New MARSOC Orbat?

[Navor]

Moin,
wiki just said that the MSOC have been reorganized,with 3 x14 Man Teams+Command in each MSOC. In an Pdf Presentation from MARSOC before this Reorg. each MSOC had about 100 Man now it seems they dropped to about 50 Man(Basically the DASR Teams seem to have beean removed) does anybody has a detailed MSOC Orbat from 2008?

Mods:
It seems that MARSOC Orbat was open source and nor OPSEC if its not anymore let me know and close this Thread.

[bodhi]

I'm probably going to tell you what you may have already read. The gist of it is pretty simple. No opsec breached with this, as any 10 year old with a computer can Google it. The decision was put in play last year. The basic MARSOC unit will be a 14 man team Marine Special Operations Team (MSOT). Like the SFODA, each team willo be commanded by a Captian (0-3). The new MSOT is modeled on the SFODA, with two more members. There will be 3 MSOT's to a Marine Special Operations Company (MSOC), commanded by a Major (0-4), and 4 or 5 MSOC's to a Marine Special Operations Battalion (MSOB), commanded by a LtCol. (0-5). There will be 2 MSOB's, with one on each coast. One at Camp Pendleton, CA, and the other at Camp Lejeune, NC.

[Dominique]

There's been another change, each MSOB will now have four companies. The Marine Special Operations Advisory Group (MSOAG - Formerly the Foreign Military Training Unit/FMTU) is being expanded. They too will use a standardized 14 man team.

The extra manning slots for the MSOAG are coming from what was going to be the 2nd MSOB's 5th Co. The Marine Special Operations Support is also being reorganized and enlarged.

[angry cow]

From what I understand the focus is now on FID, unconventional warfare, etc.

So within SOCOM:

Special Forces and MARSOC on the unconventional side, Rangers and SEALS (and their sneaky brother-organizations) on the direct action side? With a fair amount of overlap between them of course.

[Navor]

What Im wondering is that there are just 3 Teams whereas other Agencies use 6 Teams/Platoons per Company.Like the Green Berets have 6 ODA per Company

[Mustang08]

Is it true that Army SF is getting scaled down? There was an article in Soldier of Fortune that talked about how they were not mentioned much if at all in USSOCOM's press releases as well a the Capstone Concept for Special Operations.

[Dominique]

Is it true that Army SF is getting scaled down? There was an article in Soldier of Fortune that talked about how they were not mentioned much if at all in USSOCOM's press releases as well a the Capstone Concept for Special Operations.

Army SF, along with all US SOF, ar under going an expansion at the moment.

[Hispeed1]

Is it true that Army SF is getting scaled down? There was an article in Soldier of Fortune that talked about how they were not mentioned much if at all in USSOCOM's press releases as well a the Capstone Concept for Special Operations.

You should get better sources than SOF magazine.

[Hispeed1]

From what I understand the focus is now on FID, unconventional warfare, etc.

So within SOCOM:

Special Forces and MARSOC on the unconventional side, Rangers and SEALS (and their sneaky brother-organizations) on the direct action side? With a fair amount of overlap between them of course.

WTF? They are all unconventional, that's why they're USSOCOM and JSOC.

[angry cow]

I was referring to the inter-command struggle between the more kinetic SOCOM units (Rangers, SEALS) and the ones whose mission focuses more on operations such as sewing unrest and subversion behind enemy lines (SF, CA, PSYOPS, and now apparently MARSOC teams).

Every couple of years the subject of dividing SOCOM between the direct action guys and the less conventional forces comes up.

I was looking at the placement of MARSOC closer to the SF-side of the spectrum as a kind of organizational Missouri Compromise. To help balance the Rangers and Seals who focus more on HVT seizure and raids along with their respective SMU brothers. Against the guys that look for the more political means of completing their mission.

I understand that they are all technically unconventional, though some are less unconventional than others. Rangers, for example, are a unit that uses fairly conventional means to achieve unconventional goals. They just do it better than anyone else, and are thus used for higher priority missions.

When you have guys coming from more kinetic vs. more political operational backgrounds, sometimes they differ on the best unit and method for accomplishing the mission. There is nothing wrong with that, it simply gives us a wider range of options for accomplishing the mission.