SureFire

Archive for December, 2018

Step Aside, Annie Oakley, Because This Girl Can Shoot

Thursday, December 27th, 2018

TNVC President and CEO Victor DiCosola with six-time Olympic medalist, Kim Rhode

 

I am humbled every day by the amazing people I get to spend time with. One in particular is very special to me, and I am honored to be with Kim Rhode, the most decorated US shooter and first female Olympian to medal in six consecutive games, including 3 golds. (Only Italian luger Armin Zoeggeler has done it on the men’s side). And Kim will have the opportunity to make history in the upcoming 2020 Olympics in Japan as the only Olympic athlete to ever capture 7 consecutive Olympic medals. 

Kim’s coach and father, Richard, has helped me immensely honing my skills in International Bunker, along with my personal shooting coach Brian Burrows. They all are the most gracious professionals you can ever meet and hang with. (Instagram @KimRhode)

-Victor DiCosola

TNVC President and CEO

 

Pre-SHOT Show Ask SSD Redux – “Should I Give A Gear Sample To This Show Attendee?”

Thursday, December 27th, 2018

This article originated in 2013 as “Should I Send Gear To This Blogger?” Since SHOT Show is right around the corner, I thought I’d tailor the information a little. For instance, last time I published a version, I added info on testing. This time, I’ll briefly mention fundraisers and charities.


Originally the story focused primarily on bloggers, since there is no bar to entry and the Internet is rife with them, but the question of sample requests from military personnel has come up regularly. I received some excellent feedback on that aspect from a reader which I’ve since rolled into the article. Expect to get all kinds of pitches during SHOT Show from a myriad of requestors.

20131229-200020.jpg

I regularly field questions from industry about being contacted by potential gear reviewers for product samples. Most often, they’re unsure of the validity of the site or person making the request. Often, the industry rep who contacts me for advice doesn’t have a lot of time or experience dealing with “media” and wants me give them a simple “yes” or “no” answer. Instead, I send them off with some homework in the form of several questions to ask of the potential reviewer and themselves. I thought it might be helpful to share them with you as well.

Some are bloggers, some are regulars on various forums and others are military/LE personnel. Some do this for a living, others post reviews due to an interest in weapons and gear, while still others are just looking for a pile of “free stuff.” Most of the folks who contact you will think they have your best interest at heart, but let’s face it, it’s a jungle out there. This is very important. It is quite easy to get a media badge for SHOT Show. Just because the person approaching you has a media badge, doesn’t mean they are of the caliber you’d expect. What’s more, some people work for your competitors and will wear a media badge one day and an exhibitor badge the next.

The internet is awesome. It allowed me to create SSD without having to buy a print press and hire a huge staff of reporters, but it also allows for literally anyone to set up a website and start the hustle for free gear. I want to make this perfectly clear. The point of these questions isn’t to serve as a bar to entry for anyone. The next SSD might be out there somewhere and we want to encourage quality, not stifle it. Nor is the list all-inclusive, but it will certainly serve as a great baseline. Rather, this is a guide for those in industry who feel they are barraged by a stream of open hands and unsure of how to deal with them.

Who Are They?
You are assessing the whole person. Who they are, how they approach you, their deportment, online behavior, everything. It’s like a job interview. When they write about your products, by extension, they are representing you.

The very first thing any prospective reviewer should do, either via phone, email, or in person (at a trade show) is tell you who they are and where they publish. If not, they are probably full of it, or don’t have enough experience to be effective. Either way, steer clear.

If they do it in person, take a look at them. Are they wearing the Tactical Tuxedo? Covered in morale patches? In and of itself that isn’t a disqualifier, but it can certainly be entertaining (please send me a pic for a “tactical fashion police” post). Are they properly dressed for the occasion, clean, organized?

Ask them what qualifies them to write about your product. There’s no right or wrong answer here, but you have to be satisfied with what they tell you. As a corollary, ensure they actually understand what your product is used for.

On a similar note, ask them about their day job. Some guys do this full time, so that one’s easy. If not, find out what else they are up to. Do they work for one of your competitors? Yes, those guys exist. Did they tell you about how they review gear and are also developing a few designs of their own? Or, better yet, working with other companies to test gear for them and develop products? All of those are flags to stay away. As gear reviewers and reporters we get access to a lot of behind the scenes info including trade secrets and developmental products. Only a hustler would put himself in a ethically questionable situation by asking to see your products while he serves as your competition.

