Global Special Operations Featured Web Site: Thank You Soldier |
|
|
Global War on Terrorism
General Information
Archives Page Four
By Jim Garamone American Forces Press Service WASHINGTON, May 17, 2004 The war on terrorism will require the next generation to be leaders, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said at Virginia Military Institute commencement May 15. Air Force Gen. Richard B. Myers told the "Keydets" that there has never been a more important time to serve America than today. "We're fighting a war against extremists who use terrorism as their weapon to create fear," Myers said. "They attack the most visible targets they can; killing innocent men, women and children. "Our democracy and prosperity depend on the confidence we have in our leaders, in the rule of law and the stability of our economy," he continued. "Terrorists want to destroy that confidence and with it, our way of life." The chairman stressed that the newly minted lieutenants and ensigns are going to have to lead. He said the new officers are going to have to make a conscious decision. "If you don't make the choice to lead, you have no say in where you end up as an individual, as a professional, as a community or as a nation," he said. The chairman said it is not a given that freedom and democracy will survive in this highly charged world. "That's a pretty scary thought, but Americans have always stepped up to meet every challenge to our way of life," he said. "And as I see our young men and women in uniform and all of you gathered here today, I'm very optimistic." The chairman talked to the new service members about the prisoner abuse scandal at Abu Ghraib prison. He had just returned a day earlier from a visit to Iraq and a tour of the prison. He said it is "heartbreaking" that American service members would treat anyone without dignity. He said it is disappointing to those in the service "because we expect the highest standards of one another, and the nation expects it, and so does the world." He said he is sure the truth will come out and the accused will receive fair courts martial. Those found guilty will receive justice. Myers received a standing ovation from the cadets when he was introduced. VMI is a state-funded four-year, military college, located in Lexington, Va., in the heart of the Shenandoah River Valley. While many graduates go into the armed forces, others go directly into civilian professions. This year, some 41 percent of the 236 graduates were commissioned. Nine students came from foreign countries. The institution's most famous graduate is World War II General of the Army George C. Marshall, who went on to serve as secretary of state under President Harry S. Truman and engineered the Marshall Plan program of military and economic aid to foreign nations after the war. Marshall was also secretary of defense for one year during the Korean War. He also received the Nobel Peace Prize in 1953.
By Gerry J. Gilmore American Forces Press Service WASHINGTON, May 13, 2004 While American forces are fighting overseas, it's likely that terrorists are planning another attack on the United States, a senior military officer noted here today. "We are at war in this country," Army Lt. Gen. Edward G. Anderson III noted to attendees at the annual Technet information technology conference. Anderson is the deputy commander of U.S. Northern Command and vice commander of the U.S. element of North American Aerospace Defense Command. NORTHCOM, with headquarters at Peterson Air Force Base, Colo., is tasked to deter, prevent and defeat threats to the United States and its territories, while NORAD watches for threats from the skies. The United States, the general said, "is part of the battleground" in the global war against terrorism. He emphasized that terrorists "are absolutely dedicated to doing harm to the people of this nation, in this nation, I guarantee it." The terrorists are well financed, adaptive -- and patient, Anderson pointed out. "They will wait as long as they have to," the general said, "until they can find a vulnerability to do what it is that they want to do." Consequently, Anderson said, it's paramount not to underestimate terrorists' capabilities. "We must, must make sure that we do not let our guard down" and become complacent, he emphasized. The consequences of underestimating terrorists "would be tragic," Anderson said. The terrorists' intent, the general said, "is for an event bigger than we saw on 9/11 and using - if possible -- weapons of mass destruction."
By Donna Miles American Forces Press Service WASHINGTON, April 29, 2004 Winning the hearts and minds of the Iraqi and Afghan people is much more than just a slogan for the 96th Civil Affairs Battalion (Airborne). The Army's only active-duty civil affairs battalion, based at Fort Bragg, N.C., focuses 24/7 on bridging the gap between U.S. and coalition forces and the local populations. It's a mission that continues in peacetime as well as war. Maj. Don Sculli, executive officer for the battalion's C Company, said his most valuable tool in carrying out the job typically isn't his weapon or combat gear. "The most important thing you bring in may be your Rolodex," he said. Civil affairs teams support commanders on the battlefield, forming relationships with "movers and shakers" to gain cooperation and, ideally, support for the operation. Using their language skills and expertise about the local culture, they work with local governments and civilian aid organizations to rebuild infrastructure and restore stability. In the war on terror, the 96th Civil Affairs Battalion has made important inroads into the local populations. Unit members helped get power plants and other infrastructure in Iraq up and running. They got local power brokers to help them move excess military medical supplies to Iraqi medical facilities that had none. In Afghanistan, they trained and armed a 295-man militia, set up a police force, provided much-needed medical care and personally built six schools with the first flushing toilets ever seen in the region. The list goes on and on. On the surface, some might not see the military implications of these efforts, but unit members say they're considerable. Shortly after the ground war kicked off in Iraq, Sgt. 1st Class Keith Ducote, team sergeant for the battalion's B Company, said troops were getting "sniped at" in a