to the other four. If someone agrees or disagrees lets hear it, I'm kinda lost here on what to make of it. Edited October 10, 2009 by CharlieDontSurf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClearedHot Posted October 10, 2009 Share Posted October 10, 2009 Is it perfect, of course not, is it any of our choices, nope. Understood, trust me, understood. Bottomline for the gunship dudes, someone is going to get killed and story will read "gunship" guys shoot friendlies... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nsplayr Posted October 10, 2009 Share Posted October 10, 2009 (edited) Don't go disparaging the entire command with that crap. You knuckleheads in the 319th and others may do it and give us a bad name, but that doesn't mean we all do that. Wow, BURN...I feel butt hurt already. Yea, none of the other squadrons out there are taking dudes right out of UPT/nav school, none of you other guys are growing faster than is probably advisable, etc. etc. Look, we all have the same boss man and when he says "do more" and AFPC drops a bunch of LTs out of the sky, how is that not trying to mass producing SOF? Anyways, wow, get over yourself because we're all on the same team. It's happening command wide, and directed by those in charge. Maybe not to you, but for the guys who don't have wings that'll fall off in a year (319th, 318th, 524th?, and 73rd), they're all staring at the "SOF cannot be mass produced" truth in amazement. I mean, come on, taking a squadron of airdrop guys and turning them into gunship dudes in a few months?! If that doesn't violate a SOF truth, I don't know what does. When in rome... Absolutely...from the limited understanding I have of the SOF truths they seem like sound rules to follow. It's just funny to learn them though because I know we (meaning AFSOC as a whole) are breaking them on a regular basis and I'm at least hoping the product we're putting out these days (i.e. me and my bros as young LTs) are as good as what the SOF standard should be because the guys on the ground certainly deserve our very best. Time will tell I guess...more motivation not to suck. Edited October 10, 2009 by nsplayr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Alphabet soup Posted October 10, 2009 Share Posted October 10, 2009 (edited) you might as well just add the 5th SOF truth. They already mention it in ISOC. Without non-sof support, how else will we move all that shit to the AOR. We can't put it on an airdrop ship without somebody crying. AFSOC just needs to buy some C-17s, attach a 9mm to the side, call it a AC-17, and then we can use SOF to support SOF. Anyway, like we tell all our new people, AFSOC is like a monkey F*#king a football. enough said. Edited October 10, 2009 by Alphabet soup Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LJ Driver Posted October 10, 2009 Share Posted October 10, 2009 Wow, BURN...I feel butt hurt already. Yea, none of the other squadrons out there are taking dudes right out of UPT/nav school, none of you other guys are growing faster than is probably advisable, etc. etc. Look, we all have the same boss man and when he says "do more" and AFPC drops a bunch of LTs out of the sky, how is that not trying to mass producing SOF? Anyways, wow, get over yourself because we're all on the same team. Absolutely...from the limited understanding I have of the SOF truths they seem like sound rules to follow. It's just funny to learn them though because I know we (meaning AFSOC as a whole) are breaking them on a regular basis and I'm at least hoping the product we're putting out these days (i.e. me and my bros as young LTs) are as good as what the SOF standard should be because the guys on the ground certainly deserve our very best. Time will tell I guess...more motivation not to suck. I'm not surprised you feel 'butt hurt', whatever the F that is. WE are not breaking them on a regular basis. And NO. YOU are not as good as the SOF standard, and you're right, the shooters deserve our best. Not a bunch of faggy last in their class d-bags that are jaded and pissed off to be here. They should be applying. And begging to get in the door. When they get here they should be so g-damn happy that they are on the pointy end that they STFU and do their jobs as good as they can. But they don't do that. They show up and walk around like they know something, and have done more than fuck-all in an airplane. It makes all of us look like buffoons to our SOF users. Why is the Army looking for more organic fixed-wing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LJ Driver Posted October 10, 2009 Share Posted October 10, 2009 Look, I'm not turning this into a pissing contest just want to clear somethings up. It's a bit more complex than that. Is there a gun, sure, but there are things that have never been put on a 130 before that are going on our birds. Its less, 'lets take an MC squadron and turn them into an AC squadron' and more 'here is a brand new concept, lets develop it'. There will still be airdrop...and AFSOC/CC is still trying to get TF for the W. Hardly turning MC dudes into just 'gunship dudes'. I can't go into any more detail. Again I simply want to clear things up, I know there are alot of rumors running around. You didn't clear anything up, and you don't need to. Most of the dudes that are participating in this thread know as much about this as you (or likely more). And really? You don't understand how non-SOF is important? Does SOF have any space assets? No. Do we have any heavy airlift? No. Do we have any fixed-wing AR tanker capability? No. It's almost so obvious that it should't be a truth because only a moron wouldn't know that these things are a multiplier. How could this be a mystery to you? Not sure what your background is. Know that CAS and AD are two completely different mindsets and skillsets. When you add TF into the mix there is absolutely no doubt that you will not be doing both. It cannot happen. To be even remotely proficient at both these you would become a training squadron and do nothing but fly for currency and proficiency. There are simply too many events to do. When the T2 had its last accident (Albania) the AIB published the fact that T2 copilots had significantly more events to log per half than anyone else in the USAF. This was being balanced by letting guys get noncurrent and then flying them with IPs. Clearly not an effective long-term strategy. You cannot maintain proficiency in both. It doesn't work. We learned this lesson already, and it falls perfctly into the fact that you cannot mass produce SOF. People will get hurt, likely killed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now