Professional Soldiers ®

Professional Soldiers ® (http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/index.php)
-   Special Forces Qualification Course (http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=27)
-   -   Observations and Advice from a QP/Cadre (http://www.professionalsoldiers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=46455)

WarriorDiplomat 07-15-2014 08:31

Observations and Advice from a QP/Cadre
 
Gents,

These are observations I have made, take heed and adjust accordingly if applicable.

Many of us career GB's are passionate true believers, we want the best soldiers for the Regiment we are not out to get soldiers we want the talents and skills you bring. Understand we are here to select, train and assess attributes and skills that are either suitable or not suitable for Special Forces, our loyalty is to the Special Forces.

There are realities you must face such as those that are here for the wrong reason. Those that are here for the sole purpose of bragging rights, tabs, shooting people in the face, perceived lack of rules etc... are not true believers and not the model of why Green Berets are special. The Best Green Berets are those you have never heard of. There are E6's as well as SGM's that gained their rank and experience d uring GWOT kicking doors conducting DA, understand the application of Special Forces during the GWOT has been a corruption of our design and purpose. We went from being unique and special to door kicking, this is a misuse of our unique capabilities and should not be confused with our design and purpose.

Counterterrist units, Intelligence Units, Navy SOF, and other SOF units are not Special Forces they are Special Operations units. These units are Hyperconventional we are Unconventional they are better at what they specialize in not at what we do. In our area of expertise if a CounterTerrorism Unit were to attempt to kidnap, rescue or kill someone in our UW campaign area a UW unit would use it's underground sources for information, identify the intended targets and set traps for the CT force using deception tactics.

SOPC/SFPC has corrupted the SFAS selection process, part of the selection process is first drawing the right person to the job, the soldier would then through his own initiative and commitment prepare himself for SFAS. Once he arrives at Bragg the Selection course then tests the student through various events that are intended to push a soldier past his preparation training and peel back the onion of his character. Do not congratulate yourselves on getting selecting consider it a baby step into a much bigger world, selected does not mean you can "sham your way to a Green Beret" as one student stated.

We do not think you guys are funny when you write ridiculous crap on your bios this in our opinion is insight to your character and maturity.

Getting selected does not entitle you to an ego or a chip on your shoulder no matter what you are told. For every GB there are many others who are equal in ability and intelligence if not better with no desire to join Special Forces. Nothing we do is superhuman what we value above all else is the mission and the sense of brotherhood amongst like minded individuals. It is how we think and feel about what we do that seperates us from others, we are willing to tread into the unknown for an undetermined amount of time without accolades or recognition of any sort. We are loyal to our country and the people, we are more importantly loyal to the ideals of freedom "De Oppresson Liber" to liberate the oppressed is our motto and most of us believe in it.

The basics of Special Forces are contained in 3 phases, SUT, MOS, Robin Sage the rest is additional overblown training. The advanced schools do not make you a better Special Forces soldier they give you skills not talent. If you Master the basics and self educate the implied embedded skills you will be a great Green Beret. Their are alot of GB's who have never been to some of the advanced schools such as Sniper but know the skill better than those that have. It is your duty to be a true master of your MOS before you go to any advanced school. Going to HALO/HAHO, Scuba, Ranger, Sapper, Mountaineering etc....do not make you a competent Green Beret.

Read history, those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it. The history of Unconventional Warfare is smattered throughout world history. Learn to recognize what UW is and why it is effective.

NCO's and Officers coming through training are expected to conduct yourselves according to your rank. Your conduct influences 18X-rays both positive and negative. Your conduct lead these young men even if you don't want the responsibility it is there, so don't complain or make excuses. We are watching the example you are setting and we will hold you accountable for your lack of positive leadership.

Read this and understand the future of the Regiment is more important to us than your desire to join. Not all of you are wired for this career and life. We would prefer you X-rays get experience before coming here to be trained so that you can appreciate the value of leadership and learn about the Army.

Good luck to all of you.

Trapper John 07-15-2014 08:43

:lifter

WD that's PEREFECT! You new guys, pay attention to what was just shared with you. The world is changing so pay attention!

WD, I have some HUMINT that I picked up yesterday and relates to this post that I will share with you elsewhere. ;)

WarriorDiplomat 07-15-2014 08:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trapper John (Post 557092)
:lifter

WD that's PEREFECT! You new guys, pay attention to what was just shared with you. The world is changing so pay attention!

