Joint Special Operations Literature Review

CSC 1995

SUBJECT AREA - OPERATIONS

Major Michael Kenji Nagata

United States Army

Marine Corps Command & General Staff College

AY: 1994-95

Click here to view image

April 1995

Submitted to the Faculty of the Marine Corps

Command and General Staff College in partial

fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of

Master of Military Studies

The views expressed in this paper are those of the

author and do not reflect the official policy or position

of the Department of Defense of the U.S. Government

Executive Summary

Title: Joint Special Operations Literature Review

Author: Major Michael Kenji Nagata, U.S. Army

Problem or Research Question: Given the reinvigoration of Special Operations Forces

(SOF) since the late 1980's and the establishment of the United States Special Operations

Command, what is the current state of non-doctrinal SOF literature in this unique community? In

other words, how much are Special Operations personnel writing, what are they writing about, and

how well are they writing it?

Discussion:

Since 1987, USSOCOM and its subordinate commands have been creating a new specified

command and a unique military community. But urgent institutional and day-to-day mission

requirements have left little time or energy for encouraging a healthy and stimulating professional

discourse through the medium of published periodicals. The purpose of this literature review is to

measure, both quantitatively and qualitatively, the body of literature produced within the SOF

community between 1988 and 1994.

The methodology of this literature review involved reviewing 316 articles obtained primarily from

two general sources:

(1) SOF-specific periodicals published by the service components of USSOCOM.

(2) Non-SOF specific periodicals containing articles written by SOF-qualified personnel.

Conclusion:

Neither the quantity nor quality of professional exchange and debate through the medium of

non-doctrinal, periodical literature is commensurate with the requirements of SOF personnel or

SOF's unique missions. Among the areas that require special emphasis are doctrinal SOF

missions, the SOAR/AFSOC and their capabilities, language and cultural awareness, threat

education, SERE, technology issues as they pertain to SOF, intelligence as it pertains to SOF, and

Infiltration/Exfiltration.

The author recommends removal of responsibility for the publication of Full Mission

Profile and Night Flyer (the NAVSOC and AFSOC professional journals) from the

components' respective Public Affairs offices. He recommends a transfer of publication

responsibility to the AFSOC and NAVSOC training commands, and the institution of editorial

boards to ensure proper peer review of proposed articles. He also recommends stabilizing the

publication of Special Warfare to ensure uninterrupted publication.

Lastly, he recommends that USSOCOM establish a Joint Special Operations publication.

CONTENTS

Chapter

1. Introduction, Background, and Overview 1

2. Sources, Authors, Categories, and Methodology 6

Sources, 6

Authors, 8

Categories, 8

SOF Missions, 9

Military Occupational Specialties, 9

Language/Culture, 9

Threat/Terrorism, 10

Biographies/Historic/Campaign & Battle Analysis, 10

Lessons Learned, 10

First Person Accounts, 10

Unit History, 10

Unit/Force Status, 11

Mobilization/Reserves, 11

Training, 11

Readiness, 11

Professional Military Education (PME), 12

Doctrine/Force Structure, 12

Survival, Evasion, Resistance, Escape (SERE), 12

Platforms and Weapons Systems (Airborne, Waterborne, Land), 12

Combat Service/Combat Service Support (CS/CSS), 12

Command & Control/Technology/Electronic Warfare, 13

Medical, 13

Weapons/Ordnance, 13

Planning, 13

Engineering, 14

Fire Support, 14

Intelligence, 14

Legal, 15

Infiltration/Exfiltration, 15

Rebuttal/Response, 15

Joint/Combined Operations and Issues, 15

Personnel/Career Management, 16

Repeat Articles, 16

Position/Opinion/Philosophy, 16

Research and Development/Acquisition, 16

News/Miscellaneous, 16

Author Characteristics, 17

Methodology, 17

3. Quantitative and Qualitative Analysis 18

Categories, 18

SOF Missions, 18

Military Occupational Specialties, 21

Language/Culture, 23

Threat/Terrorism, 24

Biographies/Historic/Campaign & Battle Analysis, 24

Lessons Learned, 25

First Person Accounts, 25

Unit History, 26

Unit/Force Status, 26

Mobilization/Reserves, 26

Training, 27

Readiness, 27

Professional Military Education (PME), 28

Doctrine/Force Structure, 28

Survival, Evasion, Resistance, Escape (SERE), 29

Aviation Platforms/Systems, 29

Waterborne Platforms/Systems, 30

Land Platforms/Systems, 30

Combat Service/Combat Service Support (CS/CSS), 30

Command & Control/Technology/Electronic Warfare,31

Medical, 32

Weapons/Ordnance, 32

Planning, 33

Engineering, 33

Fire Support, 33

Intelligence, 34

Legal, 34

Infiltration/Exfiltration,35

Rebuttal/Response, 35

Joint/Combined Operations and Issues, 36

Personnel/Career Management, 36

Repeat Articles, 37

Position/Opinion/Philosophy, 37

Research and Development/Acquisition, 37

News/Miscellaneous, 38

Authors, 38

4. Conclusion, Recommendations, and Final Notes 41

Conclusion, 41

Recommendations, 42

Final Notes, 43

Glossary of Terms 46

Endnotes 48

Bibliography 50

CHAPTER ONE

Introduction and Background

Introduction

Professional writing by United States special operations personnel is in need of serious

attention and invigoration. Taken as a whole, the body of work generated by Special Operations

Forces (SOF) since the establishment of the United States Special Operations Command

(USSOCOM) has yet to rise to a level commensurate with the unique requirements, characteristics,

missions, and personnel of special operations. The SOF community has experienced rapid growth

and stellar accomplishment in recent years. However, there has been insufficient attention to the

character and quality of written professional discourse and debate within that community. This

discourse and debate should provide SOF's 'seed-corn' of new ideas and innovation. Such ideas

and innovations lie at the center of a special operator's ability to think "unconventionally," to do the

unexpected, and outsmart and outfight an enemy even on his own turf and among his own people.

The purpose of this paper is to outline the results of a literature review conducted on

professional periodical literature published within and by the special operations community in the

years 1988 through 1994. The aim of this review was to examine both the quantitative and

qualitative aspects of the literature published within this community.

Background

Special operations units and personnel experienced a "revitalization" era in the 1980's that

achieved a historic milestone with the 1997 establishment of the USSOCOM at MacDill AFB, FL.

After years of wrangling between a Congress frustrated with special operations failures, and a

Department of Defense (DOD) reluctant to accept the creation of a new special operations 4-star

command, "special operators" found themselves riding a wave of congressional interest,

institutional reform and reorganization, and fiscal attention that none had ever experienced before.1

Since then, special operations units and personnel have deployed with ever rising

frequency. Ranging from high-intensity operations in Desert Storm to low-intensity operations in

Somalia and Haiti (now being called "Operations Other Than War" (OOTW)), "operators" have

been showcasing the utility, flexibility, and capability of SOF every day. In today's era of joint

operations, rare is the joint task force without one of its major component commands being a "Joint

Special Operations Task Force" (JSOTF).

Yet, during this time, USSOCOM and its subordinate commands of Army Special

Operations Command (ARSOC), Air Force Special Operations Command (AFSOC), Navy Special

Operations command (NAVSOC), and the Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) have had

the unenviable task of both creating a new specified command and a unique military community.

This meant both dealing with all the institutional requirements such an effort entails while

simultaneously conducting active operations abroad with many SOF units.

USSOCOM's capabilities and successes have led to an operations tempo that is like nothing

seen before. Today's operators are so busy that they do not have time to think and reflect on their

experiences, and as this study shows, they tend not to write or to write well. This frenetic pace

may instead be creating a vulnerability to a kind of "creeping conventionalism" in their thoughts

and in their methods. By constantly operating by the same methods and establishing the same

patterns with every operation, SOF forces risk becoming predictable and "conventional" in both

activities and mindset.

This "creeping conventionalism" is not the result of a change in the nature of operators, but

rather the result of fatigue and distraction. Operators will execute tomorrow's operation exactly as

they did today's, not because operators have abandoned being unpredictable and unconventional,

but because they do not have the time or energy to try something different.

The great danger, of course, is that if SOF personnel lose their ability to do the

unpredictable, to think the unorthodox, and execute with surprise and audacity they lose much of

what makes them special. More to the point, these are the very characteristics that keep operators

alive in denied areas, and losing these traits risks survival itself. As a rule, in SOF operational

areas the enemy can both outnumber them and outgun them. The only thing that truly gives SOF

personnel the edge is their wits.

This has left precious little time or energy to pay attention to many more mundane aspects

of developing and nurturing an embryonic community. The results of this review demonstrate that

encouraging a healthy and stimulating written professional discourse through the medium of

published periodicals has been one area too long ignored. When it comes to "writing,"

USSOCOM and its components have instead spent a great deal of the available energy and time

toward getting SOF's doctrinal house in order. This primarily involved the task of writing new,

SOF-unique manuals to describe SOF doctrine both for the special operations community and for

conventional forces.

Few hours are available to today's "operator" for private reflection, study, writing, and

publishing. Even when time is available, energy must be carefully husbanded for the next

deployment, the next exercise... the next tough job. The same applies to SOF organizations. SOF

units and commands are so busy "operating" and meeting day-to-day requirements that

contributing to quality written professional discourse in periodical literature, however desirable,

must wait for some future (and imprecise) date. Some institutional progress in the publication of

SOF material has, however, been made.

During the period 1988 to 1994, three of USSOCOM's component commands began their

own journals. Today, all three components continue to publish these journals, albeit with mixed

regularity or quality.

In 1988, ARSOC started publication of Special Warfare magazine, published at the John

F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center and School in Ft. Bragg, NC. Special Warfare is a

quarterly periodical devoted to Army special operations, and focuses on issues relating to the

components of ARSOC. This includes Army Special Forces (SF), Rangers, Special Operations

Aviation Regiment (SOAR), Civil Affairs (CA), and Psychological Operations (PSYOP).

The Naval Special Warfare Command began quarterly publication of Full Mission

Profile in 1991. This publication focuses on subjects relating to SEALs, Special Boat Squadrons

and units (SBS, SBU), and SEAL Delivery teams (SDV). The Public Affairs Office (PAO) of

NAVSOC has proponency for the publication of Full Mission Profile.

Finally, in 1992, AFSOC began publication of Night Flyer magazine, published at the

Air Force Special Operations Command, Hurlburt Field, FL. Night Flyer focuses on issues

pertaining to special operations aviation, both rotary and fixed wing (including the AC-130, MC-

130, HC-130, EC-130, MH-53, MH60, and H3), and Special Tactics Group (STG) and

squadrons (STS), comprised of Combat Control Teams (CCT) and Pararescue units. As with

Full Mission Profile, the PAO office of AFSOC has proponency for the publication of this

periodical.

In other venues, "operators" have published a variety of articles in other non-SOF-specific

journals. Several non-SOF-specific journals such as Military Review and U.S. Naval

Institute Proceedings have published works on special operations. In other cases, many SOF

officers attending service academies wrote significant academic works about various aspects of

special operations as part of their formal curriculum requirements.

Overview

Accordingly, USSOCOM and its components are making some effort to encourage and

foster special operations literature. But how does one evaluate the impact of this effort? Perhaps

by seeking to answer a series of such questions one can provide a glimpse of the current state of

professional debate within SOF: how much are special operations personnel writing,

what are they writing about, and how well are they writing it?

The answers are: special operations personnel are writing little, they are writing about the

more unimportant subjects available, and the academic rigor of their writing requires attention.

These results are not all-inclusive, for this study did not cover every facet of SOF literature. The

results are also subjective, for this endeavor was in many ways more 'art' than 'science'.

This review evaluated each article for focus, origin, content and author. While specific

criteria guided the tabulation of data from each article, the application of those criteria was

subjective. This work and its subject matter beg for repetition, validation, and extension by other

researchers.

This paper begins by describing the targeted "population" of periodicals used in this

review. It then describes the sources, authors, categories, and methodology used in examining the

periodical literature. Next, it provides the results of both a quantitative and qualitative analysis of

the targeted articles. These analyses provided the answers to the principal questions of the study.

CHAPTER TWO

Sources, Authors, Categories, and Methodology

Sources

The first challenge in conducting this study lay in defining the type of article that constituted

"special operations literature." The focus of this review was material written by military personnel

with special operations training and experience- the "operators"- who have successfully attended

and completed their service-specific assessment, selection, and training processes for entering into

the ranks of SOF. It became immediately apparent, however, that many "non-operators", persons

without any SOF qualifications, are publishing a wide range of articles on special operations.

While academicians, civilian strategists, and other non-SOF authors certainly have much they can

and do contribute to SOF literature, they were not the focus of this study. Therefore, this review

required establishing a methodology for screening all SOF-related literature in order to determine

whether or not the author was SOF-qualified, and then determining whether or not a particular

article fell within the scope of the intended research.

There currently exists no convenient automated method for searching periodical literature

by the author's Military Occupational Specialty (MOS). For example, it is not possible to conduct

an automated search for "all authors of military periodical articles between 1988 and 1994 who are

qualified Navy SEALs or Army Special Forces." The only way to search by MOS is to examine

any biographical material on the author within the body of each article.

This study used a compromise methodology that allowed for gathering a statistically

representative picture of the targeted population. The only method available for obtaining a

completely accurate database of all articles written by operators was to to gather every military

periodical article written between 1988 and 1994. Then one would have to read each article to

determine whether the author was a SOF operator. While truly comprehensive, such a

methodology would have been impractical considering the tens of thousands of articles published

during this span of time.

The population of periodical literature targeted in this compromise methodology is a

composite of two sources. First among these were all articles published by the SOF-specific

journals of Special Warfare, Night Flyer, and Full Mission Profile from 1988 through

1994 (See Figure 1). These three journals accounted for a total of 291 articles. Of course, not

every article had an "operator" as an author. Some non-operators wrote extensively for these

journals. Nonetheless, since these are journals intended to support the SOF community, this

review included any article published by these journals as long it had a clearly identified author.

The second source was all other military periodicals. Again, it was not possible to

automate a search for "operator"-authors. Instead, a subject-search for articles about special

operations-related subjects (e.g., special operations, commando, ranger, unconventional warfare,

special forces, etc.) yielded a list of 156 articles from 36 different periodicals (See Figure 2).

