Catherine Herridge’s Interview with 3 SEALs

[JRB]

I disagree with the using ops tempo as an out.
All success and failures reside with Command. From the Chiefs on up, it's their job to manage it. Op's tempo causing too much burn out or unit degradation? The Senior NCO's are your "frontline managers", they need to send it up the chain, and higher needs to listen.

Start treating these operators like they are actually human, and not a mechanical weapons system, and I think you would find it a betterment for the entire force.

Also, and just speculation on my part, but if folks made it past selection because we need the bodies, and not because they met the actual standards, then that is the recipe for a shit sandwich.

I honestly laughed out loud at the part I bolded.

With the downdraw of conventional forces across the board, and the overall visibilty/big Army sorts of bureaucratic hurdles to getting stuff done, more and more SF/SOF types of elements are being tasked with more and more work. I can only speak to the Army side, but fewer and fewer applicants are passing the requirements for on 18X selection contracts or any other internal transfers from other Army elements.

So we have an increasing op tempo, a wider AOR, more missions than ever, and fewer genuinely qualified folks to do it.
I promise you that leadership will never, ever say "No, my guys can't do this mission that's a 'time now' requirement because we were just gone for 6 months and they've been back home three weeks."

You're 100% right about everything in your post, but it's not a realistic goal, especially with the current administration.

[wvincent]

I honestly laughed out loud at the part I bolded.

With the downdraw of conventional forces across the board, and the overall visibilty/big Army sorts of bureaucratic hurdles to getting stuff done, more and more SF/SOF types of elements are being tasked with more and more work. I can only speak to the Army side, but fewer and fewer applicants are passing the requirements for on 18X selection contracts or any other internal transfers from other Army elements.

So we have an increasing op tempo, a wider AOR, more missions than ever, and fewer genuinely qualified folks to do it.
I promise you that leadership will never, ever say "No, my guys can't do this mission that's a 'time now' requirement because we were just gone for 6 months and they've been back home three weeks."

You're 100% right about everything in your post, but it's not a realistic goal, especially with the current administration.

How many missions are they rolling SF on that conventional troops could be used? Serious question.

What really pisses me off is the fact that they are won't say no, they would rather break these people physically and mentally.
Operators or not, they're just like the rest of us, all they want is to serve honorably.

[JRB]

How many missions are they rolling SF on that conventional troops could be used? Serious question.

I'm out of that loop, and even if I wasn't, I doubt there's any of that information that could be shared on a public forum.

What I can say is that 2+2 = 4, and here's the 2+2:

- Record numbers of contractors both American and OCN/TCN are being used anywhere they can replace Soldiers, especially in maintenance/sustainment operations. This is done to keep the 'boots on ground' numbers lower. Takes three contractors to do the same as one American Soldier? Oh well. Sadly, in some cases one skilled prior service contractor can do the work of three Soldiers, particularly in fields like aviation maintenance, etc.

- Large conventional units require more time to 'spool up' and get logistics organized etc and actually get deployed. That's expensive and largely unpopular in a lot of circles.

- Our Immediate Reaction Force (IRF) and SF types are the exception. They can also reset and redeploy back stateside in a faster fashion as well. They have more independent control of their logistics, their budgets, and their missions. They also have a 'leaner' chain of command and more operational flexibility.
As we all know, the more staff officers present that count beans, the more lag time, cost, complication, and problems that exist in moving quickly and effectively.


Said another way, imagine that the mission is to move some stuff, and a regular deploying conventional element is a 53ft semi truck with a 30mph speed limiter and very specific rules on when, where, and what can be loaded into the back and how it can be loaded into the back, and where it's allowed to pick up and drop stuff off. There's also rules on inspecting the truck, ensuring it's maintained to a specific standard, and the truck doesn't move at all unless all those conditions are met. But when all those conditions are met, we can move a LOT of shit and move some of the biggest shit around - just slowly and with a lot of paperwork and other crap.

Meanwhile, SF/SOF elements are a 650hp pickup truck with an 8ft bed and basically no other rules beyond 'don't lose any of the shit you're carrying'.
For awhile now, it has been much faster to make multiple trips to everything, filling that 8ft bed every time and blasting around the desert at 100mph, and thereby driving the wheels off that truck.
Except now the check engine light is on, it's leaking oil, the tires are bald, and it's making some weird noises. Leadership will pay lip service to those concerns and maybe get it a new set of tires and make sure there's enough oil to keep it topped off. But they're not going to think it's a real problem until they're driving that truck somewhere and it breaks down.