village outside Baghdad. Ducote's team started handing out toys to children in the village to begin forming bonds with the people. But what really made the difference, he said, was when the team sponsored a dental hygiene class to teach about 300 local children how to brush and floss their teeth, then handed out dental kits. After that, Ducote said, people within the village started approaching him to report where insurgents had hidden weapons. "Just about every cache of weapons we've found has been the result of someone coming forward," agreed Victor Anderson, a medic with the battalion's E Company. Military leaders may have given the civil affairs mission relatively short shrift in the past, but no more. They've come to recognize the important role of civil and are incorporating civil-military operations into their battle plans from the earliest planning stages. Trained civil affairs staffs now are an integral part of every command staff. "The words 'civil-military operations' are now in the Army lexicon," said Anderson. "It's not an afterthought anymore." But just as the military is gaining a better appreciation of the value civil affairs, the Army is finding itself stretched painfully thin in manpower to cover the demand. The 96th Civil Affairs Battalion is in a constant state of deployment. "We basically have three states," Sculli explained. "You're either there, you just got home, or you're getting ready to go." For the first 20 months after Sept. 11, 2001, Sculli said he both started and ended a full month at home just three times. Anderson, E Company's only Special Forces medic, has been deployed 14 months out of the last two years, with two tours in Afghanistan and one in Iraq. Just returned from his latest deployment, he is already preparing to return to Southwest Asia. "We deploy a lot," he said. Yet the battalion represents just 4 percent of the Army's civil affairs capability. The vast majority of civil affairs expertise lies in the reserve components. These units, too, are so overtaxed by multiple deployments that Thomas F. Hall, the assistant secretary of defense for reserve affairs, is pushing to shift more civil affairs jobs into the active force. Concerned that too few soldiers are being called on repeatedly to fulfill too many demands, the DoD leadership is rethinking the civil affairs manning chart. Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld supports plans to "rebalance" the force to relieve the burden on civil affairs and other "high-demand, low density" or "stressed" specialties concentrated in the reserve components. Plans are under way to double the size of the battalion, from just over 200 soldiers to about 400 by fiscal 2005 to increase its operational capability. And while defense leaders tweak the manning charts to help create more civil affairs experts capable of deploying quickly to carry out the civil affairs mission, Sculli said the military is recognizing that civil affairs isn't exclusively the job of civil affairs specialists. "People are starting to understand that civil-military operations is everybody's job in stabilization operations, not just the civil affairs guy's," he said. "Everybody has to do it and be trained to do it. And little by little, I think we're getting there."
By Donna Miles American Forces Press Service WASHINGTON, April 23, 2004 -- The largest-ever class of future Air Force combat controllers is training at Pope Air Force Base, N.C., to provide critical skills required in the war on terror. The current class of 32 students will help bolster the Air Force's cadre of 360 combat controllers -- special operations forces who deploy quickly into restricted, often hostile territory, set up landing strips and guide in helicopters and fixed-wing aircraft. Master Sgt. Tim Tennant, director of operations for the Combat Control School, said the new crop of combat controllers will provide a wide range of other support during combat operations, from controlling air traffic to setting up drop zones to calling in air strikes. "We're the air-to-ground link," said Tech. Sgt. Robert Boulanger, noncommissioned officer in charge of the course. "We talk Air Force language to (Navy) SEALS and to the Army on the ground. It allows us to get more airpower into a theater of operations in a smaller amount of time." Like most of his fellow combat controllers, Boulanger has deployed frequently in support of the war on terror, three times to Afghanistan and once to Iraq. True to the combat controllers' motto, "First there," he said he was the 13th person to jump from the first U.S. aircraft into Afghanistan in October 2001, just one month after terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon. "I was still angry," he said. Anger, top physical fitness and finely honed skills in air traffic control, close-air support and command and control made Boulanger a formidable force on the battlefield. During his first four-month mission to Afghanistan, he established an airhead to support combat operations and identified where the enemy was to direct U.S. military ordnance onto key Taliban and al Qaeda targets. "It was a combination of precision-guided munitions and a guy on the ground telling them where they need to go," Boulanger said. During his deployment to Iraq for the first three months of Operation Iraqi Freedom, Boulanger was attached to a Navy SEAL team to provide a liaison between the air and ground forces. He also was one of three combat controllers on the special operations team that rescued prisoner of war Pfc. Jessica Lynch. "It was very rewarding to see that frail little woman," he said. Well-versed on the real-life demands on combat controllers, Boulanger said he strives to instill in his students the physical and mental skills needed to do the job. Before starting the 13-week Combat Control School, students complete the 15- week Air Force Air Traffic Control School at Keesler Air Force Base, Miss., the three-week Army Airborne School at Fort Benning, Ga., and the three-week Air Force Basic Survival School at Fairchild Air Force Base, Wash. At Pope Air Force Base, the students' training focuses on field training, demolitions, battlefield communications, land navigation and small-unit tactics. Their training culminates with a field exercise that requires them to set up drop zones and landing zones, establish a runway and direct in an