Examining these articles for the author's background allowed for classification into non-operator

versus operator authored articles (See Figure 3). This reduced the 156 articles to a list of 25

operator-authored articles. The targeted population used for this study included only these 25

articles, thus making for a total of 316 articles reviewed. There are, of course, populations of

articles and other literature that this compromise sampling excludes.

First, it eliminates the population of SOF authors who wrote articles about non-SOF

subjects. The search procedures used would not detect the presence of this population, and such

articles are beyond the scope of this study.

Second, it excludes books and larger works published by SOF authors. These works can

and do contribute to written professional dialogue, but to include them would have exceeded the

scope of this review.

Third, this methodology does not include interviews of SOF-personnel. While the

thoughts expressed in these interviews can be of great importance to the SOF community, they are

not part of the deliberate written discourse that periodical literature represents.

Fourth, it eliminates articles (especially in the SOF-specific journals) that have no

identifiable author associated with them. Excluding these articles reduces the impact of institutional

or "staff" writing writing on the study.

Finally, it excludes unpublished papers written at the various service academies by SOF

authors throughout DOD. Given the large numbers of SOF officers that enroll in the armed

services' academies, war colleges, and similar institutions each year, there is probably a growing

population of student-produced papers and research on special operations every year. This is a

potentially vast source of scholarly work that begs for investigation, dissemination, and

publication.

Authors

Deciding whether an author was SOF-qualified was the next challenge. In some cases, the

task was relatively easy: the article provided sufficient biographical data to show that the author

was SOF-qualified. In others, however, the biographical data was either vague on this point or

completely absent. For example, the biographical data might show that "LTC _______ is a member

of the JFK Special Warfare Center and School," but might not specify if he is SOF-qualified. He

might be an operator, but he may instead be a legal officer, or a flight surgeon, or in some other

non-SOF MOS. Nonetheless, this study required a method for classifying the author either

"operator" or "non-operator."

When examining articles published in the three SOF-specific journals, the following

criterion was used: when the SOF-qualification of the author was in doubt, the study assumed the

author was SOF-qualified. For all other military periodicals, when there was doubt, the

assumption was that the author was not SOF-qualified.

In those cases where an article had multiple authors, each author was examined according

to the abovementioned criterion to determine whether he/she was SOF-qualified. In the case of

non-SOF periodicals, whenever at least one coauthor was SOF-qualified, the article remained in

the survey.

Categories

* SOF Missions

Quantitative- In potential SOF missions (ranging from UW to TSAR to Peace

Operations), the category that attracted the most attention was Peace Operations/LIC/OOTW.

Articles on this category occurred 39 times, 12 percent of the total 316 articles surveyed.

Noteworthy was the fact that 77 percent of the pieces written on Peace Operations appeared in the

Army's Special Warfare magazine. Of the 30 works in Special Warfare on Peace

Operations, eight articles had non-SOF authors (See Figure 4).

The next most frequent was Foreign Internal Defense (FID). However, only seven total

works specifically focused on FID, only 2 percent of all articles studied. Of these seven pieces,

three appeared in Special Warfare, two in Full Mission Profile, and two in non-SOF periodicals

(See Figure 4).

Next were Unconventional Warfare (UW) and Special Reconnaissance (SR), each

receiving four articles apiece. In terms of all pieces surveyed, each category represented

approximately 1 percent of the total. Special Warfare contained all four of the SR works found,

while Special Warfare and Full Mission Profile each contained two UW articles (See

Figure 4).

The Direct Action (DA) category contained three articles, while the Counter-Narcotic (CN)

category contained two works. These represented 1 percent and less than 1 percent respectively of

the total articles surveyed. Special Warfare contained one of the DA articles while Full

Mission Profile contained the remaining two. For the CN category, Special Warfare

contained one article with a non-SOF periodical containing the other (See Figure 4).

Qualitative- The paucity of articles in the category of potential SOF missions, with

the exception of "Peace Operations/LIC/OOTW," is one of the most disturbing findings of this

review (See Figure 11). For example, in Special Warfare, the combined categories of

Unconventional Warfare, Foreign Internal Defense, Direct Action, and Special Reconnaissance

account for only 10 articles during the seven years that this review covers. Full Mission

Profile accounted for a total of six works in the combined categories of UW, FID and DA, and

none at all in the categories of SR, CT, CN or TSAR.

Finding so few articles on these doctrinal missions points to a disturbing absence of written

professional exchange about SOF missions. A failure of the SOF community to write about these

missions is analogous to a branch such as the infantry failing to write about the conduct of the

night attack, or military operations in urban terrain, or even the broader categories of the infantry in

the offense or the defense. The SOF missions are the operational tasks that define SOF's purpose

as an institution and provide the yardstick for measuring SOF's success or failure. Yet, while it is

abundantly clear that SOF organizations and personnel are conducting these missions regularly,

this striking absence of written professional discourse is very disturbing.

Conversely, Peace Opns/LIC/OOTW accounted for 39 articles, a significantly higher total

than any other mission category. Why is it that this subject was so popular, but authors seemed to

shy away from writing about specific mission types? A possible explanation is that this more

"general" topic is much easier and less threatening to write about.

Writing about a specific mission type would almost certainly entail more detailed research

and greater specificity when citing problem areas and/or recommendations. Such writing would

require greater subject-matter expertise than writing about a general subject like "Low-Intensity

Conflict." Furthermore, with Peace Operations having fallen into some disrepute in recent years,

perhaps writing about such endeavors is a "safer" subject than staking out more risky philosophical

ground on a specific SOF mission.

More specifically, the complete absence of writing on a mission such as TSAR is at odds

with the operational realities of JSOTF operations in recent years. Search and rescue is a capability

that joint task forces and Combatant CINC's are increasingly demanding from SOF. There now

exists a wealth of operational experience on SOF-conducted TSAR (Desert Shield/Storm,

Operation Provide Promise), but there is no evidence of it in this survey. Potential subjects spring

quickly to mind, such as the appropriateness of utilizing SOF for search and rescue missions,

special training requirements for SOF personnel, special considerations when utilizing SOF

aviation platforms to conduct TSAR, and the impact of long-term commitment to TSAR on

readiness for other missions. But on this subject the SOF community is silent.

Another mission area that lies untouched is Counter-Terrorism (CT). CT is primarily the

operational province of highly-classified Special Mission Units (SMU), but the complete absence

of articles on any aspect of the subject is puzzling, security concerns notwithstanding. Again,

potential subjects for research and writing are readily available, such as analysis of historic

counter-terrorism operations, command and control relationships for CT forces deploying into a

combatant CINC's AOR, and the utility of non-SMU units in controlling CT situations until the

arrival of more specialized units. Additionally, when one considers how terrorism and narcotic-

trafficking have begun to blend over the recent years, one might expect that CN articles would

begin to appear in concert with CT writing. Yet, as with CT, CN articles are also almost

completely absent from the results of this survey.

One article on Army Special Forces participation in JTF-Six operations was one of only

two examples of CN writing.2 Yet, SOF participation in JTF-Six and similar operations has been

ongoing for years. Again, a lucrative field of study and writing seems to be lying dormant.

All articles focused on doctrinal SOF missions appeared in either Special Warfare or

Full Mission Profile. The fact that no such articles appeared in Night Flyer is a cause for

some concern. Perhaps more so than in any other field, SOF is dependent upon its aviation arm.

AFSOC personnel and capabilities are virtually inseparable from any SOF campaign, for they must

understand the intricacies of SOF missions to the same degree as any other SOF element.

However, the absence of published works by AFSOC personnel provides no insight into their

degree of study or understanding of SOF missions.

Any evaluation of SOF writing, especially on SOF missions, must consider the impact of

secrecy on both an operator's willingness and ability to produce publishable material. Certainly,

concerns over operational security must have some restraining effect on the publication of SOF

articles. Very often the specific locales, tactical procedures, personalities, and even unit identities

involved in special operations must remain classified, and cannot be divulged through open-source

publications. But this undeniable concern for security does not provide an excuse for not writing

at all.

The mere fact that special operations are classified does not mean that SOF personnel

cannot conduct a professional dialogue through open source publications. While specific aspects

of special operations are and will always be classified, there are many aspects of these operations

that can and must be part of open debate within the SOF community. While it may not be possible

to write about "operation X conducted in country Y by unit Z," it is usually permissible to at least

analyze the applicability of certain types of operations in certain types of terrain by a certain type of

SOF organizations. The use of generalities instead of specifics, the use of hypothetical examples

instead of actual case-studies, and many other techniques are available to the prospective SOF

author. Secrecy alone does not and should not prevent SOF personnel from publishing material

without compromising operational security.

* Military Occupational Specialties

Quantitative- Army Special Forces and Navy SEALs were by far the most written

about occupational specialties (See Figure 5). Special Forces had 25 articles focused on their

specialty, while the SEALs had 22. These represented relative percentages, when compared to the

total number of works surveyed, of 8 percent for Special Forces and 7 percent for SEALs.

Predictably, 24 out of 25 Special Forces pieces appeared in Special Warfare, while 20 out of 22

SEAL articles appeared in Full Mission Profile .

The next most popular categories were Special Boat Squadrons/Units (SBS/SBU) and

Psychological Operations (PSYOP) with 20 articles each. This total represented 6 percent of all

works written for each category. All SBS/SBU pieces appeared in Full Mission Profile, and

all PSYOP articles appeared in Special Warfare (See Figure 5).

Next in frequency was Civil Affairs (CA) with 17 pieces. This represented approximately

5 percent of all articles. All 17 articles appeared in Special Warfare. In the PSYOP category, 3

out of 20 articles had non-SOF authors, while in the CA category, 7 out of 17 articles had

non-operator authors (See Figure 5).

The next highest category was the Rangers with four articles. This represented slightly

over 1 percent of the total works surveyed. Interestingly, two of the four pieces appeared in Full

Mission Profile, with one article in Special Warfare and another in a non-SOF periodical

(See Figure 5).

Lastly, the categories of ARSOC Special Operations Aviation Regiment (SOAR), AFSOC

Rotary and Fixed Wing, AFSOC Special Tactics Group, and NAVSOC SEAL Delivery Vehicle

teams (SDV) each accounted for two works. This represented less than 1 percent representation

for each category (See Figure 5).

Qualitative- (See Figure 13) Predictably, SF and SEALs occurred more often

than any other occupational specialty in this study (See Figure 12). Nonetheless, the high

frequency of Civil Affairs and PSYOP articles speaks to the growing importance of these fields in

contemporary SOF and conventional missions. In fact, many of these articles concerned the

conduct of Civil Affairs and/or PSYOP missions in support of purely conventional operations.3,4

However, within ARSOC there were two subjects that received very little attention. These

were the Rangers and SOAR. Combined, they accounted for only six articles: four articles were

on Ranger operations, and two on SOAR operations.

The paucity of articles on Ranger operations is significant. Ranger operations have always

lain astride the boundary between conventional infantry operations and special operations.

However, much of their training and recent operational history clearly falls into the category of

special operations, most notably in Somalia, Panama, and Grenada. Some of the most intense

combat experienced by SOF units in recent years has involved Ranger units, and this should

provide a rich source of material for academic study and written discourse.

As with Ranger operations, the near-absence of writing on SOAR operations highlights a

large and apparently unexplored area for research and writing. SOAR capabilities and platforms

are inseparable from nearly all Army and many Joint SOF operations. Infiltration and exfiltration

for Army SOF units is dependent on the capabilities of the SOAR. The ubiquitous nature of

special operations aviation demands greater attention.

In terms of AFSOC, the picture is much the same. Only two articles each appear for the

categories of AFSOC Rotary Wing, Fixed Wing, and STG operations. This belies the fact that

AC-130 and HC-130 usage in support of the combatant CINC's has risen dramatically over the

years. MH-53 units are maintaining an equally high operations tempo in every theater. The level

of operational expertise and experience must be quite high, but there is little evidence to show that

this knowledge is spreading to the rest of the SOF community.

NAVSOC's results were also mixed: while SEALs and SBS/SBU received abundant

attention in this survey, SDV teams were conspicuous by their near-absence. Only two articles

appeared to focus on SDV personnel and capabilities. This is an important infltration/exfiltration

capability for the NAVSOC community, and USSOCOM is investing significant funds in research

and development of new SDVs and associated capabilities.5 But the absence of written discourse

on this subject reduces the opportunity for informed debate and information distribution among

SOF personnel.

* Language/Culture

Quantitative- Here the survey found a total of 10 pieces, accounting for 3 percent

of the total. Of these 10 articles, 9 appeared in Special Warfare. Of those nine works, three

had non-SOF authors. The remaining one article appeared in Full Mission Profile (See

Figure 6).

Qualitative- (See Figure 13) Given the hundreds of different cultural, religious,

linguistic, or ethnic milieus within which SOF may have to operate, the operator community

requires much more attention toward learning about these variables. Cultural sensitivity,

awareness, and training remain among the principal elements that distinguish special operations

from other forms of military endeavor . Especially in the mission fields of UW and FID, cultural

and linguistic aptitude is as important, sometimes more important, than tactical ability or force

capability. AFSOC, in particular, should devote additional energies to this field of study and

writing, for no AFSOC articles touched on this category.

* Threat/Terrorism

Quantitative- The total of six articles represents slightly under 2 percent of the total

surveyed. Of those six articles, five appeared in Special Warfare, but all five had non-operator

authors. The remaining one article appeared in a non-SOF periodical (See Figure 6).

Qualitative- (See Figure 13) Given the number and ever-widening spectrum of

potential threats in today's operating environment, this subject is ripe for deeper exploration. SOF

forces are often the first units called upon to confront new threats. It is only prudent to ensure that

the SOF community is as well-informed as possible before encountering these threats in a

potentially hostile operating environment.

Despite the wide array of potential threats that SOF forces might face, most of the articles

found in this category focused exclusively on terrorism, and all of the articles appeared in either

Special Warfare or in a non-SOF periodical.6, 7 For the same reasons that language and

cultural awareness are vital to the successful conduct of SOF operations, intimately understanding

all potential enemies and threats is fundamental to the SOF battle. Since SOF units train to function

and fight behind enemy lines, in areas normally denied to conventional combat forces, knowledge

of the enemy is often the key to survival.

In the other components, the survey found no evidence of writing on potential threats in

either NAVSOC or AFSOC articles. Neither Full Mission Profile nor Night Flyer contained

such articles. Again, this reflected a troubling inattention to the characteristics and capabilities of

potential enemies.

