Exército dos EUA

  • 313 Respostas
  • 82655 Visualizações
*

HSMW

  • Moderador Global
  • *****
  • 8032
  • Recebeu: 600 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 893 vez(es)
  • +35/-4
    • http://youtube.com/HSMW
Re: Exército dos EUA
« Responder #285 em: Julho 16, 2017, 04:12:26 pm »
US Army Tests The World Most Quiet Military Vehicle: Chevrolet Colorado ZH2
http://www.youtube.com/profile_videos?user=HSMW

"Tudo pela Nação, nada contra a Nação."
 

*

Cabeça de Martelo

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 14236
  • Recebeu: 706 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 707 vez(es)
  • +51/-33
Re: Exército dos EUA
« Responder #286 em: Agosto 11, 2017, 12:52:27 pm »
O futuro das Forças Especiais Norte-Americanas:

 https://ndiastorage.blob.core.usgovcloudapi.net/ndia/2017/armament/Owens.pdf

Intermediate Caliber Sniper Rifle/Carbine Fielding - 6.5mm

Ou seja, enquanto que o Exército comum vai armar algumas das suas forças com uma nova espingarda-automática 7.62x51mm, as SF e outras unidades do Comando de Forças Especiais vão substituir as suas M4A1 por outra em 6.5mm (não sabemos qual).
7. Todos os animais são iguais mas alguns são mais iguais que os outros.

 

*

Menacho

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 2819
  • Recebeu: 301 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 60 vez(es)
  • +6/-50
Re: Exército dos EUA
« Responder #287 em: Agosto 17, 2017, 08:00:42 am »
O futuro das Forças Especiais Norte-Americanas:

 https://ndiastorage.blob.core.usgovcloudapi.net/ndia/2017/armament/Owens.pdf

Intermediate Caliber Sniper Rifle/Carbine Fielding - 6.5mm

Ou seja, enquanto que o Exército comum vai armar algumas das suas forças com uma nova espingarda-automática 7.62x51mm, as SF e outras unidades do Comando de Forças Especiais vão substituir as suas M4A1 por outra em 6.5mm (não sabemos qual).

Parece ser que apuestan por el IAR de HK, o de Colt en calibre 6,5:

https://www.stockarmas.com/el-ejercito-americano-vuelve-al-762/

http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/newsletters/daily-news-roundup/2017/08/15/marines-want-50000-more-infantry-automatic-rifles-to-replace-m4/



Cumprimentos
« Última modificação: Agosto 17, 2017, 08:10:03 am por Menacho »
 

*

Cabeça de Martelo

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 14236
  • Recebeu: 706 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 707 vez(es)
  • +51/-33
Re: Exército dos EUA
« Responder #288 em: Outubro 06, 2017, 04:02:16 pm »
US Army M1A2 Sep V2 MBT tanks fitted with Israeli Trophy active protection system

The US Army has finally decided to install the Israeli-made Trophy active protection system on M1A2 Abrams SEP V2 main battle tank (MBT)in response to an urgent request. In September 2017, United States governments has published a contract to its official website announcing a contract for General Dynamics Land Systems Inc. to integrate Trophy on an Armor Brigade Combat Team’s M1A2 SEPv2 MBTs.


Rafael Trophy active protection system mounted on Abrams M1A2 main battle tank

Israel army has been deploying the Trophy active protection systems on its Merkava IV tanks since 2009. It has also been installed on the Namer heavy infantry fighting vehicle and the Eitan, a new wheeled armored personnel carrier set to be introduced into Israeli infantry battalions next year.

Trophy is a situational awareness and Active Protection Hard Kill (HK) System (APS) which is available in three main configurations: HV (Heavy armored Vehicle), MV (Medium and Light Armored Vehicle) and LV (Light Armored Vehicle). Both configurations dramatically boost the force’s survivability, and provide a vital add-on capability for the maneuvering combat teams.

Trophy-HV protects heavy (>30 ton) and medium weight (>15 ton) armored vehicles from a wide variety of threats ranging from rockets, ATGMs (Anti-Tank Guided Missiles) and platform-fired High-Explosive Anti-Tank (HEAT) rounds. Trophy-HV offers 360° protection in azimuth, as well as extensive elevation coverage, while maintaining a pre-defined safety zone for friendly troops on the ground. The neutralization process is initiated only if the threat is about to hit the vehicle.

