America's 'elite' troops (For You depleting Hackworth fans)

Colonel David H Hackworth, America's most decorated soldier, does not mince his words. "I would be reluctant to jump into a battle zone with any conventional American unit. I would hate to take them into battle - they ain't ready, they are not 'good to go'."

With British and American ground troops poised to take the war against the Taliban into a new, perilous phase, Hackworth's appraisal of the army he once served will do little to calm nerves in the corridors of power. And his verdict on "crack" American troops such as those likely to be deployed in Afghanistan, is scarcely more complimentary. The soldiers of the vaunted 82nd Airborne are only "a little better" than ordinary infantry. And of the supposedly fearsome 10th Mountain Division, he says, "I hear a lot of rhetoric about the famous 10th Mountain Division. In World War II it was unquestionably America's finest unit - trained for three years, made up with men from Colorado, Montana, Idaho, really tough men, experts in mountain fighting. What we have now in the 10th Mountain Division is a bunch of kids that are better qualified to play computer games than they are to fight in that kind of terrain."

Confronted by the sudden prospect of putting their training to the test in Afghanistan, more than a handful of American soldiers show signs of agreeing with Hackworth's dismal assessment. "A large number of them have been submitting release from active duty requests, feigning that they're conscientious objectors, which is exactly what we went through in Vietnam," he says.

It is difficult to envisage anyone now emulating Hackworth's record even if they took on the Taliban during an extended campaign. After lying about his age, he managed to enlist, aged 15, in the second world war, "winding up on the Morgan Line around Trieste, trying to keep the Yugoslavs and the Italians from wasting each other".

Thereafter, in Korea and Vietnam, he was awarded a brace of Distinguished Service Crosses, 10 Silver Stars, four Legions of Merit, the Distinguished Flying Cross and a remarkable eight Purple Hearts - meaning that he was wounded, on average, in each of the (almost) eight years that he was in combat.

Commissioned in the field in Korea, he became the army's youngest captain; less than 20 years later, as its youngest colonel, he condemned America's involvement in Vietnam. It was, he said, "a bad war... it can't be won. We need to get out." He also predicted that the North Vietnamese flag would fly over Saigon within four years - a prediction made no more palatable to his superiors by being right.

Hackworth's critics might like to dismiss him as a battlefield dinosaur; most are wise enough not to try. After his public denunciation of the Vietnam war, he left the army and headed to Australia, where he gave his medals away to a class of 12-year-olds, burned his uniform, lived under the stars and smoked - and inhaled - a little dope. Nearly 20 years later, after making himself a fistful of money by selling a Brisbane restaurant and starting Australia's first Peking Duck farm, he returned to the US.

During his years of self-imposed exile, he had become an anti-nuclear campaigner but that proved no bar to re-establishing contacts with friends in the army, who were invaluable allies in his next career as a war reporter.

He discovered that - with some admirable exceptions - most of his new colleagues "wouldn't know a tank from a Range Rover or a B-52 bomber from a Valujet". During the Gulf war, he sensed that it was "almost as if frightened reporters who knew nothing about military realities wanted to inflate the war to inflate themselves". He decided on a new mission: to educate and inform his countrymen about those "military realities". Several years before he had co-authored the Vietnam Primer, which became a classic. On his return from Australia, he wrote About Face, a chronicle of his war experiences. It became a best-seller, as did three further books, the profits from the last two of which have been ploughed into Soldiers For The Truth, Hackworth's non-profit foundation dedicated to military reform.

But that reform, he says, will only come after America has suffered "a terrible performance in battle. Then we'll see maximum attention to re-establishing discipline and getting standards up". This, though, will come too late to make a difference in Afghanistan. Hackworth recently watched three weeks of basic training at Fort Jackson and left "appalled at the lack of discipline, the lack of hard training". The American military, he argues, is undermined by twin evils - a culture of grotesquely profligate, misdirected expenditure and by a toadying, self-serving caste of senior officers interested only in securing their own advancement.