aircraft, all within strict timeframes. Physical fitness gets stressed throughout the training and remains paramount after students don their distinctive scarlet berets after graduation. "Having a high level of physical fitness allows you to think clear under stress," Boulanger said. He said the school's intensive fitness standards ensure that combat controllers can carry communications equipment and other gear in rucksacks that often exceed 100 pounds, frequently moving over long distances with other special operations forces. "You have to be in great shape to keep up and not be a liability," Boulanger said. Attention to detail is also vital for combat controllers, as well as ability to work as a team. "In our role as combat controllers, sometimes you're leading and sometimes you're following," Boulanger said. "You have to be able to do both." But even more important, Tennant said, is mental toughness. "You have to be stubborn and have a non-quit attitude," he said. "It takes an extraordinary level of dedication." Dedication "isn't something you can teach," Boulanger acknowledged. "But you can teach all the things that lead up to it." Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld praised combat controllers' dedication during a visit in December to the Combat Control School, which he said, "produces some of the finest warriors in the Air Force and the armed services." Rumsfeld noted that "some 85 percent of the air strikes in Operation Enduring Freedom were called in by Air Force combat controllers", a testament, he said, to the quality of the training they receive and the airmen's courage and skills. Today's combat controllers carry out far more diverse missions than envisioned when they were established as Army Pathfinders during World War II. These parachute infantrymen, trained in air traffic control, first earned their stripes in 1943 when they used radios, smoke pots and flares to mark the way for 82nd Airborne Division paratroopers jumping into Salerno, Italy. Since then, Army Pathfinders, which became Air Force combat controllers after the Air Force was established in 1947 -- expanded their missions to include navigation aid and air traffic control. Now they're an integral part of a huge percentage of U.S. military combat, humanitarian assistance and other missions. Combat controllers say they expect this trend to continue in the future. "Special Forces is just screaming for us out there," said Boulanger. "This is a growth industry," agreed Tennant, "with combat controllers involved in more and more emerging missions."
By John D. Banusiewicz American Forces Press Service WASHINGTON, April 16, 2004 The U.S. strategy in the global war on terror boils down to changing the way terrorists live, rather than changing the way U.S. citizens live, the undersecretary of defense for policy said in an April 14 speech in Chicago. Douglas J. Feith spoke at the University of Chicago's student-run political union. He said the aim of the war on terror, as defined by President Bush, is to "defeat terrorism as a threat to our way of life as a free and open society." This, Feith said, meant the nation no longer could rely solely, or even primarily, on a defensive posture. "If we tried to do so," he said, "we would have to clamp down drastically across America, intruding grossly on the privacy rights and other civil liberties of Americans. As terrorist attacks occurred, U.S. officials would continually be under pressure to move toward police-state tactics, to sacrifice our freedom and change our way of life." The alternative, he said, is striking terrorists abroad, where they do much of their recruiting, training, equipping and planning. "Given that our aim is to preserve our society's liberties, we have no alternative to a strategy of offense," Feith said. "In other words, we concluded that in dealing with the terrorists we had either to change the way we live, or change the way they live." The terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, showed that threats previously dismissed as wild speculation or only remotely possible had become the new reality. "Before 9/11, terrorism was commonly viewed as political, an action intended to influence or persuade," Feith explained. "Many discussed terrorism as a form of 'political theater,' a way that terrorist groups used shocking actions to call attention, sympathetic attention, to a cause. "According to that view," he continued, "the terrorists, adhering to Machiavelli's dictum that it's better to be feared than loved, nonetheless still wished to avoid being hated." That view could hardly explain the Sept. 11 attacks, he said. "The terrorists who killed 3,000 ordinary people at the World Trade Center, where 10 times that number worked on a daily basis, would have been pleased to have killed them all, or many times more than that, if they had had the means to do so," Feith said. He offered three possible motives for al Qaeda and other terrorists who target the United States today: suicide attackers hoping to obtain benefits in the next world, a nihilistic desire for death and destruction, and a hope of destroying our nation's unity and sense of purpose, ultimately collapsing political order and making resistance impossible. He said the goal of defeating the United States may seem preposterous, "but it may seem achievable to those who credit the Soviet Union's collapse to their own resistance in Afghanistan, not to mention as a manifestation of divine favor for themselves." At the root of the U.S. strategy in the war on terror, Feith said, is the president's bold and radical departure from previous policy. Feith cited four terrorist acts against the United States to illustrate his point: the 1993 first World Trade Center bombing, the 1996 bombing of Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia, the 1998 destruction of U.S. embassies in East Africa and the 2000 bombing of the USS Cole in Yemen. "The U.S. government's response in those cases was to use the FBI to investigate," Feith said. "Our government was looking for individuals to arrest, extradite and prosecute in criminal courts. President Bush broke with that practice, and with that frame of mind, when he decided that 9/11 meant that we are at war. He decided that the U.S. would respond not with the FBI and U.S. attorneys, but with our armed forces and every instrument of U.S. national