The first battlefield success of the Trophy occurred on March 1, 2011, when the system knocked out a rocket-propelled grenade fired at close distance to an IDF (Israeli Defense Force) Merkava Mark-IV tank close to the Gaza border. The Trophy system was also effective during other operations, including Operation Protective Edge in 2014, when no Israeli tanks were lost in Gaza.


sraeli army Merkava IV main battle tank equipped with Rafael Trophy active protection ystem (Photo source Rafael)

https://www.armyrecognition.com/october_2017_global_defense_security_news_industry/us_army_m1a2_sep_v2_mbt_tanks_fitted_with_israeli_trophy_active_protection_system.html
7. Todos os animais são iguais mas alguns são mais iguais que os outros.

 
Os seguintes utilizadores agradeceram esta mensagem: NVF

*

Cabeça de Martelo

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 14236
  • Recebeu: 706 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 707 vez(es)
  • +51/-33
Re: Exército dos EUA
« Responder #289 em: Outubro 10, 2017, 12:25:36 pm »
O que se projecta para o futuro:

*Long-Range Precision Fires: missiles that can fire 400 kilometers, to replace ATACMS.

*Next-Generation Combat Vehicles. The Army is looking for a heavily armed, super-mobile, optionally unmanned vehicle.

*Helicopters and vertical lift aircraft of various sizes and shapes. These, too, shall be “manned, unmanned, and optionally-manned” as well as survivable.

*A communication network that works amid heavy jamming and electronic warfare.

*Better defenses against missiles and drones.

*Better soldier-worn sensors, body armor, and “load-bearing exoskeletons,” as well as other tech for dismounted soldiers, under the category of ‘soldier lethality.”

https://admin.govexec.com/media/untitled.pdf
« Última modificação: Outubro 10, 2017, 12:27:51 pm por Cabeça de Martelo »
7. Todos os animais são iguais mas alguns são mais iguais que os outros.

 

*

Cabeça de Martelo

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 14236
  • Recebeu: 706 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 707 vez(es)
  • +51/-33
Re: Exército dos EUA
« Responder #290 em: Outubro 12, 2017, 03:55:02 pm »
Exclusive: Former West Point professor’s letter exposes corruption, cheating and failing standards [Full letter]

The following letter was written by retired LTC Robert M. Heffington as an open letter. Heffington was an assistant professor at West Point for several years, until this past August.


The letter has been circulating for a few days in private among the military.

Heffington confirmed to American Military News on Wednesday that he did write the letter, and he sent a signed copy.

He wrote the letter in light of recent media coverage of 2nd Lt. Spenser Rapone, a West Point graduate and infantry officer who recently came under fire for his public advocacy and support of socialism and communism, and being an “official socialist organizer” of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA).

The broader conversation that has been taking place in the military community now is what exactly went on – and goes on – at West Point that a graduate such as Rapone would feel so strongly empowered to apparently be a socialist and/or communist and spread these doctrines.

Heffington says the Military Academy turned a blind eye to Rapone’s behavior and his “very public hatred” of West Point. While this doesn’t mean leaders at West Point defend Rapone’s views, it means that West Point’s senior leaders “are infected with apathy: they simply do not want to deal with any problem, regardless of how grievous a violation of standards and/or discipline it may be,” Heffington writes.

Rapone was recently discovered to be a communist propagandist and “official socialist organizer” of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) after he posted a photo to Twitter of himself in support of professional football player Colin Kaepernick, where he is seen in his West Point uniform at graduation holding his cap that contains a piece of paper that says “Communism will win.”

Rapone’s social media was filled with up to hundreds of posts, messages and photos that were being circulated around the military and civilian communities. His Twitter account is now set to protected, and his Instagram account has been taken down. His Facebook, where he goes under Giuseppe Impastato, is private.

Rapone had also posted a second photo of himself in uniform, and he is seen wearing a Che Guevara T-shirt underneath his uniform jacket. Guevara was an Argentine Marxist revolutionary who believed the poor people of Latin America would be saved by communism.

Rapone is a 2LT (Second Lieutenant) and an infantry officer in the 10th Mountain Division at Fort Drum, N.Y. He has deployed to Afghanistan and received a combat infantryman badge (CIB).

Rapone has been widely criticized on the internet – and so has West Point, for seemingly allowing this behavior and appearing to turn a blind eye to an apparent communist who espouses many things the U.S. Military and the United States fight against. West Point has said that Rapone’s actions “in no way reflect the values of the U.S. Military Academy or the U.S. Army.”

In Heffington’s letter, he says the most recent coverage of Rapone only highlights a “disturbing trend” that he has observed over several years of being on the faculty at West Point, which are “fundamental changes […] that have eroded it to the point where I question whether the institution should even remain open.”