What’s Their Demeanor?
Listen really hard to what they say, and how they say it. Are they confident and professional or do they come off like a used car salesman?

Do they ask for money or ask you to purchase advertising in order to review your product? If so, RUN away from them and tell all of your friends to steer clear as well. Paid reviews are bad for business. Also, tell me so I can place them in my mental Rolodex of shame.

Did they offer to “test” your product? I am retired from the military. My last assignment was as a Project Officer in the most exclusive of the five DoD Test and Evaluation Activities. I can tell you from experience, that testing requires use of the scientific method, a detailed test plan, and takes hundreds if not thousands of test data points. This equates to a great deal of time and money. Most of your products are already built to a spec so what good is a guy going to do by taking one of your products down to the local range and shooting a couple of magazines through it, or lighting a match to it, or dropping his barbell on it? Absolutely nothing. These “tests” are complete BS and generally make your product look bad since they are subjected to unrepeatable, anomalous protocols and arbitrary standards that they weren’t built for. Leave testing to guys in lab coats. On the other hand, if a guy wants to do a demonstration or examine an aspect of your product, and you are comfortable with his plan, go for it. Just remember, you have to live with the results of what he does.

Instead, they should be talking about reviews which provide basic facts about the item’s physical properties as well as impressions on how it performs for that reviewer. You’ll notice we don’t do a lot of traditional reviews here in SSD because of the time they take. Instead, we concentrate on breaking news. But, we do provide impressions of items that we’ve had experience with.

Do they immediately start name dropping? While this isn’t necessarily bad, it is a trick often used to gain your confidence by associating themselves with others with better credentials.

Do they try to win your confidence by telling you all about what your competition is up to? If so, they’ll probably do the same to you once they are off to the next guy.

Do they speak like they understand that the product sample they are asking for isn’t really free and affects your bottom line?

Many small companies are owned by former military personnel. They aren’t used to the business world or dealing with professional BS artists. What’s more, the more selectively manned the unit someone belonged to in the military, the more susceptible they are to being bamboozled in the business world. At their unit they were sheltered. It was all mission focus. The only people who had access to them were vetted and deemed trustworthy. Out here, it’s a dog-eat-dog world and those of questionable morals work hard to insert themselves into circles of trust (refer to the earlier comment on name dropping). I’ve got lots of buddies who are ETSing or retiring and the con men are lining up to associate themselves with these guys and suck them dry. Lots of the unscupulous will be at SHOT Show, looking for free booze and opportunities to exploit.

Where And How Often Do They Publish?
What’s their reach? Notice I didn’t say “ask how many readers they have.” Reach is a bit bigger than that. High readership numbers don’t necessarily equate to the right readers. Sure, ask to see their webstats. But what’s important is who they are reaching. This info has to be weighed against your product and goals. If you make specialized communication devices, those two million air softers they reach every month probably aren’t going to help you much if your goal is to increase sales. On the other hand, if a guy is influential on a precision shooting forum of a few hundred members that include personnel from very specialized military and LE teams, then sending your new scope to him might give you some excellent exposure.

Find out how long they’ve been at it. I published an article a day on SSD for a whole year before a layoff forced me to commercialize the site. If they started last month, it’s probably best to give them some time to develop their voice.

Is it a corporate or private website? Is it owned by a large conglomerate? If so, do the owners share your beliefs? Many in the gun business don’t want to associate with companies that are anti-2A. Check out who owns the site. If it’s a private guy, read the site. Is it full of anti-government stuff? If so, ask yourself if your government customers will want to do business with a company that rubs elbows with a site that refers to them as “jack booted thugs”?

Fundraisers/Charities
Lots of legitimate fundraisers will approach you at SHOT Show for donations in money or product they can raffle off. There’s nothing wrong with that. However, it seems to be the age of the parochial charity, with every little special interest cropping up. My suggestion is that you don’t say “yes” or “no” during the initial approach. Instead, ask for a copy of their prospectus and do your research. First off ensure they are a true 501(C)3 and also consider the goals of the charity, how much of their money actually is applied to their chartered goals and finally, who is involved. For instance, you may find that the wounded Navy SEAL who is raising money for working K9s is a member of an Anti-2A organization who is very vocal his views on private ownership of firearms.

