Special Forces or Special Operations?

Charles Jannuzi b_rieux at yahoo.com
Wed Mar 26 22:31:44 MST 2003

About the .ru info, JF wrote:

>>There are a number of errors in their
descriptions of the names and
composition of US Special Operations units.  1st,
5th & 10th are Special FORCES Groups, not Special
"Operations" Groups, and they each consist of
three battalions, each battalion of three line
companies, and each line company of six ODA's
(team, each team with an authorized 12 men
(usually 9-10 in reality, but they may have them
all at 100% strength or over for this).  The 22
SAS more commonly works with its US counterpart,
which is not SF, but 1st SFOD-D (Delta).<<

I think these forces may well be reconfigured for
this war. Remember Rumsfeld creating some new
command to get a lot of these away from CentCom
(and CC is the command he created back in the 70s
to handle 'rapid deployment', which CC hasn't
been in this war). No matter what, all of it
amounts to light infantry, which has to walk
slowly with a heavy pack til a helicopter shows
up, with little firepower unless it can call up
air cover. They aren't going to take Baghdad with
Delta Force, Raid on Entebbe and Chuck Norris
fantasies notwithstanding.

For one thing, the CIA guys didn't function that
well in Afghanistan (remember agent Mike having
to call in an air strike on himself, like Samson
bringing down the temple). So, I THINK, they are
filling out their units with recruits from the
Special Forces (which, knowing the military, is
probably already top heavy anyway).

Also, the media keep referring to 'Special
Operations Forces'. Just saw it on CNN. And CNN
typically uses the language the military gives it
to use.

Here is another reference:



Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop!

PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.

More information about the Marxism mailing list