The following is Heffington’s letter in its entirety:

Dear Sir/Ma’am,

Before you read any further, please understand that the following paragraphs come from a place of intense devotion and loyalty to West Point. My experience as a cadet had a profound impact upon who I am and upon the course of my life, and I remain forever grateful that I have the opportunity to be a part of the Long Gray Line. I firmly believe West Point is a national treasure and that it can and should remain a vitally important source of well trained, disciplined, highly educated Army officers and civilian leaders. However, during my time on the West Point faculty (2006-2009 and again from 2013-2017), I personally witnessed a series of fundamental changes at West Point that have eroded it to the point where I question whether the institution should even remain open. The recent coverage of 2LT Spenser Rapone – an avowed Communist and sworn enemy of the United States – dramatically highlighted this disturbing trend. Given my recent tenure on the West Point faculty and my direct interactions with Rapone, his “mentors,” and with the Academy’s leadership, I believe I can shed light on how someone like Rapone could possibly graduate.

First and foremost, standards at West Point are nonexistent. They exist on paper, but nowhere else. The senior administration at West Point inexplicably refuses to enforce West Point’s publicly touted high standards on cadets, and, having picked up on this, cadets refuse to enforce standards on each other. The Superintendent refuses to enforce admissions standards or the cadet Honor Code, the Dean refuses to enforce academic standards, and the Commandant refuses to enforce standards of conduct and discipline. The end result is a sort of malaise that pervades the entire institution. Nothing matters anymore. Cadets know this, and it has given rise to a level of cadet arrogance and entitlement the likes of which West Point has never seen in its history.

Every fall, the Superintendent addresses the staff and faculty and lies. He repeatedly states that “We are going to have winning sports teams without compromising our standards,” and everyone in Robinson Auditorium knows he is lying because we routinely admit athletes with ACT scores in the mid-teens across the board. I have personally taught cadets who are borderline illiterate and cannot read simple passages from the assigned textbooks. It is disheartening when the institution’s most senior leader openly lies to his own faculty-and they all know it.

The cadet honor code has become a laughingstock. Cadets know they will not be separated for violating it, and thus they do so on a daily basis. Moreover, since they refuse to enforce standards on each other and police their own ranks, cadets will rarely find a cadet at an honor hearing despite overwhelming evidence that a violation has occurred. This in tum has caused the staff and faculty to give up even reporting honor incidents. Why would a staff or faculty member expend the massive amount of time and energy it takes to report an honor violation-including writing multiple sworn statements, giving interviews, and testifying at the honor hearing-when they know without a doubt the cadet will not be found (or, if found, the Superintendent will not separate the cadet)? To make matters worse, the senior leadership at West Point actively discourages staff and faculty from reporting honor violations. l was unfortunate enough to experience this first hand during my first tour on the faculty, when the Commandant of Cadets called my office phone and proceeded to berate me in the most vulgar and obscene language for over ten minutes because I had reported a cadet who lied to me and then asked if “we could just drop it.” Of course, I was duty bound to report the cadet’s violation, and I did. During the course of the berating I received from the Commandant, I never actually found out why he was so angry. It seemed that he was simply irritated that the institution was having to deal with the case, and that it was my fault it even existed. At the honor hearing the next day, I ended up being the one on trial as my character and reputation were dragged through the mud by the cadet and her civilian attorney while I sat on the witness stand without any assistance. In the end, of course, the cadet was not found (despite having at first admitted that she lied), and she eventually graduated. Just recently a cadet openly and obviously plagiarized his History research paper, and his civilian professor reported it. The evidence was overwhelming-there was not the slightest question of his guilt, yet the cadet was not found. The professor, and indeed all the faculty who knew of the case, were completely demoralized. This is the new norm for the cadet honor system. In fact, there is now an addition to the honor system (the Willful Admission Process) which essentially guarantees that if a cadet admits a violation, then separation is not even a possibility. In reality, separation is not a possibility anyway because the Superintendent refuses to impose that sanction.

Academic standards are also nonexistent. I believe this trend started approximately ten years ago, and it has continued to get worse. West Point has stated standards for academic expectations and performance, but they are ignored. Cadets routinely fail multiple classes and they are not separated at the end-of-semester Academic Boards. Their professors recommend “Definitely Separate,” but those recommendations are totally disregarded. I recently taught a cadet who failed four classes in one semester (including mine), in addition to several she had failed in previous semesters, and she was retained at the Academy. As a result, professors have lost hope and faith in the entire Academic Board process. It has been made clear that cadets can fail a multitude of classes and they will not be separated. Instead, when they fail (and they do to a staggering extent), the Dean simply throws them back into the mix and expects the faculty to somehow drag them through the academic program until they manage to earn a passing grade. What a betrayal this is to the faculty! Also, since they get full grade replacement if they must re­take a course, cadets are actually incentivized to fail. They know they can re-take the course over the summer when they have no other competing requirements, and their new grade completely replaces the failing one. ST AP (Summer Term Academic Program) is also now an accepted summer detail assignment, so retaking a course during the summer translates into even more summer leave for the deficient cadet.

