View Single Post
Old 08-06-2014, 17:08   #13
WarriorDiplomat
Quiet Professional
 
WarriorDiplomat's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: C.S. Colorado
Posts: 2,046
[QUOTE=Flagg;559011]
Quote:
Originally Posted by WarriorDiplomat View Post

Cheers for that.

Do you believe there is scope for any organized physical conditioning program pre-selection?

No I believe that for one of our candidates any organized train up should be by the students on their own time through their own initiative without any current cadre influence

Truth #3 states SOF cannot be mass produced.

But are any allowances able to be made to adjust for a less physically active and more sedentary society(18X pool) that funds a fast shrinking pool of uniformed candidates?

We are not looking for the guy you just described we are looking for the self starter not easily influenced by the weaknesses of society.

Is society producing candidates today who are less initially physically capable and resilient today on average than 20,40, 60 years ago?

I cannot say that we are more or less resilient I believe living through hardship in life both physically and mentally make you a more resilient person. Toughness is forged through adversity. As a society people were tougher physically when there were less available comforts.

If so, can anything be done to assist potential candidates to exceed the required physical standard and develop physical/mental resilience without gaming/corrupting that physical slice of selection?

Yes of course we draw the right guy and provide them the opportunity. A successful candidate will do what he must to succeed to some extent within his control. Some resiliency attributes are not in the candidates control they are ingrained into their character and burned into their DNA.

Down here I see a high anecdotal correlation for successful candidates from very active rural backgrounds and endurance athletes.

But that pool appears to be at high risk of shrinking.

Being a country boy, farmer, cowboy, athlete, minister, professor etc...do not matter in the center of their being is a characteristic we want and will surface once we peel the layers of the onion away in SFAS. If we recruit FOR the right guy they will come regardless of "polls" and "statistics" that are as close to the truth as a politician.

Would a minimum threshold of circa 250+ AFPT and <58 minute 4 mile ruck times as a minimum standard to attending SFAS, paired with physical fitness mentoring to well exceed the minimum standards both make SOPC/SFPC redundant as well as mitigate the potential for short-term masking of unsuitable candidate characteristics?

If a standard is put out soldiers must meet it, if they want to be the best they will surpass that if they want to be assessed for an elite unit he has to be willing to look deep into his soul and his basic character and find out what he is and where his true values are. Once SFAS is complete a soldier should know who he really is and what he really wants.


As found here:

http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/...18&postcount=7

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a245729.pdf

I hear what you're saying about inoculating candidates to stressors and ambiguity potentially polluting SFAS assessment results.

Could an argument be made that SOPC/SFPC corrupting SFAS assessment results would be quantifiably indicated in higher failure rates in Phases 1-4?

Once again cheers for your feedback.
If an institution wants soldier they will find away to reduce attrition period hence SOPC/SFPC. Yes as an SUT cadre the soldiers coming through training lack many of the character traits required for our core mission. For example our last class 3 E7's, most of the E6's and the Captains all formed a coup and approached our Company Commander and demanded transparency in his leadership. This was because training had ended and recovery was complete the students wanted to leave on day 40 instead of day 42 IAW our training calendar and ATTRS. This I believe can be attributed to our selection process we had not selected the right guys and it was clear that someone failed miserably when it came to screening, recruiting and assessing candidates. This was the 2nd out of 5 classes where a incident happened with candidates believing they could control the training. It is highly unlikely these Captains will be relieved and they will one day lead SF. This is a case in point where we have not selected the right guys and the importance of truly assessing and selecting the right guys had we left the training for the above they would have no doubt shown themselves as unsuitable but since the training covers up undesirable traits. We have been leading students because they have little inate sense of right and wrong and cannot be guided. Again we want those who need to be guided not those that MUST be led to do the right thing.

Last edited by WarriorDiplomat; 08-06-2014 at 17:19.
WarriorDiplomat is offline   Reply With Quote