Oh, yeah, that reminds me!!

I forgot to add that the AF convinced the underemployed Army to assign Army NG and Reserve soldiers to secure AF bases here in CONUS.

Wouldn't want the Sky Cops doing menial work like that.

Might get their blue uniforms and white gloves dirty.

TR

And you know they have been doing a fine job up here. I go to Hanscom AFB about once every 5 weeks for my Class I resupply and these folks look sharp, take their job seriously, actually seem intent on doing a good job.

Jack Moroney

All Inter-service rivalry aside, when I was in I always thought Air Force Security was tops. If they are using Army personnel now it is probably because they are short handed.

I'm not so sure our troops are burned out. I saw a bit on the news where mommy and the LYB were whining about conditions in Iraq. On the same piece they mentioned the high rate of extensions and re-enlistments among the troops. Many troops enlisted to do a job and doing that job is usually a good morale builder. Those held on a short leash and not allowed into action have the lower morale.

I can attest to the fact that morale among SF in Vietnam was much higher than that at Ft. Bragg during the same period.

I wouldn't want to go through a door with him either, but how about that E-3 welder who did a kick ass job during the Jessica Lynch ambush. he Killed 8-9 people including a whole mortar team who was trying to drop rounds on his unit. I'd have him in a patrol with me.

True he seems like the exception rather than the rule, but I've gone out on missions with plenty of support people, and for the most part they do an excellent job, and are quick to learn.

Just a quick thought on my part.

As has been noted before, there is a world of difference between defensive ops, and offensive.

I just said that they could pull static security, but I wouldn't want them kicking doors as part of a stick. You are certainly entitled to a differing opinion. Go out to the flight line, and pick your breacher.

Guess we will have to agree to disagree on this one.

TR

To paraphrase Austin Powers, allow me to reduce myself to a caricature of... myself:

There are, give or take, 24,600 enlisted personnel in the Air Force with the Duty Air Force Specialty Code of 3P0xx (that includes all Security Forces AFSCs). That includes everyone from gate guards to dog handlers to SPs to ABGDs. For officers, there are 936 31P's. Career Management Field 11 (Infantry) has more than that (I want to say around 40-50 thousand, but that's just ballpark), although even there you have drill sergeants, recruiters and others not actually serving in TO&E infantry battalions.

The combat controller/PJ/combat weatherman community is much smaller.

Air Force Security Forces are spread out worldwide in small units. Each base has a Security Forces Squadron, while for deployments task-organized Expeditionary Security Forces Squadrons are formed. If you're talking about deploying these guys and gals, the analogy is not to infantry - it would be to pulling the MP companies from the various forts and deploying them. We've done that before - I remember in 1995, around the time the Haiti and Somalia deployments were winding down and the Bosnia deployment was getting started, something like 80% of CONUS MP companies were deployed overseas.

Oh, and the brilliance of the Army bureaucratic mind at work: while the MPs were away, enforcement of traffic laws got a little lax. When the MPs returned from the sun and fun of Port-au-Prince, someone in Building 4 decided their reward for a job well done was to go and man speed traps on I-185 and VD Blvd for "Operation Slowdown".

I'd hate to say it, but I think you must draw a distinction between your average Airman and your average Soldier.

I think some of the disagreement between Max_Tab and The Reaper here stems from this distinction not being made.

I would roughly estimate that 80% of support soldiers could step up to the plate and serve adequately in an infantry role. I would have to say that this falls nearer to 20% for the Airmen I know - and that is only considering attitude (mindset) and aptitude, not the other serious issue of physical fitness.

There is a differance between advanced special forces training and basic soldier skills. With the right leadership and training, many, (not all by a long shot) support soldier's will step up to the plate, especially junior enlisted. I've gone out on patrol with mechanic's, cooks, signal guys, and other's, and if you give them a good left and right limit they did there job. No I wouldn't go into a room with them, or trust them to go out by themselves and set up a drop zone, but with proper guidance, they help out alot. Sometime we are so short handed, that we need all the help we can get.
Just like training g's, and that is our job.

I disagree.

I think less than 20% of the soldiers I see in the COSCOM could serve adequately as an infantryman, maybe less. I would give 10% of the Air Force. Certainly A6 can come to the party and show us what she has. I would count her as probably part of my 10%.

Max, I believe that you are referring to SFG and SOSCOM support personnel, which are two time volunteers and a world apart from the units across Bragg Blvd. (and those are in the Airborne COSCOM).

I believe that as a senior SF soldier, I could train them to pull static security and VERY limited patrolling, and that only under direct supervision. Frankly, I would rather have indigenous LATAM forces.

Have you recently worked with the Gs we get for Robin Sage? The Cadets make better Gs than most of the support troops do.

TR

No I haven't, done that in 6 years:D

My two pesos
 

TR,

Sir, I'd like to say that the Navy would step up to the plate but you never know. The only ratings/units I see that would have some very basic knowledge would be the Seabees, Naval Coastal Warfare Units, MAs (Master-at-Arms), GMs, etc. I'm sure I am missing some others too.

There also might be other individuals with the right type of background, which could serve as a starting point, i.e. small arms training, basic marksmanship, etc., but normally these individuals are the minority and have served in certain unique billets that mandate a particular skill set. However, there would still need to be a massive training effort to get everyone up-to-speed and know the basics even with some of the groups I mentioned above.

Seabees might be the most logical choice due to their base defense training, patrolling... etc. I would like to think that if the call went out that there would be quite a few sailors stepping up to the plate to volunteer. It was my impression while in that there were/are a lot of us Squids that enjoy/ed the more physical aspects of the military, e.g. boarding parties, security, shooting, etc.

Bottom line, a shitload of training would need to happen to get everyone on the same page and I’m not sure how effective it would be in the long run.

CTA3 out

The problem with taking certain support types away from their jobs to patrol is WHO is going to do their jobs while they are gone? I agree with CTA3's assesment of the Seabees, the one's I was around were good dude's and could probably acquit themselves in a defensive role. BUT who is going to dig wells, operate equipment, etc while they are outside the wire?

Within limited constraints it IS a good idea, but if you aren't careful you'll rob Peter's HR Dept. to man up Paul's HR Dept......

Good post Doogie - agree with the Peter/Paul analogy too. It could be feasible, but there would be a lot of logistics, training, etc., that would need to be well thought out in advance. As I said, from an individual perspective, I don't think there would be a problem with people volunteering for this type of duty but I've been wrong before.

"Could" and "Should" have two different meanings... and there is always a price to pay. Always.

The idea has merit, but the penalties should be understood and accepted or mitigated.