Even the curriculum itself has suffered. The plebe American History course has been revamped to focus completely on race and on the narrative that America is founded solely on a history of racial oppression. Cadets derisively call it the “I Hate America Course.” Simultaneously, the plebe International History course now focuses on gender to the exclusion of many other important themes. On the other hand, an entire semester of military history was recently deleted from the curriculum (at West Point!). In all courses, the bar has been lowered to the point where it is irrelevant. If a cadet fails a course, the instructor is blamed, so instructors are incentivized to pass everyone. Additionally, instead of responding to cadet failure with an insistence that cadets rise to the challenge and meet the standard, the bar for passing the course itself is simply lowered. This pattern is widespread and pervades every academic department.

Conduct and disciplinary standards are in perhaps the worst shape of all. Cadets are jaded, cynical, arrogant, and entitled. They routinely talk back to and snap at their instructors (military and civilian alike), challenge authority, and openly refuse to follow regulations. They are allowed to wear civilian clothes in almost any arena outside the classroom, and they flaunt that privilege. Some arrive to class unshaven, in need of haircuts, and with uniforms that look so ridiculously bad that, at times, I could not believe I was even looking at a West Point cadet. However, if a staff or faculty member attempts to correct the cadet in question, that staff/faculty member is sure to be reprimanded for “harassing cadets.” For example, as I made my rounds through the barracks inspecting study conditions one evening as the Academic Officer in Charge, I encountered a cadet in a company study room. He was wearing a pair of blue jeans and nothing else, and was covered in tattoos. He had long hair, was unshaven, and I was honestly unsure ifhe was even a cadet. He looked more like a prison convict to me. When I questioned what he was doing there, he remained seated in his chair and sneered at me that he “was authorized” because he was a First Class cadet. I proceeded to correct him and then reported him to the chain of command the next morning. Later that day I received an email from the Brigade Tactical Officer telling me to “stay in my lane.” I know many other officers receive the same treatment when attempting to make corrections. It is extremely discouraging when the response is invariably one that comes to the defense of the cadet.

That brings me to another point: cadets’ versions of stories are always valued more highly by senior leaders than those of commissioned officers on the staff and faculty. It is as if West Point’s senior leaders believe their job is to “protect” cadets from the staff and faculty at all costs. This might explain why the faculty’s recommendations are ignored at the Academic Boards, why honor violations are ignored (and commissioned officers are verbally abused for bringing them to light), and why cadets always “win” when it comes to conduct and disciplinary issues.

It seems that the Academy’s senior leaders are intimidated by cadets. During my first tour on the faculty (I was a CPT at the time), I noticed that 4th class cadets were going on leave in civilian clothes when the regulation clearly stated they were supposed to be wearing a uniform. During a discussion about cadet standards between the BTO and the Dept. of History faculty, I asked why plebes were going on leave in civilian clothes. His answer astonished me: “That rule is too hard to enforce.” Yet West Point had no problem enforcing that rule on me in the mid-1990s. I found it impossible to believe that the several hundred field grade officers stationed at West Point could not make teenagers wear the uniform. This anecdote highlights the fact that West Point’s senior leaders lack not the ability but the motivation to enforce their will upon the Corps of Cadets.

This brings me to the case of now-2LT Spenser Rapone. It is not at all surprising that the Academy turned a blind eye to his behavior and to his very public hatred of West Point, the Army, and this nation. I knew at the time I wrote that sworn statement in 2015 that he would go on to graduate. It is not so much that West Point’s leadership defends his views (Prof. Hosein did, however); it is that West Point’s senior leaders are infected with apathy: they simply do not want to deal with any problem, regardless of how grievous a violation of standards and/or discipline it may be. They are so reticent to separate problematic cadets (undoubtedly due to the “developmental model” that now exists at USMA) that someone like Rapone can easily slip through the cracks. In other words, West Point’s leaders choose the easier wrong over the harder right.