Military/LE Personnel
Sometimes you’ll be contacted by Government personnel seeking a sample. If it’s for work:

Is (s)he a military guy? Insist on a letter from the first O5 in their chain of command stating that the requestor is authorized to evaluate you product for use by the unit. If he’s legit, this won’t be a problem.

LE guys, same deal, make sure they are reviewing your product for possible agency use or if it’s just for their own, personal use.

After you’ve spoken with them, follow through with the info they’ve given you to verify their claims.

If they are using their duty position to get free stuff to post on a forum or write about on a blog, ask them a couple of questions about the ethics of using their uniform for free stuff and then go back to all of the questions above.

Retired Contracting Officer Matt shared this advice:

…if SFC Random hits them up for basically free stuff to “test”, it is always the safest course of action to insist on a no-cost loan agreement from the troop’s/unit’s supporting Contracting Officer. It protects the company AND industry.


That said, if the troop ain’t a capability developer, program or test guy, don’t send them anything. Just sayin’
.”

Sage advice indeed. It protects both industry and the Government.

Alternatives to “Free Stuff’
In some cases you may want to offer a temporary loan sample that comes back to you after the review. In this case, you may want to secure more expensive items with a credit card number that will be charged if the item is not returned by the date agreed upon. Other times, perhaps a discounted purchase is the best course.

Use Your Network
There’s nothing wrong with vetting a website or writer. Ask friends at other companies if they’ve ever dealt with them and how it went.

Do Your Research
Independently check out their website/articles. Determine if they can actually write and convey information in a usable format.

Take a look at how they present information. Once again, do they understand your product and its use? Will they diminish the value of your brand by associating it with your competitors or what you consider inferior items?

Additionally, make sure they don’t end up associating you with something you don’t stand for. You don’t want to end up having your product on a site that conveys a different belief than yours. For example, a jihadist site, a tinfoil hat site or one that works to deny basic rights of others. Remember, right or wrong, the internet mobs are always ready to pounce.

Summary
Your product is valuable in many ways. In addition to its innate value, it has value to the potential reviewer. By providing a product for review, you validate that person’s status. By sharing a product with a reviewer, you associate yourself with them but keep in mind, that’s a two way street. Sometimes, you are getting the better end of the deal. Additionally, the article or review that is produced is a commodity as well. Information is the product for those in my line of work as well as their readers.

The ball is in your court. Whether or not you provide product samples to reviewers is up to you. Ultimately, we have to rely on industry to police the plethora of websites, forums and blogs. The cream will always rise to the top but if you don’t provide samples to the unworthy, eventually, many of them will go away and the good sites will be all the easier to identify.

I know this sounds like a lot but it’s worth it. Seeding product samples to writers and reviewers can be a very high pay off endeavor; so long as you send them to the right folks. Conversely, it can be very expensive if you don’t see a return on your investment. Ask a few simple questions and follow up with a perusal of their other work. If they check out, go for it. If not, don’t be discouraged. Trust me, there’ll be another guy right behind them.

Kitanica – Rampart FR Hoodie

Thursday, December 27th, 2018

The American made Rampart FR Hoodie is crafted from 200 gram Nomex fleece and Nomex thread. It features Contoured Sleeves, a Cinching Hood with brim, Front “Kangaroo Pocket”, and 3×4″ Velcro shoulder patch.

Offered in Olive, sizes Small Through XXX-Large.

www.kitanica.net/Rampart-FR-Hoodie

Panteao Productions Announces the Formation of the Panteao Sportsman’s Club

Wednesday, December 26th, 2018

Columbia, SC, December 26, 2018 – Panteao Productions is happy to announce the formation of the Panteao Sportsman’s Club at that Panteao Studios range facility in Swansea, SC.

This is the same facility that Panteao Productions has been filming videos and hosting firearms training classes with the Panteao instructors for the past three years. Now folks in the area have the opportunity to use the range and be a part of the Panteao club. 

The facility currently has a 600-yard rifle bay, five 25-yard handgun bays and a 50-yard 360-degree bay. There is much more coming to the facility that will provide even more training options for the members. Not to mention the training classes with Panteao instructors coming in 2019 as well as regularly scheduled SC CWP classes.

The Sportsman’s Club offers a discount on yearly memberships to military, law enforcement and first responders. There is also a short term membership available for military personnel that are in the area for only a short period of time.