But most corrosive of all, he says, has been the almost comic absurdity of making the forces politically correct. "There is now something called 'Consideration for Others' training," says Hackworth. "That's where Joe and Jane will get along and live in harmony. One, Joe and Jane shouldn't be in the foxhole together; two, harmony is not the name of the game; the name of the game is killing your enemy." (He is kinder about their British counterparts. "The Brits that I have found - the units that I've seen as a reporter in ex-Yugoslavia and so on - are not suffering as badly as the Americans from political correctness. It seems that your standards haven't been so lowered.")

Such idiocies, argues Hackworth, could have been prevented "if the top brass had opposed the politically correct leadership which was engendered and supported by Bill Clinton". "Do you think Clinton would have appointed any leader that would say, 'We've lowered the standard, we're not training our people hard enough or fierce enough'? No: the guys who get promoted are the guys who go along to get along. They are the Perfumed Princes."

But the "perfumed princes" are in for an unsettling ride, he says. "We are in round one - which is not even over - in a 30-round fight. I think my grandkids, who are five and eight, will be in college before we're in round 30. It's going to be a very long war, not like a war we've fought before. We will win, as long as everybody realises that it is not going to be a Desert Storm, wham-bam, thank you mam."

Last August, Hackworth made another prediction. Outlining three scenarios of future terror, he described a terrorist gas attack at the Indianapolis sports arena, killing 4,000. Hackworth set the date at June 4 2005; the terrorist responsible? Osama bin Laden. He concluded: "The chances are eight out of 10 that we will see a devastating terrorist attack from abroad within the next 10 years. Up to now we've been relatively lucky. But this kind of luck can't last... This dude [Bin Laden] ain't gonna give up. Neither will a thousand fanatics like him. It's a mistake to believe you can stop a terrorist movement by taking out its leader. You can cut off the head, but the body will still live on."

Consequently, Hackworth does not get overly excited by Bin Laden's fate. "He's got many, many fall-back positions, but he's a hard guy to hide. He's going to come in, in his Mercedes or his four-wheel drive; if people in the local village know he's there, the word is going to go out. He's got 30m bucks on his head; if you're an Afghan or Yemeni and you're making a dollar a week, $30m is a hell of an enticement. I wouldn't want to be in his sandals. But he's more the figurehead than the principal military planner; it's like getting rid of Saddam Hussein - there are other rattlesnakes that are even worse."

Hackworth has yet to get to Afghanistan to see the situation for himself; in the meantime, he is urging people to read a paper written by Richard Kidd, a West Point graduate who spent two years in Afghanistan working in the UN's mine clearance programme. Kidd argues in favour of giving the Northern Alliance "a big wad of cash so that they can buy off a chunk of the Taliban army before winter. Second, also with this cash I would pay some guys to kill some of the Taliban leadership, making it look like an inside job to spread distrust. Third, I would support the Northern Alliance with military assets, but not take it over or adopt so high a profile as to undermine its legitimacy."

Hackworth urges people to "burn [Kidd's] words and advice into your brain". He believes that they have been heeded in the White House, which he praises for its handling of the campaign so far. Hackworth says Washington should leave the fighting to groups like the Northern Alliance, confining British and American troops to an advisory role. As for the tens of thousands of American troops wondering if they could soon find themselves face to face with the Taliban, Hackworth suggests they should not expect to experience real combat any time soon. "I see them only in a defensive, perimeter role, because that's what they've got experience doing in Haiti, Bosnia, Kosovo: standing behind a wall of sandbags and peering out into the darkness. That's what they're very good at."

Yeah, the nuggets of wisdom are far and few between, but this part backs what I saw, and still see in the army

The American military, he argues, is undermined by twin evils - a culture of grotesquely profligate, misdirected expenditure and by a toadying, self-serving caste of senior officers interested only in securing their own advancement.

Keep in mind that this article was written just after 9/11, so his prediction of a megaterror attack (and the Osama scenario was made before then).

Besides his famous proclamation that the tough as nails Iraqi army would cause 10,000 US casualties, if you want some laughs, read the last chapter of About Face. It's full of alarmist fantasies about the inferiority of American equipment in the face of superior Soviety technology. I believe he claims that the T-72 is more than a match for the M-1's.