WD, I have some HUMINT that I picked up yesterday and relates to this post that I will share with you elsewhere. ;)

Standing by TJ

fred111 07-16-2014 05:15

Outstanding! Word for word, this should be part of the SF recruiting brochures.

striveseekfind 07-30-2014 20:19

Gentlemen,

After reading through WD's post, it occurs to me that there may be a disconnect between the understanding that recruiters and their recruits have of what truly the mission and purpose of SF is. Many of the recruiters will not have known a day in the Army without the GWOT being waged. Not having any experience in SF, I can say that as an outsider I believe that the opinion and views of many uninformed individuals is that SF is a MI/DA unit that develops HUMINT and uses actionable intelligence to conduct raids. I have buddies from the Marines who were egregiously misconceived about not only USA SF, but Rangers as well.

When I was a youngster, I read "Special Forces: A Guided Tour of US Army Special Forces" and was inspired then to achieve a place within the brotherhood. Recently I read Dick Couch's book "Chosen Soldier". He followed 18X candidates throughout SOPC, SFAS, and the Q-Course. He placed emphasis on the unconventional warfare and FID missions, and how they are unique to SF and how important the purpose of these missions and these warriors are to our leaders and the options they have within an AO of exercising policy.

It boggles my mind that there are people who think that earning their Green Beret and Special Forces tab makes them a BAMF. I learned in the Marines that training is the easy part. Afterwards, there are no excuses, do-overs, resets, and no guarantee of food, sleep, comfort, or life. I am working toward getting an 18X contract. In my mind, getting selected only means you've demonstrated the ability to complete the Q-course. Earning the GB & SF tab means earning a place within the brotherhood and a spot on a detachment. Every day afterward that tab and that beret have to be earned, and it won't get any easier.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but that's how I see it from my end.

WarriorDiplomat 08-05-2014 19:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by striveseekfind (Post 558419)
Gentlemen,

After reading through WD's post, it occurs to me that there may be a disconnect between the understanding that recruiters and their recruits have of what truly the mission and purpose of SF is. Many of the recruiters will not have known a day in the Army without the GWOT being waged. Not having any experience in SF, I can say that as an outsider I believe that the opinion and views of many uninformed individuals is that SF is a MI/DA unit that develops HUMINT and uses actionable intelligence to conduct raids. I have buddies from the Marines who were egregiously misconceived about not only USA SF, but Rangers as well.

When I was a youngster, I read "Special Forces: A Guided Tour of US Army Special Forces" and was inspired then to achieve a place within the brotherhood. Recently I read Dick Couch's book "Chosen Soldier". He followed 18X candidates throughout SOPC, SFAS, and the Q-Course. He placed emphasis on the unconventional warfare and FID missions, and how they are unique to SF and how important the purpose of these missions and these warriors are to our leaders and the options they have within an AO of exercising policy.

It boggles my mind that there are people who think that earning their Green Beret and Special Forces tab makes them a BAMF. I learned in the Marines that training is the easy part. Afterwards, there are no excuses, do-overs, resets, and no guarantee of food, sleep, comfort, or life. I am working toward getting an 18X contract. In my mind, getting selected only means you've demonstrated the ability to complete the Q-course. Earning the GB & SF tab means earning a place within the brotherhood and a spot on a detachment. Every day afterward that tab and that beret have to be earned, and it won't get any easier.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but that's how I see it from my end.

Excellent response you hit the nail on the head.

This viewpoint is what we are looking for coming through the Q-course.

Trapper John 08-06-2014 06:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by striveseekfind (Post 558419)
Gentlemen,

After reading through WD's post, it occurs to me that there may be a disconnect between the understanding that recruiters and their recruits have of what truly the mission and purpose of SF is. Many of the recruiters will not have known a day in the Army without the GWOT being waged. Not having any experience in SF, I can say that as an outsider I believe that the opinion and views of many uninformed individuals is that SF is a MI/DA unit that develops HUMINT and uses actionable intelligence to conduct raids. I have buddies from the Marines who were egregiously misconceived about not only USA SF, but Rangers as well.

