Conference Brings SOF and Industry Together

TAMPA, FL – The 2011 Special Operations Forces Industry Conference (SOFIC) and Exposition was held from 17–19 May at the Tampa Convention Center, Tampa, FL. Under the theme “SOF: Setting the Course,” USSOCOM Commander, Admiral Eric T. Olson, gave the first Keynote Address. His speech addressed the capability areas of “Understand,” “Communicate,” “Move,” and “Engage,” which characterize the context in which SOF currently operates. He stressed that within this context, SOF needs to develop language and cultural experts, better understand what motivates the local people and how they make their money, know when important events occur during the year, and recognize how climate and terrain impacts the social psyche of the population.  

Olson highlighted the recapitalization of the Fixed and Rotary Wing fleets, the way ahead on maritime surface and undersea platforms, the need for lighter individual kit for SOF operators, and a greater approach to holistic protection and protective measures and care for the wounded. Admiral Olson also discussed the expansion of the SOF Information Environment (SIE) and challenged industry to look for solutions for more simulation training, saying, “Simulation has been a tough bridge to get across.”

The second Keynote Address, made by USSOCOM Acquisition Executive, Mr. James Cluck, provided an update on the current SOF Acquisition enterprise, the Special Operations Research, Development, and Acquisition Center (SORDAC). Mr. Cluck highlighted future FY12 procurement and RDT&E new starts, and he discussed SOCOM Acquisition Summits with the Undersecretary of Defense, Dr. Ashton Carter, and service acquisition executives to collaborate on ways to minimize programmatic disconnects, better align requirements, identify co-sponsorship opportunities, seek funding efficiencies, and optimize contracting actions. 

The USSOCOM Component Commanders provided their perspectives and insights on current challenges, trends, and interests to three packed ballrooms of industry attendees. Lt Gen Donald Wurster, Commander, Air Force Special Operations Command (AFSOC), discussed the AFSOC recapitalization program of its gunships, mobility, and tanker aircraft. LTG John Mulholland, Commander, Army Special Operations Command, discussed one of the big needs going forward is to find a replacement for the Hummer, which he called an “incredible platform for Special Forces." RADM Edward Winters, Commander of Naval Special Warfare Command, highlighted the interest for new boats with signal-reducing capacity, stating, “It’ll become harder and harder to sneak up on anybody’s coasts.” MajGen Paul Lefebvre, Commander, Marine Corps Forces Special Operations Command, summed up his needs in two words: "force protection." He also distinguished the need for command and control domain dominance, on ships and land, and the increased efforts to shape “problem framing” and “intel fusion.”

Senior leaders from across the USSOCOM Headquarters and Service Component Commands shared the stage with four panel sessions exploring the conference construct of Understand, Communicate, Move and Engage. Topics ranging from smart vehicles to biometric collection, UAVs, iphones, and remote sensors were discussed by Intelligence, Requirements, Network, and Operations and Planning Directors.

USSOCOM Program Executive Officers, Program Managers, and technical experts made presentations to packed rooms in track sessions organized by the themed capability areas. The sessions identified USSOCOM’s top priorities, technology game changers, key enablers, and business opportunities for current, planned, and future USSOCOM acquisition programs.

USSOCOM small business, acquisition, and science and technology experts conducted Business Opportunities Sessions, which addressed requirements and opportunities for industry attendees supporting SOF. These experts shared information on how industry can present and demonstrate new product ideas and prototypes to SOCOM via the TILO and Experimentation process.

The National Defense Industry Association (NDIA), SOCOM’s co-sponsor for the event, organized 1,434 Exhibitors in over 350 Booths for the Technology Exposition, overflowing the Tampa Convention Center to outdoor displays exhibiting the latest technologies targeted to SOF operations.

Πηγή

Misunderstanding The Afghanistan Model

The fighting in Libya has revived the call for making large cuts in conventional ground forces (army and marines), and relying more on small numbers of Special Forces and commandos on the ground, in cooperation with heavy use of smart bombs. This is often called the "Afghanistan Model" and now, as in late 2001, it was declared to be the future of warfare. It’s not, and there are lessons from Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and history in general that make it clear why.