I could go on, but I fear that this letter would simply devolve into a screed, which is not my intention. I will sum up by saying this: a culture of extreme permissiveness has invaded the Military Academy, and there seems to be no end to it. Moreover, this is not unintentional; it is a deliberate action that is being taken by the Academy’s senior leadership, though they refuse to acknowledge or explain it. Conduct and behavior that would never be tolerated at a civilian university is common among cadets, and it is supported and defended by the Academy’s senior leaders in an apparent and misguided effort to attract more applicants and cater to what they see as the unique needs of this generation of cadets.

Our beloved Military Academy has lost its way. It is a shadow of what it once was. It used to be a place where standards and discipline mattered, and where concepts like duty, honor, and country were real and they meant something. Those ideas have been replaced by extreme permissiveness, rampant dishonesty, and an inexplicable pursuit of mediocrity. Instead of scrambling to restore West Point to what it once was, the Academy’s senior leaders give cadets more and more privileges in a seeming effort to tum the institution into a third-rate civilian liberal arts college. Unfortunately, they have largely succeeded. The few remaining members of the staff and faculty who are still trying to hold the line are routinely berated, ignored, and ultimately silenced for their unwillingness to “go along with the program.” The Academy’s senior leaders simply do not want to hear their voices or their concerns. Dissent is crushed-I was repeatedly told to keep quiet at faculty meetings, even as a LTC, because my dissent was neither needed nor appreciated.

It breaks my heart to write this. It breaks my heart to know first-hand what West Point was versus what it has become. This is not a “Corps has” story; it is meant to highlight a deliberate and radical series of changes being undertaken at the highest levels of USMA’ s leadership that are detrimental to the institution. Criticizing these changes is not popular. I have already been labeled a “traitor” by some at the Academy due to my sworn statement’s appearance in the media circus surrounding Spenser Rapone. However, whenever I hear this, I am reminded of the Cadet Prayer:

” … suffer not our hatred of hypocrisy and pretense ever to diminish. Make us to choose the harder right instead of the easier wrong, and never to be content with a half-truth when the whole can be won. …that scorns to compromise with vice and injustice, and knows no fear when truth and right are in jeopardy.”

West Point was once special, and it can be again. Spenser Rapone never should have been admitted, much less graduate, but he was-and that mistake is directly attributable to the culture of permissiveness and apathy that now exists there.

Sincerely and Respectfully,

Robert M. Heffington

LTC, U.S. Army (Retired), West Point Class of 1997
7. Todos os animais são iguais mas alguns são mais iguais que os outros.

 

*

Cabeça de Martelo

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 14236
  • Recebeu: 706 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 707 vez(es)
  • +51/-33
Re: Exército dos EUA
« Responder #291 em: Outubro 24, 2017, 03:21:08 pm »
7. Todos os animais são iguais mas alguns são mais iguais que os outros.

 

*

HSMW

  • Moderador Global
  • *****
  • 8032
  • Recebeu: 600 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 893 vez(es)
  • +35/-4
    • http://youtube.com/HSMW
Re: Exército dos EUA
« Responder #292 em: Outubro 24, 2017, 09:26:19 pm »

U.S. Army Soldiers Conduct Platoon Live-fire Exercise in Germany
http://www.youtube.com/profile_videos?user=HSMW

"Tudo pela Nação, nada contra a Nação."
 

*

Cabeça de Martelo

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 14236
  • Recebeu: 706 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 707 vez(es)
  • +51/-33
Re: Exército dos EUA
« Responder #293 em: Outubro 25, 2017, 12:09:01 pm »
7. Todos os animais são iguais mas alguns são mais iguais que os outros.

 

*

Cabeça de Martelo

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 14236
  • Recebeu: 706 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 707 vez(es)
  • +51/-33
Re: Exército dos EUA
« Responder #294 em: Outubro 31, 2017, 05:20:59 pm »
US Army to issue RFP for lightweight armoured combat vehicle



SHARE
MPFThe MPF is being procured as a replacement for the M551 Sheridan armoured reconnaissance/airborne assault vehicle. Credit: US Army photo by John Snyder.
The US Army is to issue a request for proposal (RFP) for the acquisition of a lightweight, armoured combat vehicle known as the mobile protected firepower (MPF).

The MPF is being procured as a replacement for the M551 Sheridan armoured reconnaissance / airborne assault vehicle, which was withdrawn from regular service in 1996.

A draft (RFP) was issued in September and feedback from potential MPF contractors was received this past week.

The final RFP is expected to be issued in mid-November this year.

US Army Ground Combat Systems programme executive officer major general David Bassett said: “We’re looking at awarding a contract in early FY19.

“We expect to be delivering prototypes off of that programme effort within 15 months of contract award, and getting it in the hands of an evaluation unit six months after that: rapid.”