I agree that Hackworth has egg on his face for this and a few other things he said around the same time. However, Afghanistan was hardly a true test of our ground forces. If the spit really hits the fan it will be very interesting to see if the feminized, p.c., Clinton Army will be up to the challenge. I already have no doubt about the answer to that: IT WON'T. Let's just hope it doesn't get too rough out there. If we can confine hostilities to Iraq, it shouldn't get too bad.

Well geez, what else is new? Benedict Arnold had a big chip on his shoulder about not being promoted during his wartime service. History doesn't look at that chap very well today either. Walk into any office, construction site, military base etc..and you'll hear the same complaints. "The idiots are in charge", "Why was that idiot promoted instead of me?", "Our Dept. doesn't get enough money, so we don't have enough computers and man power..." etc... same crap different smell.

It will do nothing to calm nerves in the corridors of power, and nothing to excite them. What is Mr Scriven smoking?

Walk into any office, construction site, military base etc..and you'll hear the same complaints.

Keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better--

It's a different complaint: black berets for everyone (made in China), Lowered physical standards for younger soldiers, The On-again/Off-again Crusader, Consideration Of Others Training, 'Peace-making', 'Mountain Divisions' that don't train in the mountains, 'Power-Point' Rangers, Don't ask, don't tell, moving the M-60 to company level support and the SAW to platoon level, a de-emphasis on marksmanship, suffocating safety regulation, off-limits areas due to 'endangered plants', No armor support in Somalia, Op plans in Afghanistan nixed because of 'risk', lawyers calling the shots on engagements... Shall I go on?

You can tell me about every military complaint in the world until you're blue in the face for all I care. Plenty of what you listed already can be translated to the non-miltary life. DONT ASK DONT TELL:
I can't fire your gay boss who is sexually harrassing all the interns in office, because he'll sue our company, so keep your mouth shut about it or else.

suffocating safety regulation, off-limits areas due to endangered plants':
I'm sure the folks over at Klamath Basin and other western land grab sites have tons of stories to tell. Do you realize many families get kicked off their own land for the sake of endangered species?

No armor support in Somalia,
No street crime unit in Harlem

a de-emphasis on marksmanship
"You mean I don't have to know anything about computers to be a VP in an internet company?"

lawyers calling the shots on engagements
Phillip Morris, MacDonalds, and loads of corporations dealing with Lawsuits and jobs could tell you stories.

I am not trying to demean what the military does at all. In fact, I'm insulted that Hackworth continually demoralizes our guys out there. What I am saying is many complaints are universal and translate many ways.

What did old turtleneck predict about Desert Storm? Seems to me the man is living in the freakin past! The armed forces of today are VERY different from his "glory days". He does not seem to be aware of the dramatic change in technology , tactics, or morale.

Hang it up , Hack. Thanks for your service but forget the "color commentator" work on "military affairs" for the media!

Come to thank of it , Hack reminds me of Cotton..

Yes, these are a problem brought on by almost a decade of Klintoon's homosexualizing, feminizing, diplomacizing and multilaterizing the military.

But there is an internal problem that the military needs to face in handling "operations other than war", "war on terror", and the "war on Iraq." That is - the role, and especially, command structure between conventional and unconventional forces.

The war on Iraq, if it comes, is well suited for the conventional forces and the SOF plays well in their plans. But in the war on terrorism, as we're seeing in Afghanistan, and in operations other than war, as we saw in Haiti and elsewhere, the conventional forces are a detriment to mission success. Their role should be purely rapid reaction force to provide conventional combat force to maintain military superiority.

Hackworth is slightly too rhetorical and brutish in his analysis. Discipline and hardship hone the mettle of the military, but it's a hard sell when trench warfare is unlikely and military parity doesn't exist. A new doctrine that realigns command structures and develops asymetric and unconventional "Principals of War" is sorely needed.

You are right about Hack. The Army he knows was gone 40 years ago. Things have changed and I don't think he really knows what is going on the the military. Listen to the former Delta force major who Fox News has on (I can't remember his name.) from time to time. To me he shows a clear knowledge what is going on a lot better than Hack who is wedded to the past.

And thank God those who enlist in the Military are willing to give their lives for the sake of our freedoms. I'm sure the wife of the livery cab driver or some pizza delivery man who gets his head blown off by some thug could have at least anticipated that their lives might have been in danger. Even those who died in the towers were just "going to work" that day.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.