* Biographies/Historic/Campaign & Battle Analysis

Quantitative- This category accounted for 54 articles. This represents 17 percent

of the total surveyed. Thirty nine appeared in Special Warfare, representing 72 percent of such

articles. Nine articles were in Full Mission Profile, with non-SOF periodicals contributing

four, and Night Flyer containing two (See Figure 6).

Qualitative- (See Figure 13) This category was one of the statistical bright spots

in this survey. Special Warfare, in particular, provided many articles focusing on historical

analysis. Notably absent, however, were articles focusing on Army SF campaigns in Vietnam,

Cambodia, and Laos- arguably the most complex and demanding operations SF has ever

conducted. Also absent were articles analyzing failures in special operations such as Desert One or

the attempts to capture Somali warlord Aideed in Mogadishu. The vast majority of historical

articles dealt with special operations successes which, while certainly easier and less controversial

to write about, offer less substantive material for serious debate.

* Lessons Learned

Quantitative- Twelve articles appeared in this category. This is 4 percent of the

total. Of these 12 articles, 8 appeared in Special Warfare, with 3 in Full Mission Profile,

and 1 in Night Flyer (See Figure 6).

Qualitative- (See Figure 13) This category requires additional attention. After-

action reports and other SOF databases such as the Army's Special Operations Lessons Learned

Management Information System (SOLLMIS)8 can and should provide much of this service to the

SOF community. However, published writings should also be a rich source of operational and

historical experience and debate. All three component journals contained lessons-learned articles,

but given the high operating tempo of SOF forces around the world there should be much more to

offer.

* First Person Accounts

Quantitative- Eleven articles appeared here. This represents 3 percent of the total

surveyed. Ten appeared in Full Mission Profile, with one in Special Warfare (See Figure

6).

Qualitative- (See Figure 13) Considering the number of SOF personnel that

have participated in special operations around the world since the establishment of USSOCOM, the

occurrence of these articles is very low. Certainly, security concerns mitigate against some

accounts being published, but neither should they be an excuse for not writing. Nonetheless, an

after-action report can be considered a kind of first person account. The number of after-action

reports compiled by operating units since 1998 must be very large, and methods for automating

and disseminating these reports are necessary. At the same time, more attention needs to be paid

toward sharing first-hand experiences with the SOF community.

* Unit History

Quantitative- Here the survey contained six works. This represents approximately

2 percent of the total. Three works were in Full Mission Profile, while the remaining three were in

non-SOF periodicals.

Qualitative- (See Figure 13) Unit histories can be useful in building unit morale

and cohesion, and for disseminating the lineage and traditions of a particular SOF organization

throughout the community. Beyond that, they probably contribute little to the written academic

dialogue that periodical literature represents.

* Unit/Force Status

Quantitative- The survey found a 45 articles. This accounted for 14 percent of the

total. Nineteen pieces appeared in Full Mission Profile, with 15 in Special Warfare.

Another nine appeared in non-SOF journals, while two were in Night Flyer (See Figure 6).

Qualitative- (See Figure 13) This category received a large number of articles,

but these types of "status-reports" usually contribute very little to written professional discourse.

These works ranged from CINCSOC articles on the status of USSOCOM (often these articles were

reproductions or condensed versions of Congressional Testimony), to reports on the location,

capabilities, and operating environments of individual SOF organizations.9, l0 These articles are

useful in distributing the current state-of-affairs in SOF organizations, the components, and

USSOCOM itself. Compared with the other subjects with which this category competes, less

emphasis should go into publishing these 'status' articles.

* Mobilization/Reserves

Quantitative- The survey found a total of nine articles, which is 3 percent of the

total. Of these nine works, six appeared in Special Warfare, while the other three were in Full

Mission Profile (See Figure 6).

Qualitative- (See Figure 13) Considering how many times deployed SOF

missions are utilizing the skills and capabilities of reserve component personnel and units this

number is very low. Also, only Special Warfare and Full Mission Profile included articles

on reserve component activities and capabilities, leaving Night Flyer without any treatment of

this important issue.

* Training

Quantitative- This category accounted for 71 articles, which is 22 percent of the

total. Forty eight pieces were in Full Mission Profile, which represents 68 percent of the 71

articles. Nineteen articles appeared in Special Warfare, with non-SOF periodicals and Night

Flyer each containing 2 pieces (See Figure 7).

Qualitative- (See Figure 13) As these numbers show, every component journal

and a large number of non-SOF periodicals focused heavily on training. Usually, these articles

focused on relating how SOF units organized and conducted training in a variety of training and

school environments, or under different operational and/or climactic conditions.ll,12

In only a few cases, however, did an article focus on advocating a new method or

philosophy of training, or on critiquing current training methodologies. When they did occur, they

were most frequently in Full Mission Profile.13,14 Neither Special Warfare nor Night

Flyer contained many articles advocating new training techniques or questioning current training

methods. Yet training doctrine and techniques must constantly adapt to new requirements, just as

the potential threats that SOF personnel will face in future years will also continue to evolve. More

attention should be paid to proposing, advocating, and critiquing new and different training

regimens.

* Readiness

Quantitative Analysis- The survey found a total of three articles. This is just under

1 percent. One appeared in Special Warfare, one in Full Mission Profile, and the last in a

non-SOF journal (See Figure 7).

Qualitative Analysis- (See Figure 13) There is no evidence from this survey

that SOF community is paying adequate attention to this vital category. Nonetheless, most SOF

units do in fact devote great energy toward ensuring rapid deployability. Given the short-notice

deployment requirements of so many SOF organizations, and the reality that SOF units go into

battle well before most conventional forces arrive on the scene, unit and personnel readiness is a

key concern. The planning, transportation, logistic, and operational aspects of readiness all

demand study, should provide a lucrative source of written discourse.

* Professional Military Education (PME)

Quantitative- Thirteen articles appeared here. This represents 4 percent. Of these

13 works, 11 appeared in Special Warfare. The remaining two appeared in Full Mission

Profile (See Figure 7).

Qualitative- (See Figure 13) None of the component publications nor the

non-SOF articles give this subject adequate treatment. Yet, the SOF community ignores this vital

investment in the education of its future leaders at its own peril. The professional education of

special operations officers and NCO's is the key to ensuring future operational success in any of

the far-flung places they are sure to go.

In this category, ARSOC can take some comfort from the fact that the preponderance of

articles came from Special Warfare. Conversely, very little attention is paid to this subject by

either the NAVSOC or AFSOC publication.

* Doctrine/Force Structure

Quantitative- The survey found a total of 42 pieces which accounts for 13 percent

of the total. Of these 42 articles, 20 appeared in Special Warfare, representing 48 percent of

these 42 works. Twelve of these pieces appeared in Full Mission Profile, with seven in

non-SOF periodicals, and three in Night Flyer (See Figure 7).

Qualitative- (See Figure 13) This category was one of the most popular.

Clearly there is a great deal of interest in writing about doctrinal issues in SOF, but primarily these

articles seemed to deal simply with describing current doctrine. Their focus was educating readers

about the conduct of contemporary SOF operations. Very few ventured the risky territory of either

criticizing current concepts or proposing significant changes for the future.

The articles found in this category were generally overviews of some aspect of SOF

doctrine, providing a snapshot of current doctrinal thinking. In only a very few cases, did an

article either propose changes to doctrine or criticize existing doctrine. COL Mark Boyatt's article,

"Unconventional Operations Forces of Special Operations." in Special Warfare advocated a

reexamination of the distribution of doctrinal missions within Army SOF.15

Unfortunately, such articles were the exception rather than the norm. While it was

encouraging to find that so many authors were writing about doctrinal issues, more emphasis

should go into 'questioning' the established doctrine, and in recommending changes and new

perspectives.

* Survival, Evasion, Resistance, Escape (SERE)

Quantitative- The survey found no articles (See Figure 7).

Qualitative- (See Figure 13) This finding is particularly disturbing for SERE

and the possibility of capture are two constants in all special operations. Given the recent troubling

experience of captured SOF personnel in Somalia during Task Force Ranger operations, this

would seem to be a field of study and writing that would generate great interest. Potential topics

exist in abundance, such as planning considerations for SERE, training methods to prepare SOF

personnel for capture and/or resistance, research and development efforts to assist evading SOF

personnel, and survival techniques. This category demands attention, for the eventuality that SOF

personnel in future operations will be captured or become evaders is certain.

* Aviation Platforms/Systems

Quantitative- Eleven articles appeared here. This is 3 percent of the total surveyed.

Five occurred in non-SOF periodicals, four in Special Warfare, and two in Night Flyer (See

Figure 7).

Qualitative- (See Figure 13) These statistics are surprisingly low, considering

the number of different aviation systems employed by the SOF community. In fact, there are

literally 'two communities' within SOF aviation, composed of the Army's SOAR and AFSOC's

23rd Air Force. Each community has different aviation platforms, different training regimens, and

different capabilities. That notwithstanding, excluding publications from non-SOF periodicals

(these were generally overviews of SOF aviation platforms- providing few specifics)16, only six

articles focused on aviation platforms and systems. Surprisingly, four of these articles appeared in

Special Warfare. This left the very low figure of two articles appearing in Night Flyer.

Considering the fact that AFSOC's principal purpose is to provide the air arm of USSOCOM, this

near-absence in Night Flyer is very puzzling.

* Waterborne Platforms/Systems

Quantitative- This category had an occurrence of 24 articles, which represents 8

percent of the total. Of these 24 works, 23 appeared in Full Mission Profile. The remaining

one appeared in Special Warfare (See Figure 7).

Qualitative- (See Figure 13) Not surprisingly, Full Mission Profile had

almost exclusive rights to the sampling of 24 articles focused on Waterborne platforms and

systems. However, Army Special Forces still maintains a small waterborne and underwater

infiltration capability, and it was surprising to find that no ARSOC articles appeared on this

subject.

* Land Platforms/Systems

Quantitative- The survey found no articles (See Figure 7).

Qualitative- (See Figure 13) This absence of published works occurred

although both Army SF and Navy SEALs are making use of ground mobility systems. Without

dialogue on this topic, the SOF community will remain largely uninformed as to both the utility of

such systems and how to best employ them.

* Combat Service/Combat Service Support (CS/CSS)

Quantitative- Three articles appeared here, which represent just under 1 percent.

Of these articles, one was in Special Warfare, one in Full Mission Profile, and the last

in a non-SOF periodical (See Figure 8).

Qualitative- (See Figure 13) The SOF community cannot disregard its logistic

lifeline and that lifeline's unique role in special operations without significantly increasing

operational risk. Unfortunately, in this study, there appeared very little evidence of such attention.

It is natural, especially in a relatively young community such as SOF, that the 'warfighting' aspects

of special operations should receive the lion's share of the attention. Nonetheless, special

operations are just as vulnerable to the limitations imposed by logistic realities as any other military

endeavor, and in some ways more so. Potential subjects such as supply delivery systems, food

and water considerations in denied areas, and maintaining high-technology systems in primitive

environments are all examples of areas that urgently require study. The SOF community ignores

these needs at its own risk.

* Command & Control/Technology/Electronic Warfare

Quantitative- This category contained six articles. This represents 2 percent of the

total surveyed. Two were in Special Warfare (both non-SOF authors), one in Full Mission

Profile, and one in Night Flyer (non-SOF author) (See Figure 8).

Qualitative- (See Figure 13) Considering the so-called "Revolution in Military

Affairs" that is occurring in every facet of DOD, this was a surprising finding. SOF personnel

have always taken pride in their ability to capitalize on emerging technologies, and the SOF

community has touted the fundamental importance of technology superiority for special

operations.17 Nonetheless, the low sampling rate for these articles indicates that few SOF authors

are writing about technology's impact or the problems encountered in trying to integrate emerging

technologies into SOF operations.

The inherent danger in such a trend is that failing to leverage technology could invite

disaster for SOF. The rapid proliferation of state-of-the-art sensor and weapons technologies is

creating an increasingly hostile operating environment for SOF. SOF personnel, operating in areas

where normal means of fire and logistic support are unavailable, could rapidly become isolated and

effectively neutralized by the application of such capabilities. Only by staying ahead of the

technology development and acquisition cycle of potential adversaries can SOF elements hope to

maintain a survivable edge in future SOF operations. But the lack of writing on the subject in

professional journals does not bode well for the interest in leveraging or debating the utility of such

technology.

* Medical

Quantitative- Six articles occurred in this category, which was 2 percent of the

total. Two appeared in Special Warfare (both non-SOF authors), two in Full Mission

Profile, and two in Night Flyer (again, non-operator authors) (See Figure 8).

Qualitative- (See Figure 13) The articles found in this category dealt reasonably

well with the delivery of medical support to targeted populations, but failed to cover the equally

complex requirements of caring for operators' unique medical requirements. Medical

considerations and activities in special operations, both in terms of the health of operating units and

the delivery of humanitarian assistance, increase in importance with every operation. Almost all of

the articles found in this survey dealt with delivering humanitarian aid. None dealt specifically

with maintaining the health of SOF units when operating in denied or difficult areas for extended

periods of time, and none dealt with the management of wounded SOF personnel.

* Weapons/Ordnance

Quantitative- The survey found four articles here. This is 1 percent of the total.

Of these four pieces, three occurred in Full Mission Profile, with the remaining one appearing

in Special Warfare (non-SOF author) (See Figure 8).

Qualitative- (See Figure 13) Very little interest is apparent in this study for

SOF-unique weaponry. In some respects, this may be a reflection of the reality that contemporary

SOF operations are less about actual force-on-force combat than they are about intelligence

gathering, training foreign forces, or delivering humanitarian aid. Nonetheless, SOF units

maintain a small but significant strike capability, and SOF weaponry lies at the center of that

capability. Particularly interesting in this regard is that despite the abundant employment of

AFSOC's AC-130 gunships throughout the world, no articles on the employment of its various

weapons systems occurred in the study.

* Planning

Quantitative- Five articles appeared. This represents just under 2 percent of the

total surveyed. All five were in Special Warfare (See Figure 8).

Qualitative- (See Figure 13) The survey found that very few articles appeared

on any of the many aspects of SOF operational planning. SOF units around the world are planning

for both training and 'real-world' operations everyday. Detailed and meticulous planning is

supposed to be a hallmark of SOF units. Given the very high operations tempo for SOF, one

might expect that 'planning' would be popular topic for written professional discourse: how to

plan, special considerations given changing environments and constraints, planning 'lessons

learned,' and whether or not training procedures should be standardized across the joint

components. None of this was in evidence in this study, and the low numbers of works in this

category do not bode well.