At which point the leadership will say 'what a piece of shit truck' and wonder why it broke because it was working just fine with the check engine light and bad tires etc just 15 minutes ago.

[wvincent]

I'm out of that loop, and even if I wasn't, I doubt there's any of that information that could be shared on a public forum.

What I can say is that 2+2 = 4, and here's the 2+2:

- Record numbers of contractors both American and OCN/TCN are being used anywhere they can replace Soldiers, especially in maintenance/sustainment operations. This is done to keep the 'boots on ground' numbers lower. Takes three contractors to do the same as one American Soldier? Oh well. Sadly, in some cases one skilled prior service contractor can do the work of three Soldiers, particularly in fields like aviation maintenance, etc.

- Large conventional units require more time to 'spool up' and get logistics organized etc and actually get deployed. That's expensive and largely unpopular in a lot of circles.

- Our Immediate Reaction Force (IRF) and SF types are the exception. They can also reset and redeploy back stateside in a faster fashion as well. They have more independent control of their logistics, their budgets, and their missions. They also have a 'leaner' chain of command and more operational flexibility.
As we all know, the more staff officers present that count beans, the more lag time, cost, complication, and problems that exist in moving quickly and effectively.


Said another way, imagine that the mission is to move some stuff, and a regular deploying conventional element is a 53ft semi truck with a 30mph speed limiter and very specific rules on when, where, and what can be loaded into the back and how it can be loaded into the back, and where it's allowed to pick up and drop stuff off. There's also rules on inspecting the truck, ensuring it's maintained to a specific standard, and the truck doesn't move at all unless all those conditions are met. But when all those conditions are met, we can move a LOT of shit and move some of the biggest shit around - just slowly and with a lot of paperwork and other crap.

Meanwhile, SF/SOF elements are a 650hp pickup truck with an 8ft bed and basically no other rules beyond 'don't lose any of the shit you're carrying'.
For awhile now, it has been much faster to make multiple trips to everything, filling that 8ft bed every time and blasting around the desert at 100mph, and thereby driving the wheels off that truck.
Except now the check engine light is on, it's leaking oil, the tires are bald, and it's making some weird noises. Leadership will pay lip service to those concerns and maybe get it a new set of tires and make sure there's enough oil to keep it topped off. But they're not going to think it's a real problem until they're driving that truck somewhere and it breaks down.

At which point the leadership will say 'what a piece of shit truck' and wonder why it broke because it was working just fine with the check engine light and bad tires etc just 15 minutes ago.

You know, I get what you're saying. I have personal, though dated experience with what it looks like when Big Green starts lumbering around, getting ready to do something. I've also sat strip alert, and actually launched and deployed while on strip alert while on Team Big Blue.

My thought process is that maybe not every quick deploy requires DEVGRU or DELTA. It seems like SF and Seals have become have become favorite use toys, and I'm sure it's probably very satisfying to "flex" with them.

I understand there will always be a need for a rapidly deployable top tier unit for Americans in extremis, HVT's and such. There just has to be a better way to do this that leaves our personal intact and healthy at the end of their career.

Took me a while to figure out it was more efficient to perform maint. than to have to do repairs. Leadership needs to get that clue.

[Sensei]

Having read the article and watched the interview, I didn’t recall deployment tempo being mentioned as a a major factor. In fact, the SEALs being interviewed described a significant minority of their teammates as fundamentally flawed (evil to use their term), not as once good guys who were corrupted by the pressures of the job. I would think that the three SEALs being interviewed would have specified their deployment tempo had it been the root of the issue.

[JRB]

Having read the article and watched the interview, I didn’t recall deployment tempo being mentioned as a a major factor. In fact, the SEALs being interviewed described a significant minority of their teammates as fundamentally flawed (evil to use their term), not as once good guys who were corrupted by the pressures of the job. I would think that the three SEALs being interviewed would have specified their deployment tempo had it been the root of the issue.

I made it about 10% through the interview before I switched it off.