For more information, visit the Panteao Sportsman’s Club website at: www.panteaosportsmansclub.com

Facebook:  www.facebook.com/panteaosportsmansclub

Instagram:  www.instagram.com/panteaosportsmansclub

SKD Post Christmas Sale

Wednesday, December 26th, 2018

skdtac.com

SureFire Field Notes Ep 39 – How to Speed Reload With Larry Vickers

Wednesday, December 26th, 2018

Larry Vickers is a retired US Army 1st SFOD- Delta combat veteran with years of experience in the firearms industry as a combat marksmanship instructor and industry consultant. In recent years he has hosted several tactical firearms related TV shows. Currently Larry presents videos on the Vickers Tactical Youtube channel of which Bravo Company is the presenting sponsor. Larry Vickers special operations background is one of the most unique in the industry today; he has been directly or indirectly involved in the some of the most significant special operations missions of the last quarter century. During Operation Just Cause he participated in Operation Acid Gambit – the rescue of Kurt Muse from Modelo Prison in Panama City, Panama. As a tactics and marksmanship instructor on active duty he helped train special operations personnel that later captured Saddam Hussein and eliminated his sons Uday and Qusay Hussein. In addition, he was directly involved in the design and development of the HK416 for Tier One SOF use, which was used by Naval Special Warfare personnel to kill Osama Bin Laden. Larry Vickers has developed various small arms accessories, with the most notable being his signature sling manufactured by Blue Force Gear, Glock accessories by Tangodown, and 1911 specific products by Wilson Combat. In addition he has maintained strong relationships with premium companies within the firearms industry such as Blue Force Gear, BCM, Aimpoint, CCWSafe, Wilson Combat, and Tangodown. He has developed and offered a line of Vickers Tactical Glock pistols sold exclusively thru Lipseys Inc.. He is also author of the Vickers Guide series of firearm books. Larry Vickers travels the country conducting combat marksmanship classes for law abiding civilians, law enforcement and military.

www.vickerstactical.com
www.aztectrainingservices.com
www.surefire.com

TacJobs – Sales Operations Business Development – BLACKHAWK! and Eagle Industries

Wednesday, December 26th, 2018

Join our talented team. Employees at Vista Outdoor are passionate and committed to delivering quality products to our customers. Our culture centers on an engaged and accountable workforce. Our goal is to attract and retain a diverse workforce: rich in talent, background, ideas and experience.

Responsibilities and Qualifications

This position is responsible for supporting the sales and growth for both the BLACKHAWK! and Eagle brands.  This position sells BLACKHAWK! and Eagle products and services with a thorough understanding of our company products and capabilities in relation to our competitors and customer needs as an influence to sell customers our products to meet their mission requirements.

Essential duties and responsibilities:  includes the following, but not limited to;

Develop strategies for establishing solid long term partnerships and business relationships with large Military and Special Operations end users .

Markets new and existing contacts through creation, development and implementation of various business solutions and maintains those industry contacts leading to sales

Maintain up-to-date awareness of activities, industry/consumer trends and market research

Visits commands, departments on bases and installations to teach specific customers about BLACKHAWK! and Eagle, understand their needs and how BLACKHAWK! and Eagle can assist in achieving those requirements.

Possess both the mental and Physically ability to provide product training and demonstrations both in classroom and out in the field

Ability to travel up to 50% or more of the time both domestic and international

Strive to obtain BLACKHAWK! and Eagle brands on bid lists and develop strategies for BLACKHAWK! and Eagle brands to become a bidder on all RFQ’s

Provide support to program managers and report due diligence, contacts of new business development and alliance development projects while focusing on all key accounts

Attend as needed to specified trade shows, conferences and customer events

All other duties as assigned by Director, Special Operations Division Manager and BLACKHAWK! Sales team

Senior Leadership or Instructor experience preferred

Education/Experience:

Candidate must have an associates degree preferred with emphasis in business administration, sales and or military with minimum 5 years military (10+ years preferred) experience with demonstrated negotiation skills.  Candidate must possess exemplary problem solving, strategic analysis, motivation, project management, visionary leadership and be able to work successfully in a multi-project, deadline driven, rapid growth/fast paced environment while maintaining an eager and adaptable attitude.  Interaction and collaboration with upper and senior level management required.