When I was a youngster, I read "Special Forces: A Guided Tour of US Army Special Forces" and was inspired then to achieve a place within the brotherhood. Recently I read Dick Couch's book "Chosen Soldier". He followed 18X candidates throughout SOPC, SFAS, and the Q-Course. He placed emphasis on the unconventional warfare and FID missions, and how they are unique to SF and how important the purpose of these missions and these warriors are to our leaders and the options they have within an AO of exercising policy.

It boggles my mind that there are people who think that earning their Green Beret and Special Forces tab makes them a BAMF. I learned in the Marines that training is the easy part. Afterwards, there are no excuses, do-overs, resets, and no guarantee of food, sleep, comfort, or life. I am working toward getting an 18X contract. In my mind, getting selected only means you've demonstrated the ability to complete the Q-course. Earning the GB & SF tab means earning a place within the brotherhood and a spot on a detachment. Every day afterward that tab and that beret have to be earned, and it won't get any easier.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but that's how I see it from my end.

:lifter

Flagg 08-06-2014 07:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarriorDiplomat (Post 557091)
Gents,

These are observations I have made, take heed and adjust accordingly if applicable.

the application of Special Forces during the GWOT has been a corruption of our design and purpose. We went from being unique and special to door kicking,

a UW unit would use it's underground sources for information, identify the intended targets and set traps for the CT force using deception tactics.

SOPC/SFPC has corrupted the SFAS selection process, part of the selection process is first drawing the right person to the job, the soldier would then through his own initiative and commitment prepare himself for SFAS. Once he arrives at Bragg the Selection course then tests the student through various events that are intended to push a soldier past his preparation training and peel back the onion of his character.

If I may inquire, I'm a bit confused about the part in bold regarding SOPC/SFPC.

As an outsider to SFAS, but involved in an assessment program that is assessing for qualities rather than competencies across the 360 degree spectrum of physical, mental, emotional, and social components of candidates, I'm unsure how SOPC/SFPC could corrupt the SFAS selection process.

In an increasingly urbanised society producing what appear to be(anecdotally, but obesity data and excessive consumer convenience outcomes seem to back this up) less physically resilient citizens and potential candidates on average, the logic for SOPC/SFPC appears sound(again from an outsider).

I'm assuming the primary purpose of SOPC/SFPC is largely a means of providing a highly concentrated period of physical training to improve physical capacity, provide some personal reference points for physical resiliency and the related mental mindset adjustment.

For off the street X-rays and non-teeth arms candidates does it not provide a highly condensed set of experiences that would be familiar-ish to some teeth arms candidates coming from a light infantry/airborne background during their career?

Assuming the necessary ambiguity of SFAS isn't breached during SOPC/SFPC, negative emotional/social indicators aren't temporarily coached out of candidates to mask underlying long term unsuitability, and problem solving activities aren't duplicated or leaked to mask a lack of mental agility your comment has me genuinely scratching my head.

Is it because of a strong belief that the high level of intrinsic motivation required for candidates negates the need for intrinsically motivated candidates to need SOPC/SFPC in the first place?

Because I'm left thinking that if SOPC/SFPC focus on physical capability and resiliency and it helps candidates better achieve SFAS physical standards without interfering with mental(agility/intellectual/trainability) emotional, and social assessment for suitability, how can it be a bad thing?

Very interested in your response as assessment course development is something I've been working on the last few years so I'm a keen student of what's been done thru history and what's being done now across the board to shape required outputs.

Cheers!

WarriorDiplomat 08-06-2014 12:48

[QUOTE=Flagg;558974]If I may inquire, I'm a bit confused about the part in bold regarding SOPC/SFPC.


Assessment for any career should be completely raw and kept pure, SOPC is Special Operations Preparation Course where soldiers who are recruited for SpecOps are trained to pass selection essentially gaming SFAS through preparation. This is wrong on many levels specifically for us it is because it removes a few of the key elements of assessment and that is initiative. drive and perseverance. We deem this as critical to the right person for the right job. Our career is initiative based and we are deployed without supervision and very little guidance thousands of miles from our Command, the desire to succeed must be inherent in the individuals character without question!.

For us the soldier making a decision to be a Special Forces soldier is the first step the next step is his own initiative to prepare for the training this may include learning how to navigate, physical conditioning and learning about the career so as to better understand what he is joining and why.