To be used by infantry brigade combat teams (IBCTs), the MPF vehicle will offer long-range direct-fire capability for forcible entry and breaching operations.

Citar
“We expect to be delivering prototypes off of that programme effort within 15 months of contract award.”

Requirements for the MPF are designed to enable freedom of movement and action for IBCTs, to expand lodgement and prevent counterattack, to defeat local fortifications, point defences and blocking positions, and maintain the momentum of attack.

The vehicle with substantial armour protection is expected to have a 105mm gun on top such as the original Abrams tank.

The MPF may eventually replace the Abrams tank and Bradley, the US Army stated.

Weighing between 25t and 35t, the MPF is expected to be much lighter than a tank.

 :arrow: http://www.army-technology.com/news/newsus-army-to-issue-rfp-for-lightweight-armoured-combat-vehicle-5959724/
7. Todos os animais são iguais mas alguns são mais iguais que os outros.

 

*

Lusitano89

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 8899
  • Recebeu: 293 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 208 vez(es)
  • +15/-5
Re: Exército dos EUA
« Responder #295 em: Outubro 31, 2017, 06:40:23 pm »
 

*

Cabeça de Martelo

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 14236
  • Recebeu: 706 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 707 vez(es)
  • +51/-33
Re: Exército dos EUA
« Responder #296 em: Novembro 02, 2017, 03:16:32 pm »


Citar
A few days before AUSA 2017 Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) announced it would developed prototypes for the MPF programme. The company will work together with ST Kinetics and CMI Defence. SAIC will base its offer on ST Kinetics’ Next Generation Armoured Fighting Vehicle (NGAFV) chassis. It will be most likely equipped with CMI Defence’s Cockerill 3105-series turret. General Dynamics Land Systems and BAE Systems are also competing. (Photo: Robert Czulda)
7. Todos os animais são iguais mas alguns são mais iguais que os outros.

 

*

Cabeça de Martelo

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 14236
  • Recebeu: 706 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 707 vez(es)
  • +51/-33
Re: Exército dos EUA
« Responder #297 em: Dezembro 14, 2017, 11:48:06 am »
Careerism, cronyism, and malfeasance in the Special Warfare Center
BY SOFREP

The following email titled “Careerism, Cronyism, and Malfeasance in SWCS: The End of SF Capability” was sent via a mass blast through Special Operations Command (SOCOM) yesterday.  The email was penned by a Special Forces instructor at Fort Bragg who is dismayed by slipping standards and careerism, providing a damning critique of what has been an ongoing issue as the Special Warfare Center and School for over a decade.

In the past SOFREP has published other anonymous (but verified) emails written by active duty Green Berets and Navy SEALs.  We will continue to do so as SOFREP is founded by two former Non-Commissioned Officers who strongly believe that the senior enlisted men of the Special Operations community need to have their voices heard above the careerism and cronyism that infects our community.  As soldiers, we tend to get weepy over power point slides detailing service members who commit suicide or fall into substance abuse issues but if we want to know what the root cause is, we should look no further than the below email.  Our young men and women need strong leaders, not hand holding or kid gloves as we prepare them for war.

SOFREP reached out to USASOC for their comment regarding this email but they did not reply prior to this article being published.

To our fellow Active Duty and Veteran Green Berets,

Our Regiment has a cancer, and it is destroying the SF legacy, its capability, and its credibility.

SWCS has devolved into a cesspool of toxic, exploitive, biased and self-serving senior Officers who are bolstered by submissive, sycophantic, and just-as-culpable enlisted leaders. They have doggedly succeeded in two things; furthering their careers, and ensuring that Special Forces more prolific, but dangerously less capable than ever before. Shameless and immodest careerism has, in no uncertain terms, effectively destroyed our ability to assess, train, and prepare students, or to identify those students that pose very real risk to Operational Detachments. I cannot stress how systematic and severe the effects on the force will be if the standards, recently implemented here in the Special Forces Qualification Course, remain in place.