Competencies- To perform the job successfully, an individual should demonstrate the following competencies:

Problem Solving – Identifies and resolves problems in a timely manner; Gathers and analyzes information skillfully; Develops alternative solutions; Works well in group problem solving situations; Uses reason even when dealing with emotional topics.

Project Management – Coordinates projects; Communicates changes and progress via weekly status reports; Completes projects on time and budget.

Customer Service – Manages difficult or emotional customer situations; Responds promptly to customer needs; Solicits customer feedback to improve service; Responds to requests for service and assistance; Meets commitments.

Oral Communication – Speaks clearly and persuasively in positive or negative situations; Listens and gets clarification; Responds well to questions; Demonstrates group presentation skills; Participates in meetings.

Written Communication – Writes clearly and informatively; Edits work for spelling and grammar; Varies writing style to meet needs; Presents numerical data effectively; Able to read and interpret written information.

Business Acumen – Understands business implications of decisions; Displays orientation to profitability; Demonstrates knowledge of market and competition; Aligns work with company strategic goals.

Ethics – Treats people with respect; Keeps commitments; Inspires the trust of others; Works with integrity and ethically; Upholds organizational values.

Organizational Support – Follows policies and procedures; Completes administrative tasks correctly and on time; Supports organization’s goals and values; Benefits organization through outside activities.

Judgment – Displays willingness to make decisions; Exhibits sound and accurate judgment; Supports and explains reasoning for decisions; Includes appropriate people in decision-making process; Makes timely decisions.

Planning/Organizing – Prioritizes and plans work activities; Uses time efficiently; Plans for additional resources; Sets goals and objectives; Organizes or schedules other people and their tasks; Develops realistic action plans.

Professionalism – Approaches others in a tactful manner; Reacts well under pressure; Treats others with respect and consideration regardless of their status or position; Accepts responsibility for own actions; Follows through on commitments.

Attendance/Punctuality – Is consistently at work and on time; Ensures work responsibilities are covered when absent; Arrives at meetings and appointments on time.

Initiative – Volunteers readily; Undertakes self-development activities; Seeks increased responsibilities; Takes independent actions and calculated risks; Looks for and takes advantage of opportunities; Asks for and offers help when needed.

We offer a highly competitive salary, comprehensive benefits including: medical and dental, vision, disability and life insurance, 401K, PTO, tuition reimbursement, and the ability to add value to an exciting mission!

Equal Opportunity Employer Minorities/Females/Protected Veteran/Disabled

Apply here.

The Baldwin Files – Forgotten SWCS History

Wednesday, December 26th, 2018

I sent the following email just before I retired in 2011 to an old friend who had just taken a senior position at the Special Warfare Center and School (SWCS) at Fort Bragg. During the time in question, 2000-01, I was commanding F Company, 1st Battalion, 1st Special Warfare Training Group at Camp Mackall.  My company was responsible for two phases of the Special Forces Qualification Course or Q Course for short.  What was then called Phase II, focused on Land Navigation and Small Unit Tactics; and Phase IV, focused on Unconventional Warfare (UW), including the culminating Robin Sage Exercise. I am one of the few that had firsthand knowledge of this historical episode – since it was never made public – for reasons that will become obvious.  I thought it was past time to share it with a larger audience and save it for posterity.  I have edited what follows only to spell out contractions and the numerous acronyms for clarity.

Believe it or not, this is a true story.  In 2000 and 2001 (before 9/11) a small group of senior Special Forces Officers at SWCS and some retired leaders – including one former Group Commander – were developing plans to radically “reinvent” or “reboot”  Special Forces (SF) for the new millennia. I am not going to mention names, but you know these men. They were convinced that the classic core SF mission of Unconventional Warfare (UW), aka Guerrilla Warfare, was as obsolete as the horse cavalry.  Moreover, if our Regiment did not significantly change we would risk becoming irrelevant in the 21st Century.  Therefore, they were determined to save SF…even if it meant discarding everything that makes us who we are.

This cabal looked at our history and reached some firm (but fatally flawed) conclusions: First, they determined that if any U.S. President ever considered doing small scale UW again, it would be a covert or clandestine effort conducted by the CIA. If any Department of Defense (DoD) forces were involved, those troops would come from the “black” SOF and not the “white” SF Groups (God, how I hate those terms). Because the Vietnam War had been less than successful at the strategic level, they also believed that our national leaders would never again have the political will to conduct Counterinsurgency or Nation Building.  Of course, they had to willfully disregard the myriad of tactical and operational successes and the breadth of Special Operation Activities that SF accomplished during the conflict in SE Asia.  