The Afghanistan campaign created enthusiasm for transforming the armed forces to better exploit the "Afghanistan Model" in future wars. However, the proponents of this failed to heed the lessons of history, as well as the unique conditions found in Afghanistan.

First, there's history. The Special Forces sending out small teams to work with local tribesmen and using airpower when a heavy hammer was needed is nothing new. In fact, it's a concept that was used successfully over forty years ago in Vietnam. The Special Forces and the air force were successful back then, even without smart bombs. But the Special Forces were not able to defeat the North Vietnamese. The reason was simple, the North Vietnamese were far more determined and formidable fighters than the Taliban. Moreover, the North Vietnamese had an asset the Taliban lacked, lots of jungle and other vegetation to hide under.

The Special Forces, and troops like them (LRRPS, SOG RTs) comprised about ten percent of the infantry in Vietnam. These guys were the best we had and the North Vietnamese admitted that they feared these troops the most. Not just because "death from above" often followed any encounter with them, but because these fellows were, well, very good, thoroughly prepared and superbly led infantry. Let us not forget that, in Afghanistan, we had our best fighting a pretty hardscrabble bunch of opponents. Despite all the hoopla about the "wily Afghan warriors," these guys often operated like an armed mob and were more deadly as bandits than as soldiers. The North Vietnamese would have cleaned their clocks in short order.

But the Afghans, and especially the non-Afghan al Qaeda, were quick learners. Within a few months they developed techniques to deal with smart bombs, Special Forces and assorted other international commandos. Just as the North Vietnamese quickly learned that you don't fight the American army in a straight ahead battle, the Afghans figured out how to become less vulnerable to smart bombs. The Afghan solution, which is quite similar to the North Vietnamese one, is to stay out of the way of the Americans, don't bunch up, and, in particular, dig deeper, and more numerous hiding places. Then you wage guerilla war until the impatient Yankees lose interest and go home.

Afghanistan was conquered (but not pacified) in short order largely because we had the element of surprise and the assistance of a majority of the population (especially the non-Pushtun majority, as well as many anti-Taliban Pushtuns). Surprise is a weapon that, from antiquity, has always proved to be a most decisive one. But it's a weapon of the mind, not the bomb racks. You can't manufacture surprise and stockpile it for the next war. You have to come up with something the enemy hasn't thought of and then hammer him with it before he has time to wise up. The Taliban underestimated the Special Forces and ignored the potential impact of the widely publicized smart bombs. It's easy to understand in hindsight, but accurate foresight is what creates surprise.

Most pundits didn’t notice that there were no battles in Afghanistan after early 2002. That was because it had turned into a guerilla war. Fortunately, this is what the Special Forces train for. But this form of combat is much less dependent on smart bombs. So if you're going to talk about the "Afghanistan Model" you have to deal with the entire war. It was not over in Afghanistan by early 2002, just the smart bomb phase. Not sending in ground troops meant the corruption and tribalism would have allowed the Taliban to quickly make a comeback, as they eventually did, with the help of their drug gang allies.

In Iraq, there were other problems that prevented the use of the Afghanistan Model. First, Saddam had thoroughly terrorized and disarmed the Shia majority. The Shia had rebelled in early 1991. The U.S., adhering to the UN mandate and promises made to its Arab allies (to not invade Iraq), did not assist the Shia. After a year of brutal fighting, the Shia had been put down, and Saddam kept terrorizing the Shia (to keep them down) until the U.S. invaded 12 years later. Up north, the Kurds were a different matter. Saddam had left the Kurds alone while he took care of the Shia, and U.S. and British Special Operations troops moved in to keep the two main Kurd factions from turning on each other, and to provide ground controllers for American and British warplanes. In addition, the Kurds were in mountains, which were easier to defend from. When Saddam turned his attention to the Kurds, he quickly decided that it was not worth the effort to go after them. It wasn’t the first time Arab despots decided to leave the Kurds alone.