What SOPC does is takes away much of the character assessment of what we deem most critical to the core of who we are and what we do. The course itself is the other half and is the performance assessment that is where the soldiers commitment is tested, he must value team above self and mission above self. What selection does is force a soldier to make decisions that are revealing of his character such as when he is in pain and fatigue, hunger, cold, hot, wet etc….. This forces the soldier to make a decision to quit and seek comfort or continue to place the accomplishment of the objective above his own needs this puts his basic values into perspective for not only the soldier but for the cadre.

What you seem to be confused on is the conditioning for training and as I stated earlier SFAS is not training. IMO the coming to SFAS not conditioned for it is the first step in accepting personal accountability for our own actions or lack thereof. Fitness can influence the assessment for a soldiers psychological resistance to physical stress and fear of the unknown we should not interfere with the individuals own initiative or again lack of.

The issue with us running a preparation course is we are having cadre who know what is going to be expected and training recruits just to overcome the events and reduce the stresses placed on the recruit who now has an idea of what SFAS is going to be like and has the confidence going into it that he was prepared and guided to pass the events. The stress of not knowing what was next the uneasy quiet of the cadre and lack of detailed guidance was part of why soldiers would quit or why they would perform above and beyond the average soldier.

The conditioning phase should not exist and would not be needed if there were hard standards that professional soldiers understood and were held accountable for. Accountability is only effective if an individual must face his own failures, unpreparedness and denial of the desired end state. What we owe and all we should offer during the training is the information and opportunity to improve themselves the rest is on the individual. We do not want soldiers who have to be led we want soldiers that need to be guided once they "choose" to follow us.

By running these programs and controlling these critical portions of an individual’s character it conditions our soldiers to be led and controlled and never allows for the ability to honestly assess these attributes needed to operate independently as a representative of our country. We must allow the assessment and selection process to be untouched by us in order to preserve our force competence in the future.

The Reaper 08-06-2014 13:04

Exactly.

SOPC/SFPC provides an unnecessary advantage to the 18Xs. A couple of weeks of cadre led PT and land nav training (and expereince) that not everyone else gets. I have seen units refuse to allow guys time to do individual PT and go as far as denying them a return from the field until the day before SFAS began.

Either we should add it to the SFAS program for everyone, or no one should get it.

TR

Trapper John 08-06-2014 13:14

[QUOTE=WarriorDiplomat;558997]
Quote:

Originally Posted by Flagg (Post 558974)
If I may inquire, I'm a bit confused about the part in bold regarding SOPC/SFPC.


Assessment for any career should be completely raw and kept pure, SOPC is Special Operations Preparation Course where soldiers who are recruited for SpecOps are trained to pass selection essentially gaming SFAS through preparation. This is wrong on many levels specifically for us it is because it removes a few of the key elements of assessment and that is initiative. drive and perseverance. We deem this as critical to the right person for the right job. Our career is initiative based and we are deployed without supervision and very little guidance thousands of miles from our Command, the desire to succeed must be inherent in the individuals character without question!.

For us the soldier making a decision to be a Special Forces soldier is the first step the next step is his own initiative to prepare for the training this may include learning how to navigate, physical conditioning and learning about the career so as to better understand what he is joining and why.

What SOPC does is takes away much of the character assessment of what we deem most critical to the core of who we are and what we do. The course itself is the other half and is the performance assessment that is where the soldiers commitment is tested, he must value team above self and mission above self. What selection does is force a soldier to make decisions that are revealing of his character such as when he is in pain and fatigue, hunger, cold, hot, wet etc….. This forces the soldier to make a decision to quit and seek comfort or continue to place the accomplishment of the objective above his own needs this puts his basic values into perspective for not only the soldier but for the cadre.

What you seem to be confused on is the conditioning for training and as I stated earlier SFAS is not training. IMO the coming to SFAS not conditioned for it is the first step in accepting personal accountability for our own actions or lack thereof. Fitness can influence the assessment for a soldiers psychological resistance to physical stress and fear of the unknown we should not interfere with the individuals own initiative or again lack of.

The issue with us running a preparation course is we are having cadre who know what is going to be expected and training recruits just to overcome the events and reduce the stresses placed on the recruit who now has an idea of what SFAS is going to be like and has the confidence going into it that he was prepared and guided to pass the events. The stress of not knowing what was next the uneasy quiet of the cadre and lack of detailed guidance was part of why soldiers would quit or why they would perform above and beyond the average soldier.