They looked at Desert Shield/Storm and concluded that the only mission SF conducted that conventional commanders were comfortable with – and praised – was the Coalition Support Team (CST) mission. The Special Reconnaissance (SR) missions (referred to as Strategic Reconnaissance in older manuals) executed by SF were only marginally successful and not very helpful at the operational level. Although I would argue that was because we were constrained from operating mounted a la the LRDG as 5th Group had detachments well trained to execute.  Instead, we inserted teams on foot in a fashion similar to conventional LRS units. Oddly enough, those “black” units tasked with “Scud Hunting” went in mounted, were more successful, and therefore had a more appropriate SOF operational impact. 

They looked at other operations and contingencies (Panama, Somalia) and decided that the SF contribution to combat operations was, to their way of thinking, marginal. Instead, they liked what had been done with SF ODAs in Haiti and in Northern Iraq after Desert Storm. SF had received much praise from conventional Army leaders for effectively working with indigenous people in largely permissive environments for humanitarian purposes. The cabal concluded that utilizing ODAs as “super” CAT-As instead of “cowboy” warriors was non-threatening to Conventional Force commanders and therefore a “safe” mission to retain. 

Based in part on the restraints placed on our adviser effort in El Salvador as well as constrained partner operations in Bosnia and Kosovo there was also a strong perception that Force Protection priorities (Risk Aversion) would preclude future SF advisory efforts from ever accompanying our counterparts on actual combat operations during Foreign Internal Defense (FID) activities.  Therefore, there was no need to prepare ODAs to conduct direct combat as an integral component of FID. Small scale and short duration Direct Action (DA) “surgical operations” would be the purview of those aforementioned “black” SOF units. Likewise, rapidly maturing technologies like drones and advanced reconnaissance satellites meant that SR as we had known it was also no longer a necessary or relevant skill set for SF soldiers.

No UW, no DA, no SR and no “combat” FID. So what would SF soldiers and ODAs be trained, equipped and organized to do in support of National Strategic objectives?  The cabal’s verdict…Peacetime FID.  In fact, they went so far as to declare that there should be “no such thing” as an SF unilateral mission. The “by, with and through” methodology was actually meant to purposely constrain and limit SF utility so that we could not be “mis-utilized” in some direct role.  We would in effect “opt out” of being a Full Spectrum Special Operations Force. Clandestine and covert would not be in our vocabulary, and there would be no need for classified or advanced skills and no compartmented SF operations…ever. Infiltration techniques like HALO and SCUBA would only be applicable to the training of others and never for ODA independent insertions and extractions.

We would still call ourselves “SF,” but in my opinion, we would have only been “Short Bus” Special.  I mentioned to one of the “true believers” of this radical concept that by confining ourselves to such a narrow mission set we would effectively self-select SF to be a Combat Support Function rather than a Combat Function. He seemed to take my not-at-all-subtle criticism in stride and told me that the train had already left the station and I had better get on board.

This far reaching but poorly conceived initiative scared the living daylights out of me.  I do not know how far it would have gotten. At the time, the schemers were keeping it “on the down low” because I am sure there would have been an extreme backlash from the force once this proposed transformation was out in the open. However, in the late Fall of 2000, there was a “Grey Beard” Conference held at Camp MacKall and most of the retired SF Generals were in attendance.  I was not privy to the conference sessions but was told afterwards by my Battalion Commander (you know who that was) that the proposal was discussed and at least some of the Gray Beards were “OK with it.” Whether that is true or not, after the conference the cabal continued their preparations to implement the training shift “on order.”

This was not all just theoretical discussion on their part. By the early Summer of 2001, initial steps were actively taken to phase out and eventually eliminate Robin Sage as a UW exercise in Pineland.  Instead, SWCS was preparing to shift to “FID Lane” training to be conducted entirely on the Fort Bragg reservation. The student ODAs would link up with their Host Nation (HN) counterparts (formerly known as Gs) and teach conventional small unit tactics and individual skills in a “secure HN area.”  The culminating event would be the ODA advising and assisting their counterparts through an actual Fort Bragg live fire maneuver range. Imagine that. The most complicated task we would demand in the Q Course of our SF soldiers and teams is that they can safely conduct a live fire range under peacetime rules. And, to add insult to injury, in combat we would relegate them to act as glorified liaison teams (CSTs) or surrogate CAT-As at best.