* Engineering

Quantitative- The survey found no articles (See Figure 8).

Qualitative- (See Figure 13) Considering the fact that "engineering" is a

separate and distinct career track, and the reality that special operations engineers are active in all

SOF operations worldwide, the complete absence of articles is most disturbing. Special operations

engineering, of either the demolition/combat engineering or civil-engineering variety, should be of

significant professional interest. The absence of any articles on the subject indicates that very few

people are interested in either disseminating information about operating in either role or in

developing new ideas.

* Fire Support

Quantitative- The survey found a total of two articles in this category, which is just

under 1 percent of the total. Both appeared in Special Warfare (See Figure 8).

Qualitative- (See Figure 13) The low number of occurrences in this category

might be explained by the relatively low probability that conventional fire support systems will

influence or support special operations. However, signficant research & development and

procurement effort has gone into acquiring SOF-unique systems for either providing fire support

to SOF units in denied areas or for assisting SOF elements in calling-for-fire or providing

weapons terminal guidance. Very little of this is in evidence according to the results of this survey.

* Intelligence

Quantitative- Four works were in this category. This is 1 percent of the total.

Three pieces appeared in Full Mission Profile (two had non-operator authors), and the

remaining one appeared in Special Warfare (See Figure 8).

Qualitative- (See Figure 13) This small finding is disturbing because

'intelligence' occupies two critical areas of interest for SOF. First, SOF units often conduct

intelligence-gathering operations. Second, SOF units depend on detailed and timely intelligence to

both minimize encounters with unforeseen hazards and to maximize the effect of SOF actions.

Nonetheless, only one article on intelligence appeared in Special Warfare and three in

Full Mission Profile. In one of those cases, the article was an overview of available

intelligence systems, rather than a piece that promoted the discussion of intelligence issues among

SOF operators.l8 This is an area of fundamental importance to all special operations and SOF

units. The handling, using, gathering, and distributing of intelligence are recurrent themes in all

special missions, and it is an area which "cries out" for greater emphasis by SOF writers.

* Legal

Quantitative- The survey had four articles in this category. This accounts for 1

percent of the total surveyed. All four pieces were in Special Warfare (all had non-SOF

authors) (See Figure 8).

Qualitative- (See Figure 13) The very few articles that occurred in this category

covered legal issues from only the most limited standpoint. They dealt primarily with 'law of war'

issues as they pertain to SOF. While these are worthwhile issues, they are only the most

superficial aspect of legal considerations in special operations. As potential adversaries blend more

and more seamlessly into the indigenous populations that operators must deal with, the legal

ramifications of operator activities become more and more complex. Many new considerations

with direct legal implications demand the urgent attention of SOF personnel: rules of engagement,

working in conjunction with international civilian and/or military organizations with their own

operating standards and codes of conduct, and delivering valuable humanitarian assistance that can

be either misused or misappropriated. All these subjects beg for study and exploration.

* Infiltration/Exfiltration

Quantitative- The survey found one article in this category, which is less than 1

percent of the total surveyed. This one article appeared in Special Warfare (See Figure 9).

Qualitative- (See Figure 13) This category is an important and common thread

in all special operations. Much of an operator's training, regardless of component, and a great deal

of the USSOCOM's fiscal resources exist to support this category of SOF activity. During

mission preparation and briefbacks, the greatest amount of detailed planning often occurs in

support of these activities. Nonetheless, in this entire survey only 1 article appeared to focus

here. l9

A sole article found in this category is one of the most puzzling results of this survey.

Much of what defines the SOF community and sets it apart from other forces is its unique focus on

accomplishing missions in denied areas where conventional forces cannot go. All SOF training

and most systems procurement for SOF emphasize the primacy of successful infiltration and

exfiltration. This emphasis is an extension of the premise that if an operator fails to arrive at the

target with all capabilities intact, his mission will probably be a failure. How then is it possible that

so few authors appear to focus on this fundamentally important aspect of special operations?

Perhaps this very pervasiveness mitigates against such attention. Perhaps SOF units and

personnel are so universally focused on conducting infiltration/exfiltration activities that it rarely

occurs to anyone that these experiences should be written down. Regardless, the fact remains that

the SOF community must spend greater energy debating and writing about this vitally important

category.

* Rebuttal/Response

Quantitative- Seven articles fell into this category. This represents 2 percent of the

total. Five works appeared in Full Mission Profile. The remaining two occurred in Special

Warfare (one had a non-SOF author) (See Figure 9).

Qualitative- (See Figure 13) When articles like these appear, they are signs of a

healthy and stimulating debate that can elicit the very best that SOF writers have to offer. In this

survey, these articles appeared most often in Full Mission Profile. More should be done to

encourage these professional 'debates' in all SOF journals.

* Joint/Combined Operations and Issues

Quantitative- Twenty three articles occurred in this category. This represents 7

percent of the total surveyed. Seventeen pieces appeared in Full Mission Profile, while the

remaining six articles were in Special Warfare (See Figure 9).

Qualitative- This category enjoyed a relatively high frequency of occurrence. This

appears to be a positive reflection of the SOF community's concern with the conduct of joint and

combined operations. In particular, combined operations seemed to draw the majority of attention

in these articles. That said, there are a number of joint interoperability issues that lie unaddressed

in this survey, such as: how should AFSOC and SOAR assets be utilized when a Joint Force Air

Component Command (JFACC) is established, what are the operational boundaries between Army

SF and Navy SEALs, or what is the role of JSOTF assets when a Joint Rescue Coordination

Center (JRCC) is formed?

* Personnel/Career Management

Quantitative- The survey found a total of 19 pieces in this category. This

represents 6 percent of the total surveyed. Twelve appeared in Special Warfare. Five works

were in Full Mission Profile, with one article appearing in Night Flyer, and one in a

non-SOF periodical (See Figure 9).

Qualitative- (See Figure 13) Personnel and career management appears to be

much more on the mind of ARSOC writers than in any other component. This may be a reflection

of the fact that within ARSOC there are many more subspecialties (Ranger, SF, CA, PSYOP, and

SOAR) with different potential career tracks.

* Repeat Articles

Quantitative- Five works fell into this category, which represents 2 percent of the

total surveyed. Two articles appeared in Full Mission Profile, two appeared in non-SOF

periodicals, and one appeared in Special Warfare (See Figure 9).

Qualitative- (See Figure 13) In some occasions there were articles that appeared

in more than one SOF periodical. Usually these were articles whose focus was to announce some

new policy or organization within USSOCOM or one of its components. While these

announcements serve some useful purpose, to have them appear as authored articles in a

professional periodical is perhaps a inappropriate use of the medium. At a minimum, they takeup

space within SOF periodicals that might otherwise be used for written professional discourse.

* Position/Opinion/Philosophy

Quantitative- Forty three pieces occurred here. This is 14 percent of the total.

Twenty one works appeared in Full Mission Profile, representing 49 percent of the 43 articles.

Seventeen articles were in Special Warfare, with four pieces appearing in non-SOF periodicals,

and one article in Night Flyer (See Figure 9).

Qualitative- (See Figure 13) Among the most heartening findings in this survey

was the high number of articles in this category. The high occurrence indicates that many authors

were willing to state opinions, describe their personal philosophies, or advocate professional

positions. Some of the articles were reflections on personal and historical fighting philosophies.

Others were articles that advocated rethinking traditional training systems. The SOF community

has always prided itself on its emphasis on recruiting independent thinkers, operators who are both

willing and proficient at unorthodox thinking. The results found in this category suggest that this

continues to be one of SOF's strong suits.

* Research and Development/Acquisition

Quantitative- The survey found a total of seven articles. This represents 2 percent

of the total surveyed. Four occurred in Full Mission Profile, and three works appeared in

Special Warfare (See Figure 9).

Qualitative- This category presented another puzzling finding. One of the reasons

that USSOCOM has its own budgetary authority was to protect the vital funding and development

of SOF unique systems, weapons, and platforms.20 Despite this, and despite the fact that

USSOCOM has now successfully fielded and is developing a number SOF-unique items, very

little is being written about either the process or the end results.

* News/Miscellaneous

Quantitative- Five articles occurred here, which is 2 percent of the total surveyed.

Four were in Full Mission Profile, with the remaining one article appearing in Special Warfare

(non-SOF authored) (See Figure 9).

Qualitative- (See Figure 13) These articles, though pleasant enough to read,

serve little purpose in promoting written professional discourse. They were usually PAO releases,

with no redeeming value for the SOF community other than to perhaps raise unit or family morale.

Authors

Quantitative- The tabulation of author-specific information appears in Figure 10.

It shows that in non-SOF periodicals, 15 authors were SF, 1 was a Ranger, 1 was PSYOP, 1 was

a SEAL, 5 were Air Force SOF (AFSOF), and 1 was SOAR. Two of the writers in non-SOF

periodicals were non-operators (though they were coauthors), and two were civilians. All authors

in the non-SOF periodicals were officers. Two were in the reserve component.

In Special Warfare, 68 writers were SF, none were Rangers, 12 were PSYOP, 9 were

CA, 2 were SOAR, 2 were SEALs, and 2 were AFSOF. Sixty three of these were non-operators,

and 32 were civilians. One hundred six authors were officers (83 operators, 23 non-operators),

while 14 (10 operators, 4 non-operators) were enlisted. Eighteen officer writers were in the

reserve component, while 2 of the enlisted authors were in the Reserves or National Guard.

In Night Flyer, nine writers were AFSOF, one was Army SF. Fifteen were non-SOF

qualified, with 1 civilian. Twelve were officers (6 operators, 6 non-operators), while 3 (all

operators) were enlisted. None of the authors were in the reserve component.

In Full Mission Profile, 122 writers were SEALs, 2 were Army SF. Sixteen were

non-SOF qualified, with 3 civilians, and one non-SOF Army author. One hundred seventeen

were officers (113 operators, 4 non-operators), while 29 (22 operators, 7 non-operators) were

enlisted. Five writers were in the reserve component, and all were in the officer, SOF-qualified

category.

Qualitative- (See Figure 14) Clearly dominant among the authors were the two

occupational fields of Army Special Forces (86 authors) and Navy SEALs (124 authors). Given

the high population that Army SF represents, the number of SF authors is not surprising. By

comparison, the fact that even more SEALs wrote articles (especially considering the lower

population base in comparison to Army SF) is particularly noteworthy.

More disturbing, however, were the comparatively low numbers turned in by Ranger,

SOAR, and AFSOF authors. Ranger operations have comprised a very significant portion of SOF

activities in recent years, but very little writing has been done by Rangers that have participated in

these operations. Similarly, SOAR and AFSOF, with their role of providing the infiltration and

exfiltration means for all of SOF, have been extraordinarily active in recent years. Yet, like the

Rangers, the aircrews and pilots that have flown in these operations do not seem to be writing

about their experiences or operational analyses.

One must also note how very few AFSOC, SOF-qualified authors contributed. A total of

nine such authors appeared across the entire survey. Clearly, more needs to be done to encourage

AFSOC operators to pick up their pens and begin contributing to the professional exchange.

The most striking result of analyzing the rank distribution of authors is the wide disparity

between the number of officer versus enlisted contributors (See Figure 15). A total of 299

officers contributed articles, while only 59 enlisted personnel contributed, roughly 20 percent of

the total. Yet, the SOF community has always prided itself on the age, maturity, operational

expertise, education, and sophistication of its enlisted population. The question stands out: is

SOF doing enough to encourage and challenge its enlisted members to contribute to professional

discourse by writing and publishing their thoughts, experiences, and recommendations?

Again, the very small number of AFSOC writers, even when one includes the non-SOF

qualified Air Force authors, is striking. Of course, of all the SOF-specific journals, Night Flyer

was the latest to begin publishing, issuing its first edition only in 1992. Nonetheless, more needs

to be done to increase the volume and quality of writing from this component of USSOCOM.

Finally, when examining the officer statistics, one finds a surprisingly low number of O-4

authors in comparison to other ranks. While there were 73 O-3 and 62 O-5 authors, there were

only 47 O-4 authors. It may be that this disparity is because most competitive officers attend their

service's Command & General Staff College while an O-4. The demands for writing and research

are high during the year of attendance, and perhaps this lowers the likelihood that the average O-4

will seek to publish works on an extracurricular basis. There was also a rapid decrease from O-5's

with 62 authors to O-6's with 31 authors. This may provide additional evidence of the effect

advanced schooling has in deterring extracurricular writing, as competitive O-6's usually attend a

War College or its equivalent.

CHAPTER FOUR

Conclusion, Recommendations, and Final Notes

Conclusion

While there are bright spots in the quality and quantity of non-doctrinal SOF literature

published since 1988, the level of written professional exchange and debate is not commensurate

with the quality of SOF personnel and potential. Among the areas that require special emphasis are

doctrinal SOF missions, the SOAR/AFSOC and their capabilities, language and cultural

awareness, threat education, SERE, technology issues as they pertain to SOF, intelligence as it

pertains to SOF, and infiltration/exfiltration.

The most disturbing aspect of this review was the paucity of writing on SOF's doctrinal

missions. These missions constitute SOF's reason-for-being, and if the SOF community

continues to ignore debating and exploring them in written professional exchange, it does so at

great peril. If SOF personnel will not take a hand in shaping the conduct of future missions, either

exigent circumstance or uninformed hands will shape their missions for them. The large amount of

writing on Peace Opns/LIC/OOTW is somewhat encouraging, but only if this venue is not simply

"a path of lesser resistance" compared to the harder work of writing about doctrinal missions.

When executing these doctrinal missions, h is the enlisted SOF operators, not the officers,

who actually execute SOF operations. Yet these enlisted personnel wrote only 20 percent of the

articles surveyed. The SOF community must do better than that. Enlisted operators represent

SOF's most skilled and savvy personnel. If they are contributing less than one quarter of all

professional writing, the SOF community is missing the opportunity to reap the benefits of their

expertise and operational experience.

Despite these problems, there is some mitigation to be found in the fact that our SOF

journals are still relatively young. Much of the copy in the early editions of Special Warfare,

Full Mission Profile, and Night Flyer were spent in 'feel good' pieces about a young and

vibrant new military community. One can almost sense the raw enthusiasm in these early articles.

Special operations had a new lease on life and the sky was the limit.