A tendency I personally observed in my brief and limited interactions with a repeatedly deployed SF/SOF element was a seeming lack of empathy or 'fucks to give' for want of a better term. Fundamentally, at least to my layman perspective, it seemed very similar to the 'burnout' and lack of empathy in overworked ER/Urgent Care providers and teachers in low-income schools.

In absolutely any element of service members, be it Navy Seals or Army Cooks, you will be able to find three whiny assholes that honestly think some of their superiors or peers are evil/fucked up/etc and they'd be delighted to tell anyone that will listen.
Given a chance to cry about it into a mic, I could easily see how you can find three dudes that didn't like a particular few guys and would mistake not giving a fuck for being evil.


Not to say what they're saying in that interview is impossible - just that I'm highly skeptical of their assessment being a dispassionate and accurate interpretation, given the egos and publicity involved, and military tendencies as a whole.

Also, worth mentioning, is that SEALS enjoy a different op tempo than many similar or near-similar Army elements.

[LittleLebowski]

Having read the article and watched the interview, I didn’t recall deployment tempo being mentioned as a a major factor. In fact, the SEALs being interviewed described a significant minority of their teammates as fundamentally flawed (evil to use their term), not as once good guys who were corrupted by the pressures of the job. I would think that the three SEALs being interviewed would have specified their deployment tempo had it been the root of the issue.

I don’t know, I wasn’t there; but having dealt with some serious lingering stuff from deployments in my family, I would not write anything off to such a black and white concept as just “evil” without asking a lot of hard questions. Always listen to the man on the ground is what Pete Blaber preaches. Were these guys always “evil”? Are the guys diming them out getting a plea deal of some sort? Was Luke Shawley “evil” or having a psychotic break? I’m not dismissing completely that these are just bad actors, but I’d like to know the whole story before passing judgement.

[JRB]

I don’t know, I wasn’t there; but having dealt with some serious lingering stuff from deployments in my family, I would not write anything off to such a black and white concept as just “evil” without asking a lot of hard questions. Always listen to the man on the ground is what Pete Blaber preaches. We’re these guys always “evil”? Are the guys diming them out getting a plea deal of some sort? Was Luke Shawley “evil” or having a psychotic break? I’m not dismissing completely that these are just bad actors, but I’d like to know the whole story before passing judgement.

I was trying to avoid that whole can of worms for a lot of reasons.

But you can't repeatedly deploy people to the same shitty places year after year after year to kill the same neverending stream of bad guys, and see the same never ending circle jerk of corruption and depravity with minimal if any tangible improvement to be seen, and expect them NOT to form some seriously non-PC stereotypes, and become skeptical of any actual path to solving those problems that doesn't involve just glassing everything and starting over from scratch.
If bitterness and resentment of the blood, treasure, and time spent in a futile pursuit makes someone evil, there's a fuckload of OEF and OIF veterans that are 'evil' by that standard.

[Sensei]

In absolutely any element of service members, be it Navy Seals or Army Cooks, you will be able to find three whiny assholes that honestly think some of their superiors or peers are evil/fucked up/etc and they'd be delighted to tell anyone that will listen.
Given a chance to cry about it into a mic, I could easily see how you can find three dudes that didn't like a particular few guys and would mistake not giving a fuck for being evil.


Not to say what they're saying in that interview is impossible - just that I'm highly skeptical of their assessment being a dispassionate and accurate interpretation, given the egos and publicity involved, and military tendencies as a whole.

Two years ago, the Commander and top NCO of Naval Special Warfare penned a letter that their command had “a problem.” That was in response to allegations mirroring the CBS interview.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bus...s-2019-8%3famp

The prevailing response from this forum at that time was that the Command for that community was somehow detached from the reality on the ground, and was over stating the problem. Now, the same warning is being repeated from below. I’m reluctant to chalk it up to bitching from the rank and file or a few disgruntled troops. Unlike Rolling Stone, Catherine Herridge has a record of accuracy and getting in front of issues. She also doesn’t have an axe to grind with the military which is unique among mainstream reporters.

Perhaps it’s time to acknowledge that the problem exists and we need to fix it before a country like China starts stacking American bodies.

[JDB]

I made it about 10% through the interview before I switched it off.


Also, worth mentioning, is that SEALS enjoy a different op tempo than many similar or near-similar Army elements.

Slower or faster op tempo than similar Army elements? I genuinely don't know.