power." Feith said he thought the decision to depart from past practice was "momentous," and that it showed proper comprehension of the problem. "It looks obvious in retrospect," he said, "but that's often the case with grand insights. At the time the president decided to respond to 9/11 by going to war, he was departing radically and boldly from many years of a different policy." Defining the enemy, Feith said, became a key question for policy makers. "The enemy is not a state or group of states; it's not a traditional type of enemy we have faced in war," he said. "The enemy is not a discrete, hierarchical organization either. Rather, the enemy is a far-flung network of terrorist organizations and their state and non-state sponsors. "Terrorist organizations rely on state sponsors for safe haven, funds, weapons and other types of support," he continued. "We cannot win the war on terrorism if we do not cut off state support for terrorist organizations." The danger of weapons of mass destruction falling into the hands of terrorists was another essential part of policy makers' thinking in forming the nation's strategy, a consideration that took on "greatly intensified urgency" after the Sept. 11 attacks, Feith said. "The terrorists who destroyed the World Trade Center would gleefully have killed 10, a hundred or a thousand times the number of victims on 9/11 if they could have -- if they had had access, for example, to biological or nuclear weapons," he said. "It's a significant coincidence that the list of key state sponsors of terrorism overlaps so extensively with the list of problem states that are pursuing WMD capabilities." Therefore, he said, the main strategic threat in the war on terrorism is the nexus among terrorist organizations, their state sponsors and weapons of mass destruction. The U.S. strategy for confronting the threat, Feith said, is "to organize and help lead international efforts to deny terrorist groups systematically what they need to operate and survive." The terrorists' needs, he added, are safe havens, leaders, finances, ideological support and access to targets, and weapons, especially weapons of mass destruction. The United States has taken three useful, though not entirely distinct, types of action to implement the strategy, Feith said: disrupting and attacking terrorist networks, protecting the homeland and countering ideological support for terrorism in what he called a battle of ideas. "The war on terrorism will never end if all we do is disrupt and attack terrorist networks, because while we are doing so, new terrorists are being recruited and indoctrinated -- probably faster than anyone on our side can capture or kill them," Feith said. "If we're going to avoid placing ourselves on an ever-accelerating treadmill, our strategy must aim to stem the flow of people into the ranks of the terrorists. Doing this requires a focus on the widespread ideological support for terrorism." As precedents, Feith noted that fascism and Nazism were discredited and the collapse of the Soviet empire caused communist totalitarianism to lose most of its following in the 20th century. A 50-year campaign led by the British in the 19th century, he added, changed the way the world thought about the slave trade. "As President Bush has said, the world should view terrorism as it views the slave trade, piracy on the high seas and genocide -- activities that no respectable person condones, much less supports," Feith said. To win the battle of ideas, he said, the United States is working to de- legitimize terrorism and support the success of models of moderation, especially in the Muslim world. "The ideological struggle within the war on terrorism is in large part a civil war between extremists and their opponents in the Muslim world," Feith explained. "In the war on terrorism, the U.S. is not fighting the world of Islam. On the contrary, we are allied with the many millions of Muslims who do not want to be dominated by the kind of extremists who follow Osama bin Laden. "Democratic reform and the success of democratic institutions in the Arab world and the Muslim world generally are essential parts of the strategy to defeat terrorism as a threat to our own freedom," he said. Feith noted that in the two and a half years since the global war on terror began, the United States and its coalition partners have: Ousted the Taliban regime and supported the new government in Afghanistan; Provided training in counterterrorist operations to local forces in the Philippines, Yemen, Colombia, the former Soviet republic of Georgia and elsewhere; Fostered international cooperation on law enforcement, intelligence, interdiction of terrorist finances and maritime interdiction operations in the Mediterranean Sea, off the Horn of Africa, in the Pacific and elsewhere; Killed or captured terrorist leaders and key operatives, including two-thirds of al Qaeda's known leadership; Liberated Iraq from the Saddam Hussein regime and worked to launch Iraqis on the path to freedom; and Induced the Libyan government to declare, dismantle and abandon its programs for and stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction. Operation Iraqi Freedom, Feith said, has eliminated a safe haven for terrorists. Noting that Saddam encouraged Palestinian suicide bombings by offering to pay $25,000 to the bombers' families, he said the Iraq operation also has eliminated a source of financial and other types of support for terrorists. Feith said Iraq no longer is a possible source of WMD technology, materials and training for terrorists. "By the way, this point is not negated by our not yet having found Iraqi stockpiles of WMD or the possibility that Saddam secretly destroyed all the stockpiles before the war," he added. Feith said much remains to be done in Iraq, and he acknowledged that the United States has had "a rough week or two" there. "Our losses weigh heavily," he said, "but there is no cost-free option for America in Iraq." He cited the "tenacity, creativity, courage and willingness to sacrifice" that U.S. and coalition forces have shown in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere in the war on terrorism. "Among our forces," he said, "there's a phrase that has become common as a byword: 'Failure is not an option.' Those forces give us protection, insight and inspiration. Failure is not an option."