But while such early simplicity is understandable, those days are now gone. USSOCOM

and its components now have their own budgetary authority, and their share of this nation's

military endeavors is increasing daily. With those twin opportunities come increased

responsibilities. SOF is shouldering more and more operational burden, with a corresponding rise

in SOF's impact on the nation's vital security interests. SOF professionals cannot afford to act like

neophytes anymore.

If USSOCOM and its members are to realize the full measure of their potential as military

professionals they must elevate the quality of their written discourse. At present, none of

USSOCOM's journals rise to the academic or professional standards of periodicals such as

Military Review, Parameters, or U.S. Naval Institute Proceedings. Of the three

SOF-specific journals, Special Warfare probably comes closest (it has also been in operation

the longest) to those standards. Nonetheless, Full Mission Profile has done a credible job in

nearly closing the three-year headstart that Special Warfare enjoyed. Unfortunately, Night

Flyer, has the farthest to go as it still only barely rises above the level of a newsletter in terms of

article selection and the level of academic rigor apparent in its writing.

Recommendations

The first recommendations pertain to the three SOF periodicals of Special Warfare, Full

Mission Profile, and Night Flyer.

(1) Reassign responsibility for the publication of Full Mission Profile and

Night Flyer from their respective component public affairs offices. While these PAO's have

performed herculean feats in keeping these publications alive, especially during their embryonic

years, the public affairs office is an inappropriate place for the compilation, editorial review, and

publication of a professional military journal.

(2) Stabilize publication of Special Warfare to ensure uninterrupted publication.

While Special Warfare is undoubtedly the 'class act' of the SOF-specific journals, it has often

missed quarterly publications.

The final recommendation is that USSOCOM should establish a Joint Special Operations

publication. The component SOF journals are adequate for dealing with service-unique issues, but

no dedicated arena exists for dealing with joint SOF issues or topics of common interest to all

USSOCOM components. As recent operational experience shows, SOF units operate almost

exclusively in the joint environment. A dedicated publication for promoting written discourse

about that joint environment would serve each component well.

Furthermore, the establishment of a Joint SOF publication, under the auspices of the

specified command, could serve to elevate the standards of all SOF journals. If given adequate

funding and command emphasis, this joint SOF journal could establish a higher benchmark of

academic rigor and written professional exchange for all the SOF components.

Final Notes

This study cannot be considered comprehensive. Limitations of time and material access

prevented an exhaustive review of all SOF literature published between 1988 and 1994. In truth, a

truly exhaustive study would include both the material utilized in this study, SOF literature written

in the days prior to the establishment of USSOCOM, and all the other categories of SOF literature

that the chosen methodology excluded. What was attempted here was to gather the most

representative sample possible of literature being published by the SOF community, and then

analyze that sample in order to reach some conclusions about the trends of this community's

written professional discourse.

The focus throughout this study was the "operator," although admittedly the methodology

did not focus exclusively on him. There are quite a few non-operator articles included in this

research. Nonetheless, by focusing on the journals published by the USSOCOM components, the

trends and data found give clear indications of what the SOF community is writing and not writing

about.

Very few periodicals, outside the SOF-specific journals, contained articles by

SOF-qualified authors. In just over 150 SOF-related articles in such journals, only 25 had

SOF-qualified authors. In retrospect, had the study excluded all non-SOF periodicals from this

study, the statistical results or conclusions would not have been very different.

But ultimately, this literature review should serve the same "operators" whose writings it

studied. The information in this review may prove useful for operators-turned-authors looking

for potential topics. Perhaps it will stimulate some to pick up the pen and write about their

experiences and concerns when they might not otherwise have done so.

There truly is something "special" about the SOF community, both in terms of its missions

and in terms of its people. Just as one cannot 'mass-produce' special operating forces, one cannot

mass produce the special discipline, creativity, initiative, and sophistication that must be part of

each operator.

Taking the time to sit, think, and write is the best way to ensure that SOF personnel keep

their professional spirits fresh and their minds sharp. Professional debate and discourse through

the medium of writing are the most compelling ways of both invigorating the community and

spreading valuable operational expertise and information. USSOCOM must foster the habit of

writing among its personnel, and it must reward and encourage those that do. In SOF, the most

potent weapons are, after all, the minds of the operators.

In the final analysis, special operations are about people... the operators that are the engines

of SOF. And if SOF is about people, then SOF is ultimately about ideas, for ideas are what define

and guide human beings everywhere and in every age. Since time immemorial, the method of

choice for collecting, expressing, sharing, and nurturing ideas has been the medium of the written

word.

SOF must do likewise. Operators must give shape to their thoughts, voice to their

experiences, and coherence to their deliberations. They must share the growing wealth of

knowledge about their unique community and operations in a way that clarifies and through a

method that perpetuates.

USSOCOM and its component elements have enormous potential, and hopefully a bright

future. But that future exists only for those who are willing to grasp it. To grasp that future, the

special operators of this community, while they practice their unique and hazardous craft, must

have the discipline and the willingness to grasp the pen and record their deeds and thoughts for

future generations.

Glossary of Terms

AFSOC- Air Force Special Operations Command

ARSOC- Army Special Operations Command

CA- Civil Affairs (CA)

CCT- Combat Control Team: Air Force special operations personnel qualified in forward air

control and other special operations skills.

CN- Counter-Narcotics: Special operations to interdict, seize, or otherwise stem illegal drug

activity.

CS/CSS- Combat Support/Combat Service Support

CT- Counter-Terrorism: Special operations to interdict terrorist activity.

DA- Direct Action: Special operations to attack and destroy selected targets.

FID- Foreign Internal Defense: Special operations to assist and/or advise host nation forces in

military operations.

JSOC- Joint Special Operations Command

JSOTF- Joint Special Operations Task Force

MOS- Military Occupational Specialty

NAVSOC- Navy Special Operations Command

OOTW- Operations Other Than War

PME- Professional Military Education

PSYOP- Psychological Operations

SBS/SBU- Special Boat Squadron/Unit

SDV- SEAL Delivery Vehicle

SEAL- Sea-Air-Land: Naval personnel trained in maritime special operations.

SERE- Survival, Escape, Resistance, Evasion

SF- Army Special Forces: Army special operations personnel.

SOAR- Special Operations Aviation Regiment: Army special operations rotary-wing forces.

SOF- Special Operations Forces

SR- Special Reconnaissance: Special operations to conduct reconnaissance in denied areas.

STG- Special Tactics Group: Designation for Air Force special operations units comprised of

Combat Control Teams and Pararescue.

STS- Special Tactics Squadron: Designation for Air Force combat control team units.

TSAR- Theater Search and Rescue: Special operations to rescue friendly personnel from denied

areas.

USSOCOM- United States Special Operations Command

UW- Unconventional Warfare: Special operations to assist and/or advise insurgent forces in military operations.

Endnotes:

1. William G. Boykin, The Origins of the United States Special Operations Command, Carlisle

Barracks: Army War College (1992)

2. Eric W. Buckland, The Rapid Support Unit: Special Forces Support to Joint Task Force Six,

Special Warfare, Vol 7, No 1, (January 1994)

3. Jack N. Summe, PSYOP Support to Operations Desert Shield/Desert Storm, Special Warfare,

Vol 5, No 2, (October 1992) and

4. Douglas E. Nash, Civil Affairs in the Gulf War: Administration of an Occupied Town, Special

Warfare, Vol 7, No 4, (January 1994)

5. Dean Valentine, ASDV-2: A Unique Diving Support Platform, Full Mission Profile, Vol 3, No

2, (Summer 1993)

6. Stephen Sloan, Review Essay: Understanding Terrorism Since the 60's, Special Warfare, Vol

5, No 1, (March 1994)

7. August G. Jannarone and Ray E. Stratton, Toward an Integrated U.S. Strategy

for CounterNarcotics and CounterInsurgency, DISAM Journal, Vol 13, No 2, (Winter 1990-91)

8. SOLLMIS: New data base preserves SOF lessons-learned, Special Warfare, Vol 4, No 1,

(Winter 1991)

9. Carl W. Stiner, USSOCOM Challenges: Risk, Ambiguity, Diversity, Opportunity, Defense

Issues, Vol 7, No 2, (1992)

10. Karl R. Heinz, On the Cutting Edge- Naval Special Warfare Unit ONE, Full Mission Profile,

Vol 2, No 3, (Summer 1992)

11. Phil Rhodes, Commando Look, Night Flyer, Vol 2, (2nd Quarter 1993)

12. Keith Butler, Cobra Cold '93: SOF Units Work with Thai Counterparts, Special Warfare,

Vol 7, No 1, (January 1994)

13. Mike Dyer, Discriminate Shooting, Full Mission Profile, Vol 1, No 1, (Spring 1991)

14. Larry W. Simmons, What's Next: Sneaky, Stealthy, and Do the Unexpected, Full Mission

Profile, Vol 3, No 3, (Summer 1992)

15. Mark D. Boyatt, Unconventional Operations Forces of Special Operations, Special Warfare,

Vol 7, No 4, (January 1994)

16. Brad Baker, Air Force Special Operations Forces (AFSOF): How did we decide what was

enough?, Airlift, Vol 10 (Spring 1988)

17. James J. Lindsay, C3I Challenges for U.S. Special Operations Command, Signal, Vol 42

(May 1988)

18. Edward G. Gallrein III, Intelligence and Naval Special Warfare, Full Mission Profile, Vol 3,

No 1, (Spring 1993)

19. Patrick Desmond, Waterborne Operations: New Training for an Old Mission, Special

Warfare, Vol 2, No 1, (Winter 1989)

20. William G. Boykin, The Origins of the United States Special Operations Command, Carlisle

Barracks: Army War College (1992)

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Special Warfare Magazine

Abizaid, COL John P., and John R. Wood. "Prepared for Peacekeeping: Military Training and

the Peacekeeping Environment." Special Warfare 7, no. 2 (April 1994): 14-20

Adams, LTC Thomas. "SOF in Peace-Support Operations." Special Warfare 6, no. 4 (October

1993): 2-7

Adams, James. "The Role of the Media in Peacekeeping Operations." Special Warfare 7, no. 2

(April 1994): 12-13

Adolph, LTC Robert B. "U.N. Military Civic Action in Cambodia." Special Warfare 7, no. 3

(July 1994): 12-18

Adolph, MAJ Robert B. "Functional Area 39: New Career Management for PSYOP, active CA

Officers.'' Special Warfare 1, no. 2 (July 1988): 26-30

Adolph, LTC Robert B. "Remaining Engaged in Africa: An Army SOF Strategy." Special

Warfare 6, no. 4 (October 1993): 22-25

Bailey, CPT Chris. "PSYOP-unique Equipment: Special 'Weapons' of Communication." Special

Warfare 5, no. 2 (October 1992): 32-34

Banner, CPT Gregory T. "Foreign Training Missions: Tricks of the Trade." Special Warfare 2,

no. 3 (Summer 1989): 43-45

Barnes, LTC Rudolph C. "Civic Action, Humanitarian, and Civic Assistance, and Disaster Relief:

Military priorities in Low-Intensity Conflict." Special Warfare 2, no. 4 (Fall 1989): 34-41

Barnes, COL Rudolph Jr. "Civil Affairs: Diplomat-Warriors in Contemporary Conflict." Special

Warfare 4, no. 1 (Winter 1991): 4- 11

Benson, MAJ Kevin. "Commander's Intent: Providing the Focus for Operations." Special

Warfare 7, no. 1 (January 1994): 42-43

Blankenship, LTC (Ret) D.R. "Marine Expeditionary Unit." Special Warfare 2, no. 2 (Spring

1989): 28-32

Bond, SSG Gregg. "The Lords of Darkness: Oklahoma's l/245th Aviation Battalion." Special

Warfare 5, no. 1 (March 1992): 32-35

Bone, SGM Henry. "Is Fitness Important for Leaders." Special Warfare 3, no. 1 (Winter 1990):

42-43

Borchini, LTC Charles P., and Mari Borstelmann. "PSYOP in Somalia: The Voice of Hope."

Special Warfare 7, no. 4 (October 1994): 2-9

Boyatt, COL Mark D. "Unconventional Operations Forces of Special Operations." Special

Warfare 7, no. 4 (October 1994): 10-17

Brady, MAJ Robert G. "The Civil Affairs FID/UW battalion and Its Implications for SOF in LIC

Operations." Special Warfare 4, no. 1 (Winter 1991): 12-17

Brandon, MSG Linda "Military Coordination Center: Forward Component of Provide Comfort."

Special Warfare 7, no. 3 (July 1994):: 30-31

Bruton, LTC James K. "Preparing Special Operations Forces for Counterinsurgency." Special

Warfare 2, no. 3 (Summer 1989): 32-39

Bruton, LTC James K. "The Subjective Side of Cross-Cultural Communication." Special

Warfare 7, no. 2 (April 1994): 28-31

Bruton, LTC James K., and LTC Wayne D. Zajac. "Cultural Interaction: The Forgotten

Dimension of Low Intensity Conflict." Special Warfare 1, no. 1 (April 1988): 29-33

Bucci, MAJ Steven. "Fighters vs. Thinkers: The Special Operations Staff Officer Course and the

Future of SOF." Special Warfare 2, no. 2 (Spring 1989): 33-37

Bucci, MAJ Steven. "The Greek Civil War." Special Warfare 2, no. 3 (Summer 1989): 46-55

Buckland, MAJ Eric. "The Rapid Support Unit: Special Forces Support to Joint Task Force Six."

Special Warfare 7, no. 1 (January 1994): 16-18

Burback, SGM Steve. "The Blue Helmets: A History of United Nations Peacekeeping Forces."