We consistently and concretely identify dozens of graduates every year who are incapable of ever being ‘value-added’ to ODA’s yet are pushed forward to you. THAT NUMBER IS SET TO RISE DRAMATICALLY in the very near future. To clarify, we instructors recognize that none of us graduating the Q-Course were fully competent Green Berets when we first arrived to our teams. We are also acutely aware that senior generations derisively judging their juniors is a tradition as old as humanity. So this address is not being written because ‘cherries are so much more cherry than we were when we were cherries’. We do not expect them to be assets yet, we only expect that they possess the basic qualities necessary to become assets. I am asking for 20 minutes of your time because many students graduating the Q-course now do not possess those qualities and, from this moment forward, determining if ANY students possess them is not possible. The actions of SWCS leadership have created a new era of Special Forces that are; increasingly incapable of actualizing SOF attributes; markedly and demonstrably weaker; and quantifiably projecting measurable risk and liability onto the teammates with which they serve. Before this paradigm shift, cadre due diligence was capable of some risk mitigation in these aspects. We could, did, and often still do reach back to teams and prepare them for those [inevitable] outliers that slip through the course unimpeded due to cronysim, nepotism, or malfeasance. But the recent systematic dismissal of course standards and continous violation of regulations at the Training Group and SWCS echelons makes student failure nigh impossible. Assessing, Identifying, and mitigating prolonged individual performance has historically been a cornerstone of the pipleline. That has been provably replaced with willful mediocrity. This climate has been empowered by a feckless, selfish, and recreant command ideology, set into motion by MG Linder and COL Lock, and actualized by MG Sonntag, CSM Arrowsmith, COL Kornburger, and CSM Berkibile.

In the last 24 months, Commanders and/or Sergeants Major at the Group and SWCS level have systematically removed numerous fundamental SF standards, lowered and undermined the grading metrics for others, all while simultaneously ensuring that a gagged cadre population was expressly prohibited from holding students accountable for their academic, physical, and character performance. Obviously, this concerns those of us whom are returning to Group. We have an understandably vested interest in developing the best new teammates we possibly can, for we will be serving alongside them. The issue is that career-focused leaders, far removed from team life, have no ‘skin in the game’ and thus do not concern themselves with the problems inherent in employing subpar soldiers in a no-fail environment: where individual limitation creates team-wide catastrophe, often with international repercussions. Their responsibilities involve ensuring that yearly graduation quotas are met and that political agendas are enforced. They do not concern themselves with ensuring that students are capable of surviving the rigors of combat, and in all fairness they shouldn’t. That is the cadre’s mantle to bear. Ignorance of their interference in this endeavor might be forgivable, but they have been told by the operational force numerous times what issues these policies would create, and chose career progression instead.  As you will read, this moral cowardice started in the preceding command, and is shared by every current Commander and Sergeant Major at the Group and SWCS level. When one of our cadre addressed these concerns (with examples) directly to the SWCS leadership in an open forum, CSM David Gibb’s (at the time the SWCS CSM) response was verbatim:

“We push some of these issues forward [to the Regiment] because we believe that the Groups can succeed in fixing those problem graduates when they arrive. That is an amount of risk we willingly accept, because after all it’s much easier to get a tab removed at Group if he doesn’t pan out, than to risk relieving what’s basically a fully qualified student who might have been able to fix himself and become a solid Green Beret.”

Specifically, he was defending the decision to graduate a student that had failed the final graduation SFPA (Special Forces Physical Assessment) five times on the 40-minute 5-mile run. He finally passed on the 6th attempt: coming in 12 seconds under time, and 4 attempts past the mandatory 1-year relief dictated by regulation. Over 100 of your current teammates heard this exchange during at SLC in 2016, and can bear witness. A senior E-9, with approximately 20 years in SF, unashamedly acknowledged that reducing, and then ignoring course standards is a perfectly acceptable philosophy to embrace in pursuit of graduation numbers. His response embodied everything that is wrong with SF leadership today. Standards are being drastically reduced, and they are being done so to achieve a very acute goal, one that does not benefit or enhance the force.

So here we are, the trainers, hoping to illuminate to you, the operational force, the severity of this issue. Below, we’ve illustrated a variety of truths to fully encompass the selfish and careerist nature of the leadership that is injecting poison into the SF foundation. This does not capture everything, only the most recent events, and should sufficiently capture the essence of the systematically detrimental change and malfeasance occurring in the SFQC. Deducing their impact on the unit is easy to the operational soldier. Unfortunately it is not to Senior leaders. So, help us to affect change. This plea is on behalf of a clear majority of your brothers who have no real power to affect change on their own. Cadre hands are increasingly tied, and yet they are regularly, randomly castrated as scapegoats for a command that often confuses blind, knee-jerk reactions with due process. SF legitimacy is fading at the hands of self-serving careerism. Commanders truly want to be recognized and rewarded for the milestones they are achieving. Please accommodate them. Spread this message, publish it, share it online, go to the press, and send it to congress. If these “leaders” so desire the recognition for what they are doing, then let us ensure they receive all of it.