Of course, 9/11 occurred and their plan and their premise became moot. All have since retired and/or faded into well-earned obscurity. That is a very good thing as far as I am concerned. I do not fault these gentlemen for not having precognition and foreseeing GWOT. I do fault them for cherry picking historical examples that supported their thesis and ignoring the rest. I fault them for being so timid that they would retreat from SF heritage – not under pressure from the Army or DoD – but out of fear. I fault them for not understanding that our success in FID is directly related to the fact that we are – first, foremost, and always – combat soldiers and combat units with a long history of skill and valor to prove it. But most of all, I fault them for not understanding what makes us Special Forces. It is not a beret, a tab, or a title.  It is in fact the UW Mission.

UW is not just one more thing on our “to do” list alongside other potential tasks/missions of equal importance and priority. UW is the foundational mission that shapes our individual troopers and our teams. Training for it in the Q Course and the Groups teaches our people to operate effectively in any complex, uncertain and ambiguous situation or any challenging environment. It teaches them to be able to act alone or as part of a team sometimes without much in the way of outside support. It reinforces the individual and collective traits of self-reliance, adaptability and determination. UW teaches our operators that when all else fails they can always rely on their wits, their training and their teammates. No other mission set does that. UW makes us good at FID and just about anything else we might be asked to do. The opposite is not true.

So, what is my point?  This is ancient history. It did not happen. Crisis averted.  But wait, as we draw down from the larger scale conflicts in Iraq and eventually Afghanistan we will again rightly reassess ourselves and look at ways we need to change to meet emerging threats and missions. I have already seen or heard public and private comments by well-meaning but sadly uninformed individuals (some wearing long tabs) that we (SF) “lost our way” to a certain extent over the last decade plus.  The argument goes that we became too enamored with DA missions and we have to “get back to our roots” as an “Indirect” force rather than a “Direct” force. 

First, you and I both know that their premise is false. SF conducted almost all of our combat activities “by, with, through and alongside” our indigenous counterparts. Either we partnered with existing forces like the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan or the Peshmurga in Northern Iraq – or we created surrogate forces where none existed. Ultimately building successful high-end HN Counterinsurgency and Counterterrorism forces in Afghanistan and Iraq.  Yet, U.S. SF teams also rightly retained the option and capability to conduct unilateral operations when appropriate.  It would be just as wrong for us to back away from our DA skills now, as it would have been in 2000-2001. Clearly, our DA skills remain a vital enabler that directly supports the UW and FID missions as well as enhances our ability to provide our own measure of credible force protection or independent offensive action under any circumstances.

Some people still worry that we are the only SOF unit that does not fit into a well-defined niche. The rest generally specialize in narrower mission sets and they are very good at what they do. The concern is that we (SF) are trying to be “jacks of all (SOF) trades”…and therefore appear to outsiders as perhaps “unfocused” and “masters of none.” I would argue that there is great goodness in having a highly skilled force that is not a one trick pony. I think the incredible range of activities that SF soldiers and teams are successfully conducting around the world every day proves that. Moreover, in my opinion, we do have a clear focus because we spend our careers mastering the UW Mission and the UW Environment. In short, with UW as our foundational and defining task I believe we are on very firm footing.  And I do not see us going the way of the horse cavalry anytime soon.

I am not trying to set myself up as the arbitrator of what SF should and should not be in the future. However, I have been around long enough and seen enough to know a little about what we are and what we are not. We are not Combat Support and we are not second string to the “black” side. We are unapologetic men of action and can justly call ourselves the best of the best. I am very pleased with where the Regiment is now and I have even greater expectations for the future. The schoolhouse is where we define ourselves. It is where we shape not only our entry-level operators but our senior leaders as well. Based on what I have just told you, I would just caution that not everyone who has a Special Forces Tab necessarily “gets it.”  Of course, you already knew that. On a personal level, I can tell you that I am very thankful that you are where you are right now. Moreover, I envy you the opportunity to directly shape that bright future.

De Oppresso Liber.

Terry                  

LTC Terry Baldwin, US Army (Ret) served on active duty from 1975-2011 in various Infantry and Special Forces assignments. SSD is blessed to have him as both reader and contributor.