Special Warfare 7, no. 1 (January 1994): 2-6

Burgess, CPT William H. "Special Operations in the Iran-Iraq War." Special Warfare 2, no. 1

(Winter 1989): 16-27

Burgess, MAJ William H. "A Theory of Ground Reconnaissance." Special Warfare 6, no. 1

(February 1993): 2-7

Burgess, MAJ William H. "Spetsnaz Engineers in the Great Patriotic War." Special Warfare 2,

no. 4 (Fall 1989): 46-51

Burns, COL Mike. "Officer Skills: From Technical and Tactical to a Sense of Humor." Special

Warfare 7, no. 3 (July 1994): 43-45

Bushong, Carol M. "Military Qualification Standards System: Army Framework for Leader

Development." Special Warfare 6, no. 3 (July 1993): 39

Butler, SSG Keith. "Cobra Gold '93: SOF Units Work with Thai Counterparts." Special

Warfare 7, no. 1 (January 1994): 12-15

Butler, SSG Keith. "SOF Support to Hurricane Andrew Recovery." Special Warfare 6, no. 3

(July 1993): 12-17

Carr, CPT Matt. "Special Forces Officer Branch." Special Warfare 1, no. 2 (July 1988): 11-13

Carter, SGM Jake. "Special Forces Enlisted CMF18." Special Warfare 1, no. 2 (July 1988): 15-

Christie, CPT Kevin. "ODA Planning: Tips from the JRTC." Special Warfare 7, no. 2 (April

1994): 22-27

Collins, John M. "Roles and Functions of U.S. Special Operations Forces." Special Warfare 6,

no. 3 (July 1993): 22-27

Cook, Steven E. "Managing Special Operations Forces Doctrine." Special Warfare 7, no. 2 (April

1994): 36-39

Crane, COL Barry, and COL Joel Leson, COL Robert Plebanek, CMDR Paul Shemella, COL

Ronald Smith, and COL Richard Williams. "Between Peace and War: Comprehending

Low-Intensity Conflict." Special Warfare 2, no. 3 (Summer 1989): 4-25

Darragh, LTC Shaun M. "Rangers: The Long Road to Recognition." Special Warfare 1, no. 1

(April 1988): 19-27

Davis, LTC Thomas III. "The Truth about Promotion to Major: A No-Nonsense Guide for

Officers Facing the Major's Promotion Board." Special Warfare 4, no. 1 (Winter 1991):

45-46

DeAtkine, Norvell B. "Communal Strife: The Insurgency of the Future." Special Warfare 5, no.

2 (October 1992): 48-51

DeAtkine, Norvell B. "International Affairs Symposium Examines Regional Problems." Special

Warfare 7, no. 3 (July 1994): 19-21

Delorier, CWO2 Brent A. "Sniper Training in the 10th Special Forces Group." Special Warfare

6, no. 4 (October 1993):: 26-28

Desmond, CPT Patrick. "Waterborne Operations: New Training for an Old Mission." Special

Warfare 2, no. 1 (Winter 1989): 5- 11

Dietrich, COL Joseph K. "Ensuring Readiness for Active and Reserve-Component SF Units."

Special Warfare 5, no. 1 (March 1992): 25-27

Doherty, Terry. "FID in the 90's." Special Warfare 5, no. 1 (March 1992): 39-41

Doherty, Terry. "The Future of Low-Intensity Conflict." Special Warfare 2, no. 3 (Summer

1989): 40-42

Dorogi, LTC Louis T. "Early Special Forces Medical Training: 1952-1971." Special Warfare 3,

no. 1 (Winter 1990): 28-35

Dougherty, CPT Kevin. "Why Civic Actions and Security Cannot be Separated." Special Warfare

7, no. 1 (January 1994): 34-38

Dushnyck, LTC Mark W. "Cameroon: CA Unit Conducts Joint Medical Exercise." Special

Warfare 6, no. 3 (July 1993): 28-29

Eisenstadt, Michael. "Israel's Approach to Special Operations." Special Warfare 7, no. 1

(January 1994): 22-29

Ellis, Rand. "Innovative Means of Achieving Innovative Technology." Special Warfare 7, no. 3

(July 1994): 40-42

Elmo, CPT David S. "Food Distribution during Operation Provide Comfort." Special Warfare 5,

no. 1 (March 1992): 8-9

Epstein, LTC Stephen M., and LTC Robert S. Cronin, and COL James G. Pulley. "JTF Haiti: A

United Nations Foreign Internal Defense Mission." Special Warfare 7, no. 3 (July 1994):

2-9

Fenzel, CPT John III. "Five Imperatives of Coalition Warfare." Special Warfare 6, no. 3 (July

1993): 2-8

Fletcher, James S. "Kachin Rangers: Fighting with Burma's Guerrilla Warriors." Special

Warfare 1, no. 2 (July 1988): 19-27

Fricke, MAJ James R. "The Special Forces Q-Course." Special Warfare 3, no. 1 (Winter 1990):

4-11

Funkhouser, LTC Preston L. "Terrorism as an Element of War: A Primer for the SOF Soldier."

Special Warfare 1, no. 1 (April 1988): 13-17

Goble, Dr. Paul A. "Ethnicity as Explanation, Ethnicity as Excuse." Special Warfare 7, no. 2

(April 1994): 8-11

Grady, MAJ Robert G. "Mass Strategy: A Different approach to Unconventional Warfare."

Special Warfare 2, no. 3 (Summer 1989): 26-31

Green, LT Steve. "Naval Special Warfare: From Frogmen to SEALS." Special Warfare 2, no. 2

(Spring 1989): 24-27

Gruenther, Richard L., and David W. Parmly. "The Crusade of the Green Beret: Eleazar Parmly

IV in Southeast Asia." Special Warfare 5, no. 1 (March 1992): 42-55

Guest, GEN James A. "Special Forces Training: New Initiatives to Enhance the Force." Special

Warfare 1, no. 1 (April 1988): 5-12

Hallford, SGT Scott D. "Federalization: 20th SF Group becomes First RC SF Unit to be

Activated." Special Warfare 5, no. 1 (March 1992): 28-29

Harned, MAJ Glenn. "Bridging the Gap: Special Forces as a member of the Combined Arms

Team"." Special Warfare 1, no. 3 (October 1988): 3-9

Herbert, CWO Scott. "Making the Most of Special Forces Pre-Mission Planning." Special

Warfare 1, no. 1 (April 1988): 35-37

Herbert, CWO Scott. "Special Operations Warrant Officer." Special Warfare 1, no. 2 (July

1988): 13-15

Herbert, CWO2 Scott S., and MAJ Robert B. Adolph Jr. "A Common-Sense Approach to

Psychological Operations." Special Warfare 2, no. 1 (Winter 1989)30-33

Hicks, Guy M., and George E. Pickett, Jr. "Tanks and Helicopters: Factors Influencing the Rate

of Innovation." Special Warfare 7, no. 4 (October 1994): 34-41

Hinrichs, LTC Ralph Jr. "Joint Duty: Pathway to the Stars or Purple Haze?" Special Warfare 2,

no. 2 (Spring 1989): 38-41

Hoffman, Bruce. "Future Trends in Terrorist Targeting and Tactics." Special Warfare 6, no. 3

(July 1993): 30-35

Huckabee, LTC Robert H. "Reconnaissance: Looking to the Future Through the Past." Special

Warfare 6, no. 1 (February 1993): 9-11

Hurteau, BG Joseph C., and MAJ Robert D. Hayner. "USACAPOC: One Step Closer to the

'Total Army'." Special Warfare 5, no. 1 (March 1992): 14-17

Ivey, MAJ Karl F. "But It's Only Civilian Property..." Special Warfare 2, no. 4 (Fall 1989): 42-

Johnson, CPT David E.A. "Cross-Cultural Communication in Coalition Warfare." Special

Warfare 6, no. 3 (July 1993): 9-11

Jones, COL Jeffrey B. "Psychological Operations in Desert Shield, Desert Storm, and Urban

Freedom." Special Warfare 7, no. 3 (July 1994): 22-29

Kappelman, LTC Paul B., and MAJ Robert E. Armstrong. "PSYOP Task Force to JTF Andrew:

A Case Study in Support to Disaster-Recovery Operations." Special Warfare 6, no. 3 (July

1993): 18-21

Kernan, BG William F. "USSOCOM creates clearinghouse for new ideas." Special Warfare 7,

no. 2 (April 1994): 21

Kilgore, MAJ Joe E. "Psyop in Support of Low-Intensity Conflict." Special Warfare 5, no. 2

(October 1992): 26-31

King, CPT Charles. "The SF Branch: Two Years Later." Special Warfare 2, no. 3 (Summer

1989): 56-59

Lambert, LTC Geoffrey. "Fire-Support Planning at the ODA Level." Special Warfare 6, no. 3

(July 1993): 45

Lewis, LTC Robert D. "SOF Planning for Coalition Operations." Special Warfare 7, no. 4

(October 1994): 28-33

Lewis, CPT Robert D. "Pegasus Bridge: Prelude to D-Day." Special Warfare 2, no. 2 (Spring

1989): 42-45

Lindsay, GEN James J. "USSOCOM: Strengthening the SOF Capability." Special Warfare 2,

no. 2 (Spring 1989): 4-9

Locher, James R. III. "Focusing on the Future: The Role of SOF in Emerging Defense Strategy."

Special Warfare 5, no. 1 (March 1992): 10-13

Martinez, MAJ Jose M. "Functional Area 39: Guidelines for Training and Professional

Development." Special Warfare 5, no. 2 (October 1992): 52-54

McDonald, Lawrence H. "The OSS: America's First National Intelligence Organization." Special

Warfare 6, no. 1 (February 1993): 24-31

McGill, SFC Jim. "FM31-2S5: New Manual Focuses on Special Reconnaissance." Special

Warfare 6, no. 1 (February 1993): 12-15

McTyeire, MAJ Rex H. "Operations and Intelligence: Keeping Pace with Special Forces

Missions." Special Warfare 3, no. 1 (Winter 1990): 16-21

Merchant, Julie M. "Threat Weapons and Weapons Technologies: Implications for Army SOF."

Special Warfare 7, no. 3 (July 1994): 32-39

Mulholland, MAJ John F. "Grabbing the Brass Ring: Making the Most of Overseas Training."

Special Warfare 6, no. 4 (October 1993): 42-43

Nash, MAJ Douglas E. "Civil Affairs in the Gulf War: Administration of an Occupied Town."

Special Warfare 7, no. 4 (October 1994): 18-27

Oelrich, COL Frederick C. "The 200K Cal-Up: Just Cause vs. Desert Shield." Special Warfare

5, no. 1 (March 1992): 18-24

O'Brien, CPT Michael A. "The Reserve-Component Special Forces Soldier: An Asset with

Special Capabilities." Special Warfare 5, no. 1 (March 1992): 36-38

Paddock, Dr. Alfred H. Jr. "PSYOP in the early 1980's: The Way We Were." Special Warfare

6, no. 4 (October 1993): 29-33

Parker, MAJ Jay M. "Training the PSYOP Force." Special Warfare 5, no. 2 (October 1992): 2-5

Porter, MAJ (P) Neil. "Legal Aspects of Civil Affairs." Special Warfare 7, no. 2 (April 1994):

32-35

Reppert, LTC John C. "Psychological Operations: The Oldest Weapon of Mass Destruction."

Special Warfare 1, no. 2 (July 1988): 28-33

Riester, MAJ Carl W. "Cold-Weather Operations." Special Warfare 7, no. 1 (January 1994): 7-

Rogers, CW02 Thomas F.D. "Missions-oriented Language Training." Special Warfare 6, no. 1

(February 1993): 23

Rollins, LTC George. "Special Forces Pretraining." Special Warfare 5, no. 1 (March 1992): 30-

Rome, MSG Calvin. "NCO Professional Development: The Psyop Specialist." Special Warfare

3, no. 1 (Winter 1990): 37-41

Rylander, R. Lynn. "ASD-SOLIC: The Congressional Approach to SOF Reorganization."

Special Warfare 2, no. 2 (Spring 1989): 10-17

Sandler, Stanley. "Army Psywarriors: A History of U.S. Army Psychological operations."

Special Warfare 5, no. 2 (October 1992): 18-25

Sandler, Stanley. "Seal the Victory: A History of U.S. Army Civil Affairs." Special Warfare 4,

no. 1 (Winter 1991): 38-41

Sandler, Dr. Stanley. "Military History: Soldier's Professional Memory." Special Warfare 1, no.

2 (July 1988): 16-21

Sayre, MAJ (Ret) Ed. "Special Forces Command and Control: Running an Operational Base."

Special Warfare 5, no. 2 (October 1992): 42-4

Schachnow, MG Sidney. "Intercultural Communication: The Need for Conceptual Skills."

Special Warfare 6, no. 1 (February 1993): 20-22

Schaller, LTC Richard. "The Customer Guide to Airpower." Special Warfare 6, no. 4 (October

1993): 11-13

Schultz, Dr. Richard H. "Peace Operations: Post-Conflict Reconstruction and Restoration-

Assistance Missions." Special Warfare 7, no. 2 (April 1994): 2-6

Simmons, LTC (Ret) Thomas R. "Legal Aspects of Security Assistance." Special Warfare 2, no.

4 (Fall 1989): 29-33

Sloan, Stephen. "Review Essay: Understanding Terrorism Since the 60's- An Evaluation of

Academic and Operational Perspectives." Special Warfare 5, no. 1 (March 1992): 56-59

Smith, COL Ronald M. "Civil Affairs in Support of the Unified Combatant Command: A

Proposal for USCENTCOM." Special Warfare 4, no. 1 (Winter 1991): 18-27

Smith, CPT Dan. "Mission Planning and Rehearsal Systems: New tools for Mission

Preparation." Special Warfare 6, no. 1 (February 1993): 36-38

Sofaer, Abraham D. "Terrorism, the Law and the National Defense." Special Warfare 2, no. 4

(Fall 1989): 12-27

Stanley, CPT John L. "Beyond the Sniper: Special Operations Target Interdiction." Special

Warfare 1, no. 2 (July 1988): 3-9

Stech, LTC Frank J. "Upheaval in Europe: PSYOP communications Lessons Learned." Special

Warfare 5, no. 2 (October 1992): 13-17

Sterner, LTC Thomas G., and Carol M. Bushong. "MQS Evolves Into Officer Foundation

Standards." Special Warfare 7, no. 4 (October 1994): 42-45

Sullivan, GEN Gordon R. "The Army's 218th Birthday: Continuity, Change, Growth." Special

Warfare 6, no. 4 (October 1993): 8-10

Summe, MAJ Jack N. "PSYOP Support to Operations Desert Shield/Desert Storm." Special

Warfare 5, no. 2 (October 1992): 6-9

Summe, MAJ Jack. "Total PSYOP Integration: Reorganizing active and reserve-component

PSYOP forces." Special Warfare 5, no. 2 (October 1992): 10-12

Susong, CPT William. "The Tri-Zone Concept: Allocation of SOF assets in a

Counterinsurgency." Special Warfare 2, no. 1 (Winter 1989): 12-15

Thomas, MSG Kirk. "The Self-Development Test: What's In It for Me?." Special Warfare 6, no.