In Libya, not sending in ground troops was the best option, mainly because Kaddafi did not have the same kind of security force Saddam possessed. Saddam regularly used brutality and terrorism to deal with opponent. Kaddafi was a smoother article, which is why he lasted twice as long as Saddam. But when the revolution came, Kaddafi found he had fewer allies than Saddam. Providing the rebels with some 20,000 smart bombs and guided missiles, often directed by NATO commandoes on the ground, made all the difference. Kaddafi’s forces were picked apart and demoralized by the bombs. But the end has not yet arrived. It’s not a given that the rebels will be able to establish a stable (even by Middle Eastern standards) democracy. Then there are the Islamic radical factions within the rebel coalition. Will these groups be allowed to operate from Libya, with the usual proviso that they don’t go terrorizing Libyans? That was the problem in Afghanistan, where a lack of NATO ground troops would have meant that the drug gangs and Taliban could have bought the government and returned to being a terrorist sanctuary.

Any future war will involve smart bombs and Special Forces. But there is no "Afghanistan Model." What we saw in Afghanistan was what went on as a part of the Vietnam War. Against a determined enemy, expect hard fighting, and being on the receiving end of nasty surprises. In Libya, it’s unclear what the end of the war will really look like. The "Afghanistan Model" is wishful, and dangerous, thinking.

Πηγή

Israeli Mossad training Iranian exiles in Kurdistan

A leading French newspaper has claimed that Israeli intelligence agents are recruiting and training Iranian dissidents in clandestine bases located in Iraq’s Kurdish region. Paris-based daily Le Figaro, France’s second-largest national newspaper, cited a “security source in Baghdad”, who alleged that members of Israeli intelligence are currently operating in Iraq’s autonomous northern Kurdish region. According to the anonymous source, the Israelis, who are members of the Mossad, Israel’s foremost external intelligence agency, are actively recruiting Iranian exiles in Kurdistan. 

Many of these Iranian assets, who are members of Iran’s Kurdish minority and opposed to the Iranian regime, are allegedly being trained by the Mossad in spy-craft and sabotage. The article in Le Figaro claims that the Iranian assets are being prepared for conducting operations inside the energy-rich country, as part of Israel’s undercover intelligence war against Iran’s nuclear energy program. 

The Baghdad source told the French daily that part of Israel’s sabotage program against sensitive Iranian nuclear facilities, which includes targeted assassinations of Iranian nuclear experts, is directed out of the autonomous region of Iraqi Kurdistan, “where [Mossad] agents have stepped up their penetration”. For this, “the Israelis are using Kurdish oppositionists to the regime in Iran, who are living are refugees in the Kurdish regions of Iraq”, the source told Le Figaro.

 Although the article makes no mention of official or unofficial sanction of the Israeli operations by the Iraqi Kurdish authorities, it implies that the alleged Mossad activities are an open secret in Iraqi Kurdistan. This is not the first time that allegations have surfaced in the international press about Israeli intelligence activities in Kurdistan. In 2006, the BBC flagship investigative television program Newsnight obtained strong evidence of Israeli operatives providing military training to Kurdish militia members. 

The program aired video footage showing Israeli expects drilling members of Kurdish armed groups in shooting techniques and guerrilla tactics. The Israeli government denied having authorized any such training, while Iraqi Kurdish officials refused to comment on the report. But Israeli security experts told the BBC that it would be virtually impossible for Israeli trainers to operate inside Iraqi Kurdistan “without the knowledge of the Kurdish authorities”. 

More recently, in September of 2010, the government of Lebanonarrested three Kurds in Jounieh, a coastal town 15 kilometers north of Beirut, which it accused of working for Israeli intelligence. All three were members of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK), a secessionist armed group fighting for an independent Kurdish homeland in Turkey’s far-eastern Anatolia region.

Πηγή

Spetsnaz

Παρακαλούμε κάντε κλικ στον ακόλουθο σύνδεσμο για να κατεβάσετε το άρθρο Spetsnaz: Μύθος, Σύγχυση, και Πραγματικότητα. Παρελθόν, παρόν και μέλλον των δυνάμεων ειδικών καθηκόντων της ΕΣΣΔ/ Ρωσίας σε μορφή PDF . 

