View Full Version : spec ops on pbs last night
pinkeye
11-06-2003, 09:04 AM
did anyone watch the pbs special on american "spec ops" last night? the focus was on the green beret's, with emphasis on the oda 574 (?). operational footage from afganistan and iraq. very interesting. pbs is terrific, as is public broadcasting in general...
pinkeye
11-06-2003, 09:05 AM
National Geographic
Wednesday, November 5, 8:00pm
Inside Special Forces
In 1756, nine companies of American colonists were recruited to fight the British in the French and Indian War. Such units were used occasionally throughout U.S. history, but it was not until the 1960s that the role of Special Forces was formalized by President John F. Kennedy to combat a new type of war by 'guerillas, subversives, insurgents and assassins.' This program follows this highly skilled, elite group of soldiers as they make their way from the home front to the front lines to face an unpredictable enemy in an unfamiliar land.
N In Stereo (CC)
Ed. Taping Rights: 1 year
I saw it. Very well done despite using a lot of stock footage as "filler". Obviously, no one was concerned about OPSEC since full names were referred to and none of the "talking heads" were edited or disguised.
pinkeye
11-06-2003, 09:22 AM
I saw it. Very well done despite using a lot of stock footage as "filler". Obviously, no one was concerned about OPSEC since full names were referred to and none of the "talking heads" were edited or disguised.
i found that somewhat strange, especially considering some of the debates that have occurred on the messageboard about opsec.
Obviously, OPSEC debates in this forum were a bit over the top since there have been several documentaries, newscasts and articles on special operations that clearly showed the faces of operators.
My experience is that operators who require deep cover, who are few in number, don't need to have their faces blacked out because they try to avoid cameras and don't pose for group or Rambo-pose photos to be posted on the Internet.
Deuterium
11-06-2003, 09:44 AM
Well obviously since with few execptions no one here is SF, you guys don't know **** about about what is real OPSES/PERSEC and what is pure hollywood.
pinkeye
11-06-2003, 09:53 AM
Well obviously since with few execptions no one here is SF, you guys don't know **** about about what is real OPSES/PERSEC and what is pure hollywood.
no one is claiming otherwise. did you watch the national geographic special? it wasn't pure hollywood. it was the kind of programme that would have raised hell among some of the sf pers. if photos of that nature had been posted on this site.
I might not be up on current OPSEC requirements, but, without going into too much detail, I once had a TS-C clearance and my military experience in both intelligence and special operations would make me somewhat familiar with the subject.
My point is OPSEC concerns by forum members probably has little effect in the real world because any photos or information posted here is of little concern to those actually in the fray because they would take steps to avoid being compromise long before it was posted here.
When in doubt, don't post it; otherwise, no big deal.
Deuterium
11-06-2003, 09:56 AM
Well obviously since with few execptions no one here is SF, you guys don't know **** about about what is real OPSES/PERSEC and what is pure hollywood.
no one is claiming otherwise. did you watch the national geographic special? it wasn't pure hollywood. it was the kind of programme that would have raised hell among some of the sf pers. if photos of that nature had been posted on this site.
Hey dumb-ass I am SF. Yes I did watch. I didn't see any problems. My point was that all those crying OPSEC don't know what they are talking about.
pinkeye
11-06-2003, 10:11 AM
Well obviously since with few execptions no one here is SF, you guys don't know **** about about what is real OPSES/PERSEC and what is pure hollywood.
no one is claiming otherwise. did you watch the national geographic special? it wasn't pure hollywood. it was the kind of programme that would have raised hell among some of the sf pers. if photos of that nature had been posted on this site.
Hey dumb-ass I am SF. Yes I did watch. I didn't see any problems. My point was that all those crying OPSEC don't know what they are talking about.
hey jerk-off (since we are now on a first-name basis), you are merely reiterating my point. here's a suggestion: read the posts before commenting!!!
i stated that some sf pers. complained about photos being posted on this site despite the fact that many of these photos were released for public consumption. accordingly, i wrote that the concerns raised by some regarding opsec were not always valid.
Deuterium
11-06-2003, 10:15 AM
Well obviously since with few execptions no one here is SF, you guys don't know **** about about what is real OPSES/PERSEC and what is pure hollywood.
no one is claiming otherwise. did you watch the national geographic special? it wasn't pure hollywood. it was the kind of programme that would have raised hell among some of the sf pers. if photos of that nature had been posted on this site.
Hey dumb-ass I am SF. Yes I did watch. I didn't see any problems. My point was that all those crying OPSEC don't know what they are talking about.
hey jerk-off (since we are now on a first-name basis), you are merely reiterating my point. here's a suggestion: read the posts before commenting!!!
i stated that some sf pers. complained about photos being posted on this site despite the fact that many of these photos were released for public consumption. accordingly, i wrote that the concerns raised by some regarding opsec were not always valid.
Whatever, you don't want to know what's going on then fine.
I managed to record this one and liked it a bunch. It explains some of the photos that are on here as being in that detachment. What's seemingly obvious, (Deuterium will step on me if I'm wrong) is that the Army designates certain groups to be the "on camera" guys. This was true for the ones in Profiles from the Front Lines and the guys in this show. The SF in Afghanistan show on Dutch TV blurred out the faces of a few of the guys who were dressed very differently than the regular SF soldiers, so it's obvious where OpSec matters and where it doesn't.