3 (July 1993): 36-38

Timmes, COL Thomas A. "Military Psychological Operations in the 1990's." Special Warfare 7,

no. 1 (January 1994): 19-21

Turbiville, Dr. Graham H. "The Organized Crime Dimension of Regional Conflict and

'Operations Other than War'." Special Warfare 7, no. 2 (April 1994): 6-7

Velky, MAJ James L. "SFAS: Special Forces Assessment and Selection." Special Warfare 3,

no. 1 (Winter 1990): 12-15

Vines, CPT Brian R. "Special Reconnaissance Planning: Notes from the JRTC." Special

Warfare 6, no. 1 (February 1993): 16-19

Vogelsang, CPT Bob. "Treating the Animals of Kuwait." Special Warfare 5, no. 1 (March 1992):

Wakefield, LT Tonya H. "JTF Haiti: Lasting Impressions." Special Warfare 7, no. 3 (July

1994): 10-11

Walsh, MAJ Gary L. "No Special Rules for Special Operations: The Relationship of Law and the

Judge Advocate to SOF." Special Warfare 2, no. 4 (Fall 1989): 4-11

Ward, James R. "The Activities of Detachment 101." Special Warfare 6, no. 4 (October 1993):

14-21

Watson, LTC Henry III. "Special Forces Mission Analysis by the Operational Detachment."

Special Warfare 7, no. 1 (January 1994): 39-41

Watson, MAJ Douglas S. "North Korean Special-Purpose Forces." Special Warfare 5, no. 2

(October 1992): 35-41

Wayne, LTC Larry. "Civil Affairs in Grenada." Special Warfare 1, no. 2 (July 1988): 11- 15

Wayne, LTC Larry. "Converting from H- to L-Series TOE: An Impossible Task for Civil

Affairs?" Special Warfare 4, no. 1 (Winter 1991): 42-43

Welborn, MAJ Grey, and CPT Tom Gilbert. "Soldier's ideas can become SOF Equipment."

Special Warfare 1, no. 2 (July 1988): 22-25

Wood, John, and Ken Benway, and Sherry Barnes. "The SOF Warfighting Center: Answering

the Challenge of SOF Simulation Support." Special Warfare 7, no. 1 (January 1994): 30-

Woods, 1LT William A. "Operation Guantanamo: Civil Affairs in Action." Special Warfare 6,

no. 4 (October 1993): 39-41

Worsham, James J., and MAJ R.B. Anderson. "Mosby: The Model Partisan." Special Warfare

2, no. 1 (Winter 1989): 34-38

Full Mission Profile Magazine

Armstrong, Stephen. "Why Can't I Have It Now?" Full Mission Profile 2, no. 1 (Winter 1992):

35-39

Asdel, JO3 Don A. "Special Boats Need Special People." Full Mission Profile 4, no. 1 (Spring

1994): 44-45

Bailey, BMCM(SW) Steven W. "NSWU- 1: Observations of the Command Master Chief." Full

Mission Profile 2, no. 3 (Summer 1992): 36

Barrett, SFC Steve. "Navy Senior Chief Petty Officer Anchors Samoan Olympic Bobsled Team." Full

Mission Profile 4, no. 1 (Spring 1994): 66-67

Beckwith, Charlie USA (Ret). "Point: SOF Offensive Handgun." Full Mission Profile 2, no. 2

(Spring 1992): 76-78

Behrens, ENS Brian. "The Naval Special Warfare Center Special Boat Training Department." Full

Mission Profile 4, no. 1 (Spring 1994): 39-40

Blackman, ENS David B. "Bushido: The Way of the Warrior." Full Mission Profile 2, no. 1

(Winter 1992): 45-46

Blanton, LCDR S.L. "A Concept Whose Time Has Come." Full Mission Profile 1, no. 1 (Spring

1991): 40-41

Bonelli, CDR Garry J. "Standing Tall and Answering the Call." Full Mission Profile 1, no. 1

(Spring 1991): 31-33

Bosiljevac, LCDR T.L. "The Mayaguez Rescue: A Tactical Analysis." Full Mission Profile 3, no.

2 (Summer 1993): 51-58

Bosiljevac, LCDR T.L. "Total Professional Better Than 'Quiet Professional'." Full Mission

Profile 3, no. 2 (Summer 1993): 42

Bosiljevac, LCDR T.L. "The Green Island Raid: A Tactical Analysis." Full Mission Profile 3,

no. 1 (Spring 1993): 52-60

Bowman, LT Jeffrey W. "UNITAS: Showing the Flag in South America." Full Mission Profile

3, no. 2 (Summer 1993): 29-32

Brennan, ENS Mike, and ENS Dan Lounsbury. "Inflatable Boat/Small." Full Mission Profile 4,

no. 1 (Spring 1994): 41

Butler, CDR Frank K. "The Ten Commandments of Nutrition." Full Mission Profile 2, no. 1

(Winter 1992): 40-44

Castellano, LCDR John. "Rapid Medical Deployment Capability." Full Mission Profile 2, no. 2

(Spring 1992): 24-27

Coffey, CAPT Tom. "Desert Storm Tests Total Force." Full Mission Profile 1, no. 1 (Spring

1991): 34-36

Couch, CAPT Dick, and CDR Glen King. "The Most Demanding 'Raid' Ever!!" Full Mission

Profile 4, no. 1 (Spring 1994): 64-64-65

Couch, CAPT Dick. "Team Three Spiker." Full Mission Profile 4, no. 1 (Spring 1994): 68

Couch, CAPT Dick. "Call 911... and a Navy SEAL." Full Mission Profile 4, no. 1 (Spring

1994): 69

Cucci, BM1 Frank. "Needed: A SEAL Unarmed Combat System." Full Mission Profile 2, no. 3

(Summer 1992): 54

Curtin, ET3 Elizabeth. "SEAL PRT Stresses Personal and Combat Readiness." Full Mission

Profile 1, no. 2 (Summer 1991): 38-39

Curtis, LT Adam. "SEAL Team Two: A Profile." Full Mission Profile 3, no. 1 (Spring 1993):

20-21

Davidchik, JOC M.D. "SBU-ll Personnel Mobilized for DESERT STORM." Full Mission

Profile 1, no. 2 (Summer 1991): 46-54

Davidchik, JOC Mike. "NSWC takes the Lead in Riverine Warfare." Full Mission Profile 1, no.

1 (Spring 1991): 26-28

Dietz, LT Tom. "SEAL Lieutenants in Washington, DC." Full Mission Profile 3, no. 2 (Summer

1993): 42-44

Douglas, LT Tom E. "Ocean Venture 93: A Combined Special Forces Adventure." Full Mission

Profile 3, no. 2 (Summer 1993): 33-35

Dutcher, JO2 Roger. "SEAL's in Bangladesh" by JO2 Roger Dutcher." Full Mission Profile 1,

no. 2 (Summer 1991): 35

Dwyer, John B. "ATB Ft. Pierce Training the Navy's First SPECWAR Commandos." Full

Mission Profile 2, no. 1 (Winter 1992): 51-55

Dyer, LT Mike. "So You Want to be a SEAL Warrant... Ehh?" Full Mission Profile 4, no. 1

(Spring 1994): 8-9

Dyer, LT Mike. "Discriminate Shooting." Full Mission Profile 1, no. 1 (Spring 1991): 33

Elliot, LT Stewart G. "Perspective: A Tour at Naval Special Warfare Unit Two." Full Mission

Profile 3, no. 1 (Spring 1993): 38-39

Ellis, RMC Patrick D. "Going Home: Final Journey for the Crew of P2V-2." Full Mission

Profile 2, no. 3 (Summer 1992): 58-61

Emihl, TMC "Moe". "Go North For the Future." Full Mission Profile 2, no. 3 (Summer 1992):

44-45

Everage, LTJG Jeffrey E. "Army Ranger School." Full Mission Profile 4, no. 1 (Spring 1994):

54-55

Ferguson, EMC Michael. "Enlisted Opportunities in Panama." Full Mission Profile 2, no. 2

(Spring 1992): 65-66

Finnell, LT Norman L. "How SOF is Like a Flashlight." Full Mission Profile 4, no. 1 (Spring

1994): 57-58

Fitzgerald, CDR Mike. "NAVSCIATTS." Full Mission Profile 2, no. 2 (Spring 1992): 62-64

Frazzini, JO1 Lorraine. "Conseil International Du Sport Militaire (CISM)." Full Mission Profile 2,

no. 2 (Spring 1992): 73-75

Gallrein, LT Edward, and Captain P.J. Ferraro, USMC. "So You're Going to Ranger School..."

Full Mission Profile 1, no. 2 (Summer 1991): 20-22

Gallrein, LT Edward G. "Intelligence and Naval Special Warfare." Full Mission Profile 3, no. 1

(Spring 1993): 44-46

Gantt, LT Robert. "The Supply Corps Officer's Unwritten Mission in the Naval Special Warfare

Arena." Full Mission Profile 3, no. 2 (Summer 1993): 45-46

Garamone, Jim. "Atlantic Command Readies for New Responsibilities." Full Mission Profile 3,

no. 2 (Summer 1993): 18-19

Gray, GMCS James D. "The First Special Boat Unit PT Squadron 2(2)." Full Mission Profile 2,

no. 1 (Winter 1992): 55-57

Gray, GMCS James. "Command History of Special Boat Unit THIRTEEN." Full Mission Profile

4, no. 1 (Spring 1994): 46-47

Grizzard, ENS Geoff. "More on 'Warriors'..." Full Mission Profile 1, no. 2 (Summer 1991): 32-

Hall, LT J.T. "No Time to Train" by LT J.T. Hall." Full Mission Profile 1, no. 2 (Summer

1991): 27-29

Hamilton, CAPT William L. "Reflections on a True Warrior's Legacy to Naval Special Warfare."

Full Mission Profile 3, no. 1 (Spring 1993): 61-63

Hamilton, CDR W.L. "Take Your Best Shot!" Full Mission Profile 1, no. 1 (Spring 1991): 30-31

Hamilton, CDR William. "Rogue Warrior or Quiet Professional." Full Mission Profile 2, no. 2

(Spring 1992): 70-71

Hamilton, CDR William III. "Straightening out the Acquisition Process." Full Mission Profile 2,

no. 2 (Spring 1992): 82-83

Harding, LT E., and CW03 M. Balister. "RIBS in the Mediterranean." Full Mission Profile 3,

no. 1 (Spring 1993): 32

Heinz, CDR Karl R. "Positively Parochial." Full Mission Profile 2, no. 3 (Summer 1992): 54

Heinz, CDR Karl R. "Update: Naval Special Warfare Unit ONE." Full Mission Profile 2, no. 3

(Summer 1992): 34-35

Heinz, CDR Karl R. "On the Cutting Edge- Naval Special Warfare Unit ONE." Full Mission

Profile 2, no. 3 (Summer 1992): 32

Heinz, CDR Karl R. "NSW in Exercise Cobra Gold 92." Full Mission Profile 2, no. 3 (Summer

1992): 26-28

Heitmann, LT Jurgen. "EUCOM 2-92- Been There, Done That!" Full Mission Profile 3, no. 1

(Spring 1993): 30-31

Hogan, LT George Jr. "Centinelas de Rios Y Costas." Full Mission Profile 2, no. 2 (Spring

1992): 54-57

Hopkins, LT Andrew E. "Platoon Training in Latin America." Full Mission Profile 2, no. 2

(Spring 1992): 58-61

Howe, LT Gardner. "Naval Special Warfare Unit TWO: An Overview." Full Mission Profile 3,

no. 1 (Spring 1993):16-17

Huckins, BMCM William. "Det Kodiak." Full Mission Profile 2, no. 3 (Summer 1992): 42-43

Huff, LT Tim. "Surface Warfare Officers assigned to Special Boat Units ." Full Mission Profile

4, no. 1 (Spring 1994): 25-26

Imhof, CDR Mike. "Training Safely in NAVSPECWARCEN High-Risk Courses." Full Mission

Profile 3, no. 2 (Summer 1993): 47

Jaco, BMC Michael. "SCARS: A Fighting System for the Teams." Full Mission Profile 3, no. 1

(Spring 1993): 44

James, LCDR Jack B. "The Role of Naval Special Warfare '... From the Sea'." Full Mission

Profile 4, no. 1 (Spring 1994): 60-61

James, LT Jack B. "The Closest Guys with the Guns." Full Mission Profile 2, no. 1 (Winter

1992): 31-34

Jones, LCDR Rick. "Crime Fighting in the Western Pacific by LCDR Rick Jones." Full Mission

Profile 2, no. 3 (Summer 1992): 25

Karpinski, IS 1 R. "Intelligence- Supporting Operators." Full Mission Profile 3, no. 2 (Summer

1993): 46-47

Katana, CMDR Tom. "Naval Special Warfare: New Force option for Carrier Battle Groups." Full

Mission Profile 3, no. 1 (Spring 1993): 22-25

Katana, CDR Tom. "An Open Letter to Naval Special Warfare: 'The Retirement of an American

Hero'." Full Mission Profile 2, no. 3 (Summer 1992): 49

Kernan, BG William F. "SOF Warriors: Quiet (and Thinking) Professionals." Full Mission

Profile 4, no. 1 (Spring 1994): 52-53

Kernan, LCDR Joe. "Joint Specialty Officer.'' Full Mission Profile 2, no. 1 (Winter 1992): 22-23

Klinedinst, LT D.K. Jr. "The End of an Era." Full Mission Profile 4, no. 1 (Spring 1994): 59

Liddy, LT James G. "Are Inherent SEAL Skills What They Should Be?" Full Mission Profile 2,

no. 2 (Spring 1992): 71-72

Loefstedt, LT Robert E. "Special Boat Unit Eleven: 'The Brown Water Navy Lives'." Full

Mission Profile 4, no. 1 (Spring 1994): 19-21

Lowe, LCDR D.S. "A Prominent and Expanding Warfighting Capability in the U.S. Sixth Fleet."