Σύνδεσμος: http://www.apollo-ccrd.gr/files/pdf/spetsnaz.pdf




Πηγή

CIA involved into military operations in Asia

Gennady Yevstafyev, retired Lieutenant-General of Russia's Foreign Intelligence Service:

The CIA is a highly sophisticated agency because they possess fantastic number of technological instruments, starting from satellites, eavesdropping equipment and all kinds of gadgets and now they are concentrating on cyber attacks and especially in their operations on disinformation.

In Afghanistan they have special operation units which started the operation against Taliban movement and even now they operate on the territory of Pakistan.

Every day there are about 1500 American Special Forces belonging to CIA operate on the territory of Pakistan, trying to find the leaders of Taliban and they operate numerous unmanned air vehicles (UAV) which they use for attacking particular targets.

Their collateral damage is tremendous ‑ huge number of peaceful people - while trying to pursue their targets on the territory of Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Πηγή

Goose Green

SYRIA: British Special Forces, CIA and MI6 Supporting Armed Insurgency. NATO Intervention Contemplated !

2012 will mark a critical turning point in history. It will be the year “the sum of all our fears” become reality. It will be the year the sheeple can no longer stay asleep. They will realize that we are all in deep trouble!

-

SYRIA: British Special Forces, CIA and MI6 Supporting Armed Insurgency. NATO Intervention Contemplated 

by Michel Chossudovsky, http://globalresearch.ca/

Several articles in the British media confirm that British Special Forces are training Syrian rebels. The underlying pattern is similar to that of Libya where British SAS were on the ground prior to the launching of NATO’s military intervention. A Responsibility to Protect (R2P) NATO intervention modelled on Libya is contemplated. The Free Syrian Army is a de facto paramilitary creation of NATO. The reports confirm that British military and intelligence operatives are already on the ground inside Syria: 

-

“There has been growing chatter indicating that British Special Forces are in some way assisting forces aligned against the Syrian regime.

-

Reports from late November last year state that British Special forces have met up with members of the Free Syrian Army (FSA), the armed wing of the Syrian National Council. The apparent goal of this initial contact was to establish the rebel forces’ strength and to pave the way for any future training operations.

-

More recent reports have stated that British and French Special Forces have been actively training members of the FSA, from a base in Turkey. Some reports indicate that training is also taking place in locations in Libya and Northern Lebanon. British MI6 operatives and UKSF (SAS/SBS) personnel have reportedly been training the rebels in urban warfare as well as supplying them with arms and equipment. US CIA operatives and special forces are believed to be providing communications assistance to the rebels.”

-

http://www.eliteukforces.info/uk-military-news/0501012-british-special-forces-syria.php (emphasis added)

-

These reports confirm unequivocally foreign interference in the affairs of a sovereign state. This is not a popular uprising. The insurrection as well as the killings of civilians were sponsored by the Western powers from the outset. 

-

US, UK and Turkish operatives are supplying the rebels with weapons in violation of international law. Reports confirm that the rebels are trained gunmen as well members of Al Qaeda affiliated organizations: 

-

“Britain is gearing up for fighting in Syria that could be bigger and bloodier than the battle against Gaddafi. The Ministry of Defence is drawing up secret plans for a NATO-sponsored no-fly zone but first it needs backing from the United Nations Security Council. 

-

As the unrest and killings escalate in the troubled Arab state, agents from MI6 and the CIA are already in Syria assessing the situation, a security official has revealed.

-

Special forces are also talking to Syrian dissident soldiers.

They want to know about weapons and communications kit rebel forces will need if the Government decides to help. “MI6 and the CIA are in Syria to infiltrate and get at the truth,” said the well-placed source.

-

“We have SAS and SBS not far away who want to know what is happening and are finding out what kit dissident soldiers need.” Syria will be bloodiest yet, Daily Star (emphasis added)

Πηγή