The conditioning phase should not exist and would not be needed if there were hard standards that professional soldiers understood and were held accountable for. Accountability is only effective if an individual must face his own failures, unpreparedness and denial of the desired end state. What we owe and all we should offer during the training is the information and opportunity to improve themselves the rest is on the individual. We do not want soldiers who have to be led we want soldiers that need to be guided once they "choose" to follow us.

By running these programs and controlling these critical portions of an individual’s character it conditions our soldiers to be led and controlled and never allows for the ability to honestly assess these attributes needed to operate independently as a representative of our country. We must allow the assessment and selection process to be untouched by us in order to preserve our force competence in the future.

Couldn't agree more WD! I didn't realize this was going on and it is nothing more than "teaching to the test". I can understand the reasoning though, but that should definitely change in light of the new mission focus. Qualities and characteristics needed are more intuitive or innate and not ones that can be developed in a 4-wk course anyway. JMHO

Flagg 08-06-2014 15:48

[QUOTE=WarriorDiplomat;558997]
Quote:

Originally Posted by Flagg (Post 558974)
If I may inquire, I'm a bit confused about the part in bold regarding SOPC/SFPC.


Assessment for any career should be completely raw and kept pure, SOPC is Special Operations Preparation Course where soldiers who are recruited for SpecOps are trained to pass selection essentially gaming SFAS through preparation. This is wrong on many levels specifically for us it is because it removes a few of the key elements of assessment and that is initiative. drive and perseverance. We deem this as critical to the right person for the right job. Our career is initiative based and we are deployed without supervision and very little guidance thousands of miles from our Command, the desire to succeed must be inherent in the individuals character without question!.

For us the soldier making a decision to be a Special Forces soldier is the first step the next step is his own initiative to prepare for the training this may include learning how to navigate, physical conditioning and learning about the career so as to better understand what he is joining and why.

What SOPC does is takes away much of the character assessment of what we deem most critical to the core of who we are and what we do. The course itself is the other half and is the performance assessment that is where the soldiers commitment is tested, he must value team above self and mission above self. What selection does is force a soldier to make decisions that are revealing of his character such as when he is in pain and fatigue, hunger, cold, hot, wet etc….. This forces the soldier to make a decision to quit and seek comfort or continue to place the accomplishment of the objective above his own needs this puts his basic values into perspective for not only the soldier but for the cadre.

What you seem to be confused on is the conditioning for training and as I stated earlier SFAS is not training. IMO the coming to SFAS not conditioned for it is the first step in accepting personal accountability for our own actions or lack thereof. Fitness can influence the assessment for a soldiers psychological resistance to physical stress and fear of the unknown we should not interfere with the individuals own initiative or again lack of.

The issue with us running a preparation course is we are having cadre who know what is going to be expected and training recruits just to overcome the events and reduce the stresses placed on the recruit who now has an idea of what SFAS is going to be like and has the confidence going into it that he was prepared and guided to pass the events. The stress of not knowing what was next the uneasy quiet of the cadre and lack of detailed guidance was part of why soldiers would quit or why they would perform above and beyond the average soldier.

The conditioning phase should not exist and would not be needed if there were hard standards that professional soldiers understood and were held accountable for. Accountability is only effective if an individual must face his own failures, unpreparedness and denial of the desired end state. What we owe and all we should offer during the training is the information and opportunity to improve themselves the rest is on the individual. We do not want soldiers who have to be led we want soldiers that need to be guided once they "choose" to follow us.

By running these programs and controlling these critical portions of an individual’s character it conditions our soldiers to be led and controlled and never allows for the ability to honestly assess these attributes needed to operate independently as a representative of our country. We must allow the assessment and selection process to be untouched by us in order to preserve our force competence in the future.

Cheers for that.

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

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?

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

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?

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.

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?

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.

WarriorDiplomat 08-06-2014 17:08

:D[QUOTE=Flagg;559011]
Quote:

Originally Posted by WarriorDiplomat (Post 558997)

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.

Flagg 08-06-2014 17:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by WarriorDiplomat (Post 559018)
Your responses

Cheers! Thanks heaps for taking the time to post responses to my questions.

Peregrino 08-06-2014 19:16

You think SOPC enables the wrong candidates to "pass" now - wait until they "tweak" it so females are able to succeed at SFAS.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 13:35.


Copyright 2004-2019 by Professional Soldiers ®