Liberty wrote:Maybe its me , but I've gotten a little confused about the role of the Special Forces. The Navy seal seem to be seeing a lot of action in the Mountains of Afghanistan and and not so much about the Special Forces these days. Seems to me that there is some political castration going on. Maybe it's just some old Army loyalty and Navy rivalry in me ... But it just seems like the SEALs are getting jobs the Special Forces used to do. Things just aren't the same as they used to be 40 years ago.
I recommend doing historical reading on the SEALs and Special Forces. Historically they have very different mission profiles and their training lifecycles reflect that.
STS (DevGru) may have some of the finest pipe hitters in the world, but they are not infantrymen. They are highly trained in direct action, recon, etc but they were never in the infantry. That is why you will often hear about missions where Army Rangers were attached to STS or Teams in general. They gave them land combat capabilities that are intrinsic to infantry operations - and our Rangers are the best infantry in the world.
This also goes back to the concept that Army Special Forces has always been designed to project force and create capabilities - not necessarily fire shots. Yes, they are VERY good at that. They are masters of unconventional warfare. Their primary goal, however, has been to integrate with host nation elements - either the rebels or the Government - and training them to succeed. They bring soft skills with them as a result of their selection and training criteria that the SEALs do not necessarily look for. It's not a weakness or strength - it's a matter of mission profile.
They are different units. The GWOT has seen their MPs blur and mix and mesh. You see SF teams doing lots of direct action work while there are SEALs training people. These are highly talented warriors that bring a lot to the table. At the end of the day, though, their charters are not the same. They do not exist for the same reasons, strictly speaking.