I completely understand that some of those reading up to this point may be skeptical. It sounds overly dramatic, tinged with emotion, and can easily be brushed off as the ranting of some scorned, disgruntled has-been who had a bad run-in with a senior leader too many times. Here are the facts, so you can make that decision for yourself. Every single one of you out there in Group knows a brother-in-arms or 2 doing time in SWCS, if your don’t believe me, give any one of us a ring…

THE SPECIAL FORCES QUALIFICATION COURSE

We work in 1st SWTG(A) at USAJFKSWCS. There are currently about 900 GB’s on the roster, and we account for and/or train every single one of the (roughly) 2200 students currently in the Q-course. As a refresher for those of you who have been away for a while, here is a breakdown of what were (key word) the major training requirements that students were were to pass to graduate each phase of the SFQC after getting selected.

o CLT: Graduate to move into the pipeline

o Special Forces Orientation Course (SFOC): Pass Phase 1
-Pass Land Navigation
-Pass Swim test
-Pass 12-mile ruck march (55 lbs dry in under 3 hours)
-Pass SFPA(57 push-ups, 66 sit-ups, 5-mile run in under 40 minutes, 1 rope climb w/25lbs vest)

o Small Unit Tactics (SUT)/SERE Pass phase 2

o MOS                                             Pass phase 3
o ROBIN SAGE                             Pass phase 4
o LANGUAGE                               Pass phase 5

-Earn a 1+/1+ OPI in target language
-Pass graduation SFPA

o GRADUATE

Notes:

o The SFOC SFPA and the LANGUAGE SFPA are the only physical requirements enforced in the SFQC, as in they are the only PT events they can be relieved for.

o Failure of any 1 event on the SFPA is a recycle of that phase. Failure on any retest is by-regulation at least an automatic 1-year relief from the SFQC.

o Relief boards are held for all academic or attribute failures in all phases. Even if a relief is mandated by regulation, every instructor must justify why a student warrants relief or retention (e.g. 3x UXO failure, 6x late to formation, any SOF attribute violation, etc.). At the relief board, 15+ instructors and the Battalion Command team review every case, and debate what the punishment should be, and after everyone says their piece, the Battalion Commander makes his decision. Any appeals go directly to the Group Commander, and ALL NTR’s go to the Group Commander.

o Keep in mind, the SFQC goal for graduating Special Forces Green Berets is 550 Active Duty Enlisted (ADE) every year. More importantly, the SFQC produces on-average between 400-470 ADE annually. This is…very important to say the least.

...

Help us fix this mess. The Regiment’s legacy depends on it.

A concerned Green Beret,

-DE OPPRESSO LIBER

https://sofrep.com/94786/careerism-cronyism-malfeasance-special-warfare-center-end-special-forces-capability/
7. Todos os animais são iguais mas alguns são mais iguais que os outros.

 

*

Cabeça de Martelo

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 14236
  • Recebeu: 706 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 707 vez(es)
  • +51/-33
Re: Exército dos EUA
« Responder #298 em: Dezembro 14, 2017, 04:47:32 pm »
2018 fact book United States Special Operations Command

 :arrow: http://www.socom.mil/FactBook/2018%20Fact%20Book.pdf
7. Todos os animais são iguais mas alguns são mais iguais que os outros.

 

*

Lusitano89

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 8899
  • Recebeu: 293 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 208 vez(es)
  • +15/-5
Re: Exército dos EUA
« Responder #299 em: Janeiro 20, 2018, 01:00:16 pm »
 

 

"O motor no Exercito"

Iniciado por Nuno CalhauQuadro Livros-Revistas-Filmes-Documentários

Respostas: 4
Visualizações: 3799
Última mensagem Dezembro 26, 2011, 10:34:13 pm
por flyer
Unidades do Exército a "criar"

Iniciado por PereiraMarquesQuadro Exército Português no ForumDefesa.com

Respostas: 0
Visualizações: 1956
Última mensagem Junho 16, 2006, 01:28:18 pm
por PereiraMarques
High Tech "Battlelab" para o Exército Britânico

Iniciado por JLRCQuadro Exércitos/Sistemas de Armas

Respostas: 0
Visualizações: 1809
Última mensagem Outubro 28, 2004, 11:04:28 pm
por JLRC
Nova unidade para o Exército; solução para o quartel de Beja

Iniciado por DuarteQuadro Área Livre-Outras Temáticas de Defesa

Respostas: 24
Visualizações: 10594
Última mensagem Junho 04, 2007, 01:24:10 pm
por Upham
Exército dos EUA conta com novos meios para minimizar baixas

Iniciado por Tiger22Quadro Tecnologia Militar

Respostas: 4
Visualizações: 2737
Última mensagem Junho 29, 2004, 11:06:12 pm
por [PT]HKFlash