By Rudi Williams American Forces Press Service WASHINGTON, March 31, 2004 -- Despite the many pressing demands on the nation and its resources, the United States must pay more attention to traditional and emerging threats in the Latin American and Caribbean region of the world, Army Gen. James T. Hill said in March 24 testimony before the House Armed Services Committee. For example, he said, Colombia's considerable progress in the battle against narcoterrorism is offset by negative developments elsewhere in the region, particularly in Haiti, Bolivia and Venezuela. "These developments represent an increasing threat to U.S. interests," said Hill, commander of the U.S. Southern Command, with headquarters in Miami. SOUTHCOM includes the landmass of Latin America south of Mexico; the waters adjacent to Central and South America; the Caribbean Sea, its 12 island nations and European territories; the Gulf of Mexico; and a portion of the Atlantic Ocean. It encompasses 32 countries, 19 in Central and South America and 12 in the Caribbean, and covers about 15.6 million square miles. Hill said the United States faces two primary types of threats in the region: traditional and emerging threats. On the traditional front are threats from narcoterrorists and their ilk, a growing threat to law and order in partner nations from urban gangs and other illegal armed groups, Hill said, generally tied to the narcotics trade. Islamic radical groups pose a lesser, but sophisticated threat, he added. "These traditional threats are now complemented by an emerging threat best described as radical populism, in which the democratic process is undermined to decrease rather than protect individual rights," the general said. "Some leaders in the region are tapping into deep-seated frustrations of the failure of democratic reforms to deliver expected goods and services." By tapping into these frustrations, coupled with frustrations caused by social and economic inequality, the leaders are able to reinforce their radical positions by inflaming anti-U.S. sentiment, the general said. Others are seeking to undermine U.S. interests in the region by supporting these movements, he noted. The narcoterrorists in Colombia remain the largest and most well-known threat in the region, he said. The three narcoterrorist groups, he noted, never have paid a price for their illicit activities. They are the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, or FARC; the National Liberation Army, or ELN; and the United Self-Defense Forces, or AUC. "Most observers now understand that these groups are narcoterrorists rather than romantic guerrillas crusading for the downtrodden," Hill said. "While a few might retain some of their founding ideology, by and large these groups consist of terrorists and criminals who operate outside the rule of law in pursuit of illicit profits rather than political revolution." The largest threat comes from FARC, the largest group with 13,000 to 15,000 members, which still holds three Americans hostage. Hill said ELN, a smaller organization with an estimated 3,500 to 4,000 members, is declining in importance. "There has been some progress in encouraging the ELN to demobilize via peace talks, although those who refuse may merge with the FARC," the general said. AUC still is a threat and still is heavily involved in narcotics trafficking, but the organization is in peace negotiations with the Colombian government, Hill noted. "Some 10,000 to 12,000 members of the illegal self-defense groups are estimated to be involved in the peace process, though another 2,000 to 4,000 remain outside the process," Hill said. An increasingly dangerous emerging threat is that the narcoterrorist influence is bleeding over into the growingly sophisticated criminal gangs, Hall said. While not all gangs are fueled by illicit narcotics, most bolster their criminality by drawing substantial support from the drug trade, he noted. Hill said the World Health Organization describes Latin America as the world's most violent region, based on the numbers of homicides per capita, surpassing even war-torn Africa. "Violent crime causes capital flight from within the country and stifles investment from outside the country," he pointed out. "It literally takes money out of the pockets of those who need it most and hurts those who have the least. "Beyond narcoterrorist and gang violence, branches of Middle Eastern terrorist organizations conduct support activities in the Southern Command area of responsibility," Hill told the lawmakers. "Islamic radical group supporters extending from the Caribbean basin to the tri-border area of Paraguay, Argentina and Brazil conduct fund-raising activities. The general said supporters generate illicit funds through money laundering, drug trafficking, arms deals, human smuggling, piracy and document forgery. "They funnel tens of millions of dollars every year back to their parent organizations in the Middle East, thus extending the global support structure of international terrorism to this hemisphere," he said. "Islamic radical groups, narcoterrorists in Colombia and urban gangs across Latin America all practice many of the same illicit business methods." Radical populism is another emerging concern in the region, Hill noted. "Populism in and of itself is not a threat," he emphasized. "The threat emerges when it becomes radicalized by a leader who increasingly uses his position and support from a segment of the population to infringe gradually upon the rights of all citizens. This trend degrades democracy and promises to concentrate power in the hands of a few rather than guaranteeing the individual rights of the many. "Anti-American sentiment also troubles our partner nations as well, as elected leaders must take into account the sometime very vocal views of their constituents," Hill said. The general noted that Colombia is where the most is at stake, because the United States made an enormous investment in the Colombia government more than three years ago. "That investment is beginning to pay dividends," he continued. "Under President (Alvaro) Uribe, the government of Colombia, with robust popular support, is making impressive progress in defeating the narcoterrorists and rejoining the ranks of peaceful, safe and secure states."
