Just what we need right now<\/p>\n
Army Strongly Considering 10-20% Cut To Special Ops Forces.<\/a><\/p>\n The Army has a serious\u00a0recruiting problem<\/a>. One of their solutions? Hey! Let\u2019s cut our Special Ops Forces by 10-20%! Yes folks, that\u2019s really what they are\u00a0considering<\/a>.<\/span><\/p>\n The Army is cutting about 3,000 troops, or about 10% from its special-operations ranks, which could include so-called trigger-pullers from the Green Beret commando units who have conducted some of the nation\u2019s most dangerous and sensitive missions around the world, from the jungles of Vietnam to the back alleys of Baghdad.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n The reductions would enable the Army to rebalance toward the large conventional ground forces needed in a potential fight in Asia. The trims in the ranks of special forces would also help the Army cope with a recruiting shortfall in a strong labor market. But opponents of the cuts, notably senior special-operations officers, have argued they could hinder training of U.S. partners, including the Ukrainian and Taiwanese militaries, and limit the elite units\u2019 ability to respond to crises.<\/strong><\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n This is an asinine idea that will blow a significant crater in our current war fighting capabilities. Yet doing this, according to the brilliantly idiotic minds at the Pentagon will \u201crebalance\u201d our forces and magically ramp up recruitment?\u00a0Are You Kidding Me?\u00a0<\/a><\/p>\n <\/p>\n Kenneth Tovo, a retired Army lieutenant general who led U.S. Army Special Operations Command, was asked by Sen. Ted Budd, R-N.C., at a Senate hearing on Wednesday about \u201cthe administration\u2019s plans to cut 10 percent of U.S. Army Special Operations Forces\u201d and their likely effect on the service\u2019s ability \u201cto provide combatant commanders with options for great power competition, counterterrorism and crisis response.\u201d<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n \u201cI think it\u2019ll be crippling,\u201d said Tovo, who was speaking before the Armed Services subcommittee on emerging threats and capabilities. \u201c10 percent of the force is going to be a significant\u2014\u2026the higher end is even 20 percent.\u201d<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n ~Snip<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n \u201cI\u2019m told that the cuts will be most acute on SOF enablers like logistics and intelligence, but that some changes to force structure are also likely for Special Forces, civil affairs, psychological operations,\u201d the aide said.<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n Why yes, it would be, WILL BE crippling to our military capabilities and readiness. WHY would cutting logistics and intelligence be on the table? If we don\u2019t have intel or logistics, then we can\u2019t put good people in place who can quickly move to kill a major\u00a0ISIS terrorist<\/a>\u00a0and capture his wife!<\/strong><\/p>\n Our history is replete with times when intelligence failed or wasn\u2019t listened to. Pearl Harbor and 9\/11 are two such examples. If we don\u2019t have a strong logistics team in place, our ability to respond quickly to a threat is hindered.<\/p>\n Again, why in the ever loving hell would our military consider dumping 10-20% of our Special Ops Forces in the midst of a massive recruiting crisis??<\/p>\n There are definitely other ways to recruit that do not include getting rid of a significant percentage of some of our best warfighters out there. One example is from this guy, who wrote a book about how to get Gen Z to step up.<\/p>\n