Full Mission Profile 3, no. 1 (Spring 1993): 26-29

Lumpkin, LT Michael. "Life in Panama: A PCS Perspective." Full Mission Profile 2, no. 2

(Spring 1992): 67-69

L'Heureux, LT J. "Coastal Patrol Boat." Full Mission Profile 1, no. 1 (Spring 1991): 28-29

Mackley, GMC B.E., and CMDR R.G. Castner, USNR. "The First Operational Deployment of

Cyclone Class Ships." Full Mission Profile 3, no. 2 (Summer 1993): 40-41

Madden, LT James L. "Thirty Foot RIB's." Full Mission Profile 1, no. 2 (Summer 1991): 33-34

Madison, RMCS J.F. III. "Total Professional" remains "Quiet Professional." Full Mission Profile

4, no. 1 (Spring 1994): 58-59

Mahoney, ENS Bill. "Cadets Attack Coronado." Full Mission Profile 1, no. 2 (Summer 1991):

36-37

Masi, LT Stephen. "Special Boat Detachment, WESTPAC." Full Mission Profile 2, no. 3

(Summer 1992): 29

McCreary, CAPT Shannon. "NSWTU-PAC and the USPACOM Joint SOF Team." Full Mission

Profile 2, no. 3 (Summer 1992): 19-22

Mynster, LT John. "Naval Special Warfare Operations and Training in the Caribbean." Full

Mission Profile 3, no. 2 (Summer 1993): 23-24

Negron, LCDR Anthony. "Partners in Education: Naval Special Warfare Volunteers Make a

Difference." Full Mission Profile 3, no. 1 (Spring 1993): 64

Neumann, LT William D. "Local Training in the Atlantic Command." Full Mission Profile 3, no.

2 (Summer 1993): 39

Newson, LTJG Rob. "Confessions of an ARGO-NOT!" Full Mission Profile 2, no. 3 (Summer

1992):

Phillips, LT Dexter. "On Deployment: Naval Special Warfare Unit ONE." Full Mission Profile 2,

no. 3 (Summer 1992): 40-41

Pidgeon, LT Sandy. "African Security Assistance: Naval Special Warfare and the Biodiversity

Program." Full Mission Profile 3, no. 1 (Spring 1993): 35-37

Quincannon, CAPT Joseph. "Naval Special Warfare in the Pacific: the future is bright." Full

Mission Profile 2, no. 3 (Summer 1992): 23-24

Rieve, CAPT R.M. "The FY92 Active Duty Lieutenant Commander Unrestricted Line Selection

Board." Full Mission Profile 1, no. 2 (Summer 1991): 41-46

Sandoval, GMC Carlos. "Life at Naval Special Warfare Unit Four." Full Mission Profile 3, no. 2

(Summer 1993): 28

Schoultz CDR Bob. "Professional Reading Can be Enjoyable too." Full Mission Profile 2, no. 3

(Summer 1992): 55-56

Schoultz, CDR Robert. "So You Want to Go to DLI?" Full Mission Profile 2, no. 2 (Spring

1992): 83-86

Schwartzel, CMDR Joseph H. "Naval Special Warfare Operations in the European Theater." Full

Mission Profile 3, no. 1 (Spring 1993): 18-19

Shemella, CDR Paul. "NSW Riverine Programs in Latin America." Full Mission Profile 2, no. 2

(Spring 1992): 36-40

Shoultz, CDR Robert, and LCDR Steven Siegel, USN. "SEAL's and Special Boats in

SOUTHCOM." Full Mission Profile 2, no. 2 (Spring 1992): 46-48

Simmons, CDR Larry. "Is There a Future for Naval Special Warfare?" Full Mission Profile 1, no

1 (Spring 1991): 24-25

Simmons, CDR Larry W. "What's Next: Sneaky Stealthy, and Do the Unexpected." Full Mission

Profile 2, no. 3 (Summer 1992): 46-48

Slyfield, LCDR James T. "Distinguished Marksman." Full Mission Profile 3, no. 1 (Spring

1993): 40-43

Smith, CDR P.T. "An Alternative PME." Full Mission Profile 2, no. 1 (Winter 1992): 24

Smith, R.J. "Total Quality Leadership: What is it?" Full Mission Profile 4, no. 1 (Spring 1994):

10-11

Steinbauch, CDR Mike, and JO2 Rachel O'Sullivan. "Training." Full Mission Profile 1, no. 2

(Summer 1991): 16-20

Stevens, LTJG Matthew P. "Special Forces Training from a SEAL's Perspective." Full Mission

Profile 4, no. 1 (Spring 1994):

Steward, CDR Dan. "The Case for Specialization." Full Mission Profile 2, no. 3 (Summer 1992):

50-51

Stratton, LCDR Jeffrey P. "Last Call for the PB MK III." Full Mission Profile 3, no. 2 (Summer

1993): 36-38

Stubblefield, LT Allen. "Coastal Patrol Class Ships Join the Fleet." Full Mission Profile 3, no. 2

(Summer 1993): 12-13

Sutton, TM2 W.R. "The SAW M-249 in SEAL Platoon Inventory?" Full Mission Profile 3, no. 1

(Spring 1993): 40

Temple, LT Tom. "SUBOPS in the Marianas." Full Mission Profile 2, no. 3 (Summer 1992): 45

Thomas, LCDR R.J. "Counterpoint: SOF Offensive Handgun." Full Mission Profile 2, no. 2

(Spring 1992): 79-81

Thompson, LCDR Evin H. "Naval Special Warfare Unit Four: An Overview." Full Mission

Profile 3, no. 2 (Summer 1993): 20-22

Tiska, LT Carl. "Special Boat Unit Twenty: Expanding Capabilities, New Commitments." Full

Mission Profile 4, no. 1 (Spring 1994): 33-35

Tiska, LT Carl. "RIB's in Naval Special Warfare: A Historical Perspective." Full Mission Profile

4, no. 1 (Spring 1994): 29-32

Treadway, LT Braddock. "Korean War UDT Ops." Full Mission Profile 2, no. 2 (Spring 1992):

92-93

Tumulty, ENS Will. "The Warrior Spirit." Full Mission Profile 1, no. 2 (Summer 1991): 30-31

Valentine, LT Dean. "ASDV-2: A Unique Diving Support Platform." Full Mission Profile 3, no.

2 (Summer 1993): 25

Valentine, LT Dean. "RIBS at NAVSPECWARUNIT FOUR." Full Mission Profile 3, no. 2

(Summer 1993): 26

Valentine LT Dean. "SEAL Officers on Combatant Craft." Full Mission Profile 4, no. 1 (Spring

1994): 27-28

Van Hooser, LCDR P.F. "NSW Combatant Craft in the Littoral." Full Mission Profile 4, no. 1

(Spring 1994): 36-38

Vasely, ENS Peter G. "More Warrior Spirit." Full Mission Profile 2, no. 1 (Winter 1992): 47-48

Waddell, Marshele Carter. "Heroines of Unsung Heroes: Wives of U.S. Navy SEALs." Full

Mission Profile 3, no. 2 (Summer 1993): 59-61

Warren, Joe D. "Relocation: Naval Special Warfare Unit One." Full Mission Profile 2, no. 3

(Summer 1992): 37

Washbaugh, LT J. "End of an Era." Full Mission Profile 2, no. 3 (Summer 1992): 38-39

Wells, CAPT Wade. "Riverine Operations in Vietnam." Full Mission Profile 2, no. 2 (Spring

1992): 41-45

Williams, CAPT (SEL) T.R. "The Case for Generalization." Full Mission Profile 2, no. 3

(Summer 1992): 52-53

Wilson, LT Bill. "Cross Training with Saudi SEALs." Full Mission Profile 1, no. 2 (Summer

1991): 23-26

Wilson, George C. "Our Special Op Units Need the Human Touch." Full Mission Profile 4, no. 1

(Spring 1994): 57

Wingo, LT Harry Jr. "The Two Sides of Riverine Warfare." Full Mission Profile 2, no. 2 (Spring

1992): 49-53

Wood, LCDR Michael P. "Silent But Deadly: The USS Kamehameha Dry Deck Shelter." Full

Mission Profile 4, no. 1 (Spring 1994): 48-51

Woodruff, LCDR W.L. "Naval Special Warfare: Very Shallow Water Mine Counter-Measures or

'Mine Your Own Business'." Full Mission Profile 2, no. 3 (Summer 1992): 53-54

Wright, CAPT Jon. "MK V Special Operations Craft (SOC)." Full Mission Profile 4, no. 1

(Spring 1994): 23-24

Night Flyer Magazine

Bedrosian, CPT Scott "Building a Community of Democratic Nations." Night Flyer 3, no. 1

(January 1995): 12

Brozenick, CPT Norm. "Transforming Vision into Action." Night Flyer 2, no. 2 (July-August

1994): 7

Caporicci, CPT Louis A, and MAJ Brendan G. Clare. "Revisiting Tactics: A New Focus for

AFSOC." Night Flyer 3, no. 1 (January 1995): 6-7

Fister, MG Bruce L. "Specialized airpower- a step ahead in a changing world." Night Flyer 1, no.

1 (July-September 1992): 4

Ganzel, SSgt Stephen. "lst SOW goes anywhere, anytime." Night Flyer 1, no. 1 (July-

September 1992): 10

Haas, COL Mike. "Project 9." Night Flyer (lst Quarter 1994): 12

Hartley, MAJ Randy. "Shift work major stress factor." Night Flyer 1, no. 1 (July-September

1992): 8

Kernan, BG William F. "SOF Warriors: Quiet (and Thinking) Professionals." Night Flyer (lst

Quarter 1994): 3

Lavigne, SSgt Barbara. "'Dr. of choice' is choice of Air Force." Night Flyer 1, no. 1 (July-

September 1992): 2

Lavigne, SSgt Barbara. "An 'Outstanding' Airman." Night Flyer 1, no. 1 (July-September 1992):

Leach, A1C Karl, and Diane C. Howard. "Hurlburt Units Rescue Pilot." Night Flyer 2, no. 2

(July-August 1994): 4

McIntyre, MSgt J.E. "Finally Home Together." Night Flyer 2, no. 2 (July-August 1994): 6

McKenna, 2LT Sean. ''Officer, Pilot, Teacher." Night Flyer (lst Quarter 1994): 11

McKenna, 1LT Sean. "Preacher and Judge Still Flying High." Night Flyer 3, no. 1 (January

1995): 8-9

McKenna, 2LT Sean S. "Unfourseen additions." Night Flyer (2nd Quarter 1993): 11

Miller, SrA Dean. "Wing Aids Flood Victims." Night Flyer 2, no. 2 (July-August 1994): 5-9

Norrad, CMSgt Wayne G. "A STEP ahead, in a changing world..." Night Flyer 3, no. 1 (January

1995): 10

O'Donnell, CPT Maurice. "Engineering Better 'SOFware'." Night Flyer 2, no. 2 (July-August

1994): 6

Rhodes, MSgt Phil. "Commando Look." Night Flyer (2nd Quarter 1993): 6-7

Rhodes, MSgt Philip F. "A Soldier's Nightmare." Night Flyer (lst Quarter 1994): 6-10

Robinson, TSgt D.K. "The Carpetbaggers." Night Flyer (2nd Quarter 1993): 8-9

Warren, TSgt. "SP Advisors secure wings." Night Flyer 1, no. 1 (July-September 1992): 9

Non-SOF Periodicals

Adolph, MAJ Robert B. "Strategic rationale for SOF." Military Review 72, no. 4 (April 1992):

36-46

Baker, MAJ Brad. "Air Force Special Operations Forces (AFSOF): How did we decide what was

enough?" Airlift 10, (Spring 88): 14-17

Burgess, William H. "Toward a more complete doctrine: SOF in Airland Battle Future." Military

Review 71, no. 2 (February 1991): 30-37

Burgess, William H. "Spetznaz- no elite is perfect." International Defense Review 22: 1471-1473

Nov 89

Combs, CW3 James D. "Changing of the Guard (deactivation of Army Aviation Special Forces)"

USA Aviation Digest (July-August 1991): 20-22

Eggers, MG Thomas. "Today's air commandos: Air Force Special Operations Command."

Military Review 71, no. 6 (June 1991): 14-21

Fister, MG Bruce. "Air Force Special Operations Command in the "new" world." TIG Brief 44,

no. 5 (September-October 1992): 12-13

Foster, Stephan Oliver. "Pentagon slow-rollers stymie SOF improvements." Armed Forces

Journal International 126 (October 88): 98-102

Hoffman, LTC Robert J. "The Ranger Training Brigade." LTC Robert J. Hoffman. Infantry 79

(March-April 1989): 25-28

Jannarone, COL August G., and Ray E. Stratton. "Toward an integrated U.S. strategy for

counternarcotics and counterinsurgency." DISAM Jrnl 13, no. 2 (Winter 1990-1991): 51-

Jannarone, COL August G., and Ray E. Stratton. "Building a practical United States Air Force

capability for FID." DISAM Journal 13 no 4 (Summer 1991): 80-91

Jenne, Michael. "Proposal- a chemical deterrence force." National Defense 73 (September 1988):

27-30

Jenne, Michael. "Applying GPS to special operations." National Defense 75, no. 463 (December

1990): 18-20

Katana, CDR Tom. "SEALS to the carriers." U.S. Naval Institute Proceedings 119, no. 6 (June

1993): 61-63

Koren, LTC Henry L. T. "Congress wades into special operations." Parameters 18 (December

1988): 62-74

Lewis, CPT Robert D. "Chindits' operations in Burma." Military Review 68 (June 1988): 34-43

Lindsay, GEN James J. "Increased prospects for low-intensity conflict." DISAM Journal 12, no.

4 (Summer 1990): 30-34

Lindsay, GEN James J. "Low-Intensity conflict: Risks increase." DEFENSE/90 (May-June

1990): 31-35

Lindsay, GEN James J. "C3I challenges for U.S. Special Operations Command." Signal (May

1988): 21-23 42

Spaulding, MAJ Greg, and William J. Crane. "Logistics for Army Special Operations Forces."

Army Logistics (July-August 1989): 12-16

Stiner, GEN Carl W. "U.S. Special operations Command: 'Prime-time players in the Third

World network of conflict'." Army 40, no. 10 (October 1990): 190-193

Stiner, GEN Carl W. "U.S. special operations forces: A Strategic Perspective." Parameters 22,

no. 2 (Summer 1992): 2-13

Stiner, GEN Carl W. "Strategic employment of special operations forces." Military Review 71,

no. 6 (June 1991): 36

Stiner, GEN Carl W. "Special Ops: Unprecedented risks, opportunities ahead." I (May-Jun 92):

29-38

Stiner, GEN Carl W. "USSOCOM challenges: Risk, Ambiguity, Diversity, Opportunity."

Defense Issues 7, no. 18 (1992): 1-10

Click here to view image

NEWSLETTER

Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list