By Sgt. 1st Class Doug Sample, USA American Forces Press Service WASHINGTON, March 29, 2004 -- With the help of special operations forces, the United States has made significant progress in the war on terrorism a Defense Department official told the Senate Armed Services Committee March 25. But sustaining that progress is not without its costs, he added. Thomas W. O'Connell, assistant secretary of defense for special operations and low-intensity conflict, said in his prepared statement that for the U. S. Special Operations Command to continue to gain momentum in the war on terrorism, it must modernize and transform. And he said SOCOM will use $6.546 billion -- its share of the President Bush's fiscal 2005 budget request to do so. "I believe that the United States is at a critical moment in this war," O'Connell told the committee. "We have realized initial successes and achieved a degree of momentum that together support a general assessment that we are making progress in winning this war. But sustaining that momentum and continuing the successes against terrorists and their supporters now and into the future is just as critical." O'Connell said the president's budget submission for SOCOM will continue the modernization and transformation efforts started by the command in fiscal 2004. Those efforts, he said, included: -- Transforming special operations forces' capabilities to better locate and track individual terrorists across the globe and conduct small, surgical operations with minimal risk to the employed force; -- Maintaining sustained operations in areas where terrorist networks are operating; -- Continuing to invest in critical "low-density/high-demand" aviation assets that provide special operations forces with the mobility necessary to deploy and to execute their missions quickly, and in key command, control and communications to more effectively support the war on terrorism; and -- Supporting personnel SOCOM has added to better support worldwide deployments and 24-hour-a-day operations. "This funding is essential to sustaining the necessary operations in the war on terrorism and to ensuring we can meet essential transformation requirements," he said. In explaining SOCOM's need for modernization and transformation, O'Connell said the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, changed how DoD defines "defense" and how, as a consequence, the war on terrorism fundamentally is a different type of war from those the United States has fought before. "Prior to then, we perceived and responded to the threat of global terrorism in terms of transnational criminal activity, albeit politically or religiously motivated," he explained. "Today's international terrorist is far different than those of the past, as terrorists now have global reach, infrastructure and significant resources." He added that while special operations forces always were a part of the equation in addressing terrorism, the "posture and role" of those forces today in combating and defeating global terrorism has changed. "Previously, we were postured to defend against a state projecting force across great distances, and we built extensive capabilities to provide us early warning and tools to deter aggression," he noted. "But the potential destructiveness of an attack of the type we suffered on 9/11 means that we are no longer afforded an opportunity to determine an 'appropriate response,' nor make a clear determination of when decisive action is too little or too late." O'Connell pointed out that special operations forces originally were conceived to be used for "supporting or leveraging" larger conventional forces in battle, or for undertaking discrete and limited strategic missions. The new reality of war, he said, has given them a more "prominent, front-line, essential role." That essential role forced SOCOM to set several new priorities aimed at transforming its capabilities in order to fight terrorist cells scattered across the globe, O'Connell said. Besides low-density/high-demand aviation assets, the priorities include sizing, training and equipping the command to engage in "any threat environment against any adversary," he said. Special operations forces should be culturally, linguistically, politically and regionally focused, and more rapidly deployable, he added. They also must be capable of conducting exceptionally precise strikes against specific targets and able to achieve operational and tactical superiority, he said. O'Connell told the committee the end priority is to develop operationally and strategically agile joint forces that can develop and execute unconventional, audacious and high pay-off courses of action. "Transformation of SOF is a journey, not a destination, and there is no mark on the wall that will indicate we are finished transforming," he said. "Transformation is a continuing process that not only anticipates the future, but also seeks to create that future." O'Connell testified that he had recently visited both special operations and conventional forces in Iraq. He told the committee that "these forces make us proud, and should cause potential adversaries to pause before seeking to harm the United States." Special operations forces have gained much from their experience, he observed. "The commitment of SOF to pursuing terrorists to all corners of the globe is embedded in their mindset," he said. "The experience gained in defeating the Taliban and disrupting al Qaeda in Afghanistan, destroying the brutal regime in Iraq and aiding friends and partners in other corners of the globe, such as Colombia and the Philippines, has matured our warfighters to a keen edge. Our challenge is to maintain that edge."
By John D. Banusiewicz American Forces Press Service WASHINGTON, March 17, 2004 Though the United States always will seek cooperation from allies in the global war on terror, there's a difference between leading a coalition of many nations and submitting to the objections of a few, Vice President Dick Cheney said in California today. "The United States will never seek a permission slip to defend the security of our country," Cheney told an audience at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library and Museum in Simi Valley. He was there to mark delivery of a former Marine One presidential helicopter for display. American resolve has not escaped notice in other countries, Cheney said. "Three months ago, after initiating talks with America and Britain, and five days after the capture of Saddam Hussein, the leader of Libya voluntarily committed to disclose and dismantle all of his weapons of mass destruction programs," Cheney said. "As we meet today, the dismantling of those programs is under way." The vice president said he doesn't think Libyan leader Col. Muammar Qadhafi just happened to decide to abandon his WMD programs. "He was responding to the new realities of the world," Cheney said. "Leaders elsewhere are learning that weapons of mass destruction do not bring influence, or prestige, or security. They only invite isolation and carry other costs." Calling it a "great and urgent responsibility" to protect the nation from terrorist attack and to keep weapons of mass destruction out of terrorists' hands, Cheney said the stakes are high. "If terrorists ever do acquire weapons of mass destruction -- on their own or with help from a terror regime -- they will use those weapons without the slightest constraint of reason or morality," he said. "Instead of losing thousands of lives, we might lose tens or even hundreds of thousands of lives in a single day of horror." The past practice of prosecuting terrorist events one by one as a series of crimes is not the right approach, he said, and a good defense is not enough. "The terrorist enemy holds no territory, defends no population, is unconstrained by rules of warfare, and respects no law of morality," the vice president said. "Such an enemy cannot be deterred, contained, appeased, or negotiated with. It can only be destroyed." Cheney said work remains to be done in Iraq, and he pledged that the United States will see it through. "Our forces are conducting swift precision raids against the terrorists and regime holdouts who still remain. The thugs and assassins in Iraq are desperately trying to shake our will," he said. "Just this morning, they conducted a murderous attack on a hotel in Baghdad. Their goal is to prevent the rise of democracy. But they will fail." He called Iraq's interim constitution an essential step in building a democracy in the heart of the Middle East and said it's part of a "forward strategy of freedom" the United States is pursuing throughout the region. "By helping nations to build the institutions of freedom and turning the energies of men and women away from violence," he said, "we not only make that region more peaceful, we add to the security of our own region." The vice president said the terrorists responsible for the March 11 deadly train bombing in Spain intended to undermine the transition to democracy in Iraq, and that they would fail in that aim. "Our determination is unshakable," he said. "We will stand with the people of Iraq as they build a government based on democracy, tolerance and freedom."
By Jim Garamone American Forces Press Service WASHINGTON, March 17, 2004 History has shown that appeasement doesn't work, Air Force Gen. Richard B. Myers said here today. The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff spoke at the Foreign Press Center and gave his assessment of the coalition in Iraq a year after the beginning of Operation Iraqi Freedom. "The mission was to liberate the Iraqi people from one of the world's most brutal and dangerous dictators, and to begin laying the foundation for a free and prosperous Iraq," Myers said. "We have done that." The chairman said that if history has shown anything, it is that appeasement just hasn't worked. "Weakness is provocative. It doesn't resolve the situation," he said. He said European countries have dealt with terrorism for years, and they have found the way to do so is directly and forthrightly. The lesson of the past year is that all countries are connected, he said. "We can't just park in our corner of the world and hope this passes us by, and maybe get to us last," the chairman said. "That is not an attitude that has worked through history, and I don't think it will work now." Myers said the coalition is making "very good progress in Iraq despite the challenges that remain." He noted that recent polls show the Iraqi people say life is better today than under Saddam, and said it's important that the rest of the world remain committed to Iraq. "Each country plays a key role in this war on terror," he said. "We must continue to work together to see that freedom and democracy are achieved everywhere there exists the desire." U.S. actions in Iraq are not "inviting" al Qaeda attacks, Myers said. "Al Qaeda did not need an invitation for Sept. 11," he said. "This is an organization that has professed to do away with our way of life." The terrorist group also has said it will kill innocents to achieve its aims. "This is unacceptable," Myers said. "I do not think our actions in Afghanistan and Iraq have emboldened them or enabled them in any way. It's probably done just the opposite." Coalition actions have killed or captured many al Qaeda operatives, he said. The coalition deposed the Taliban and stopped al Qaeda from using Afghanistan as a planning and logistics base. Myers said al Qaeda had set up a lab in Kandahar to examine using anthrax as a weapon. "If they could have killed not 3,000 on Sept. 11, (if) they could have killed 30,000 or 300,000, they would have done so," he said. He noted that just in the last few days there have been arrests in Yemen and Saudi Arabia. Operations in Pakistan killed 24 terrorists and resulted in the detention of 18. "The region is now more secure due to the elimination of a dangerous regime with a history of aggression and links with terrorist organizations," he said. "The achievement of this historic effort is thanks to the brave and selfless sacrifice of our coalition forces." As democracy in Iraq takes hold, the message that resonates is that freedom, peace and security can be the future of every nation, Myers said. The coalition has more than 150,000 troops on the ground in Iraq, and more than 20,000 coalition forces are in Afghanistan. But it is wrong to think of the war on terror as only a military operation, Myers said. Diplomacy, law enforcement and commercial activities, all must work together to defeat terrorism, he added, and every government has to bring teamwork to the fight. "Every element of every government has to pull together to eradicate this threat," Myers said. In Iraq, progress is being made politically and economically, but coalition forces will remain in the country after return to sovereignty June 30, Myers said. Coalition forces still will go on patrols, mentor the Iraqi forces and provide quick-reaction forces following the return of sovereignty. But the Iraqis, he added, will pick up more and more of the security mission. Myers said that there are roughly 209,000 members of the Iraqi police, the Civil Defense Corps, the Facilities Protection Service, the Border Patrol and the new Iraqi army. As those groups are able, they will assume the security missions, he said. Looking back on the past year, Myers said he is most proud of the coalition's flexibility that allowed forces to react to the changing situation inside Iraq. "The character of the threat changed," he said. "In May, there was not much threat from the former regime elements. But as we got into June, July (and) August, that threat emerged." Now the biggest threat is coming from foreign jihadists, he said, and the coalition is able to change course, develop intelligence sources and operate against those threats. Myers stressed that the war on terror will take time. He said addressing immediate threats is all well and good, but governments have to set the conditions where men and women don't want to join an extremist cause. And all countries of the world must participate. "To think that you can sit at home and erect defenses to protect you, or to think that you are somehow immune to this, I reject that," Myers said.
By Jim Garamone American Forces Press Service WASHINGTON, March 17, 2004 The United States cannot defend against every terrorist threat, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld told a Philadelphia radio audience March 16. "The only way to deal with it is to go after the terrorist in the terrorists' havens where they exist," Rumsfeld said. It is better to deal with terrorists in Afghanistan and Iraq than in the United States, he said. Rumsfeld spoke as part of Radio Day at the Pentagon. The event brought together civilian and military leaders with radio stations around the country. Rumsfeld said the United States is making great progress in the war on terror. U.S. service members, particularly those in Afghanistan and Iraq, are courageous and they are proud of what they are doing, he said. Those service members have liberated more than 50 million people in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the circumstances in these countries are getting better every day, he added. Defense officials have said that if Iraq and Afghanistan can transition to democracies that respect the rights of all citizens and the rule of law, they will serve as an example to other nations of the region. Rumsfeld told the radio audience that in the run-up to war, all members of the coalition were certain Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. "The president would ask: How will the military handle it when Saddam Hussein uses chemical weapons on our troops?" he said. The coalition forces that moved into Iraq last year lived in their chemical protection suits. They also found thousands of Iraqi chemical protection suits. Saddam used chemical weapons in the past. There was unanimity that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, Rumsfeld said. "I think we'll eventually know the ground truth on this, and there's no question but that he had those capabilities and used them on his neighbors and on his own people," he said. "So the question is what happened to them?" Rumsfeld said the Iraq Survey Group has 1,200 people sorting out the truth about Saddam's weapons programs. He asked why Saddam would defy 17 United Nations Security Council resolutions if he had no chemical weapons. "It was Saddam Hussein who chose war," the secretary said. "He could have done what Libya is doing right now and opened up his country and said, 'Come in, see that we're willing to turn over, (and) what we have,' but he didn't. He defied the United Nations, and he made a poor choice." By Jim Garamone American Forces Press Service WASHINGTON, March 16, 2004 The world must stand shoulder to shoulder against terrorists, President Bush and Dutch Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende said here today. At a press availability in the Oval Office, Bush said terrorist attacks are meant to shake the coalition's will. "They'll never shake the will of the United States," the president said. "We understand the stakes. And we will work with our friends to bring justice to the terrorists." Following the terrorist bombings in Madrid, Spanish voters elected Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero as prime minister. Zapatero, a critic of Spanish involvement in the coalition in Iraq, said he would withdraw Spanish peacekeepers from Iraq unless the United Nations takes control of the operation. Balkenende said it "is important that the world society, the international community stands shoulder to shoulder and shows its solidarity to fight against these terrible attacks." The Netherlands has troops in Iraq serving in the Multinational Division South East. Bush reiterated that it is crucial that the Free World remain strong, resolute and determined against the terrorist threat. Bush said that terrorists kill to make the world "cower." Bush asked Dutch citizens to think about the Iraqi citizens who don't want coalition forces to withdraw because they want to be free. "I would remind the Dutch citizens that al Qaeda has an interest in Iraq for a reason," Bush said. "And that interest is they realize (Iraq) is a front in the war on terror, and they fear the spread of freedom and democracy in places like the greater Middle East. "They can't stand the thought of free societies springing up in the Middle East, because they understand a free society is against their very wishes. And so it's essential that we remain side by side with the Iraqi people as they begin the process of self-government." Bush said the coalition is making good progress in the war on terror in Iraq and Afghanistan. He said the Iraqi adoption of the Transitional Administrative Law and the Afghan constitution will help change the region. "And it's essential that we help Iraq and Afghanistan develop into free societies, which in itself will start changing the regions in which they exist," he said.
The Department of Defense announced today it transferred 23 Afghan and three Pakistani detainees from Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, for release. The decision to transfer or release a detainee is based on many factors, including whether the detainee is of further intelligence value to the United States and whether he is believed to pose a threat to the United States. There is a process to review the status of detainees. We make a determination about the detention and release of a detainee based on the best information and evidence we have at the time. The circumstances in which detainees are apprehended can be ambiguous, and many of them are highly skilled in concealing the truth. The process of evaluation and detention is not free of risk--at least one detainee has gone back to the fight. During the course of the war on terrorism, the department expects there will be other transfers or releases of detainees. Because of operational and security considerations, no further details can be provided. Currently, 119 detainees have been released and 12 others have been transferred for continued detention (four to the Saudi Arabian government, one to the Spanish government and seven to the Russian government). As a result of today’s release, there are approximately 610 detainees at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. (1) (2) (3) (5)
Copyright © 2001-2008 Intellectual Property Charles E. Geck III Founder/Owner/Publisher GlobalSpecialOperations.com (TM) Special Forces Assn. Life Member #M-7514 All Rights Reserved |
| Home | Privacy | Sitemap | Email Webmaster |