On a humorous note, one of the best parts of the show was when they were going into the bomb-making house. They decided to remove most of the metallic items from their various pockets and pouches and put them on a table so as to reduce the chance of causing sparks. The table was filled with enough ammo that it could have taken out a small army.
At a glance, these guys seem like they were featured on the show.
http://media.militaryphotos.net/photos/albums/gulf_war_2_iraqi_freedom_army_special_forces/ussf415.jpg
http://media.militaryphotos.net/photos/albums/gulf_war_2_iraqi_freedom_army_special_forces/ussf417.jpg
pinkeye
11-06-2003, 10:37 AM
wtf are you talking about? are you dyslexic by any chance? damn, i wrote that some sf pers. have criticised this website for the content posted, yet pbs, with the accord of the pentagon and the sf personnel involved, aired a programme that featured faces and names. this website has been criticised for posting pictures from the public domain. that's all i am saying. i have not criticised the national geographic special. i have not criticised anyone or anything related to this issue. i found the fact that the pentagon would agree to this level of exposure somewhat strange in light of the comments made by the sf. pers. that have attacked this site for the afore-mentioned reason, i.e., that the faces and names of sf pers. should not be publicly available.
Merik
11-06-2003, 10:41 AM
Is there any chance that someone knows if the program will air again?
National Geographic
Inside Special Forces: The stories of three soldiers depict U.S. Special Operations. (2003)
Sunday, Nov 09, 02:00 PM GMT -5, Channel 013 - WNET
pinkeye
11-06-2003, 10:47 AM
fyi, my last post (201) is directed at deuterium...
WARPIG
11-06-2003, 11:06 AM
A little more food for thought.
The Pentagon tends to release info and coverage of SPECOPS, intell, and air capability from time to time. OPSEC is a relative thing. Good practice is to not advertise stuff that is specific...ie. names, places, units, equip. etc. Rule of thumb type of thing. That is for Joes like you and me. The Pentagon has good reasons for releasing or "leaking" stuff like that to the public.
Example.
Cold war era. USSR for a period would hide missle and military capability by hiding underground. Instead of telling them," hey stupid Russians we have satellites that can see underground!" we used the satellites to map some underground waterways in some rainforest and released it to some science cable program. So the documentary of the US science satellite that sees underground was a little hint to the USSR.
Another reason for SF to be ok in the spotlight is that much of their mission is in contact with the indigenous public. Training, giving aide, acting as "sherrifs", gathering intel, etc. Letting the public know who they are is a way to make them more approachable and seem less ominous.
Don't worry, those guys doing "black" ops or what ever is popular to call them now, are still fairly anonymous and so are much of the tactics.
I'll post these here since my old topic for it is defunct. These are a few from that Dutch show.
http://media.militaryphotos.net/misc/sf-d-01.jpg
http://media.militaryphotos.net/misc/sf-d-02.jpg
http://media.militaryphotos.net/misc/sf-d-03.jpg
http://media.militaryphotos.net/misc/sf-d-04.jpg
http://media.militaryphotos.net/misc/sf-d-05.jpg
http://media.militaryphotos.net/misc/sf-d-06.jpg
http://media.militaryphotos.net/misc/sf-d-07.jpg
http://media.militaryphotos.net/misc/sf-d-08.jpg
http://media.militaryphotos.net/misc/sf-d-09.jpg
http://media.militaryphotos.net/misc/sf-d-10.jpg
http://media.militaryphotos.net/misc/sf-d-11.jpg
http://media.militaryphotos.net/misc/sf-d-12.jpg
NcDeuce
11-06-2003, 11:38 AM
Pinkeye, shut your hole...Deut is in Special Forces. You don't wear a pair of crossed arrows, do you? I'd go with his word.
Argyll
11-06-2003, 11:40 AM
Hood these are stills from the program where the team said the guy "Travis" was only 17,that caused all the ruckuss a few weeks back!
budanski
11-06-2003, 11:42 AM
Thanks for sharing Hood. woot
pinkeye
11-06-2003, 11:52 AM
Pinkeye, shut your hole...Deut is in Special Forces. You don't wear a pair of crossed arrows, do you? I'd go with his word.
piss off. in the context of this thread, his comments were way off-mark vis-a-vis mine, hence my posts. keep havin' your spec. ops. wet-dreams...
NcDeuce
11-06-2003, 12:02 PM
Pinkeye, shut your hole...Deut is in Special Forces. You don't wear a pair of crossed arrows, do you? I'd go with his word.
piss off. in the context of this thread, his comments were way off-mark vis-a-vis mine, hence my posts. keep havin' your spec. ops. wet-dreams...
Yeah, you'll probably be saying that in 5-7 years when I begin assessing too. Keep having your wet dreams as well.
Argyll
11-06-2003, 12:08 PM
I admire you're confidence there TF,that's mighty ballsy of you!
But you got some serious maturing to do,and arguing here in these forums,shows this.
I wish you well,I have another young friend who's so confident at becoming a NSW operator,that I think you're all in for a rude awakening!
Saranof
11-06-2003, 01:36 PM
I do like the car on the back of the camel :D
phinfan
11-06-2003, 02:03 PM
Anyone know what vest set up they were using on the show? Appeared
to be body armor with the mole pouches directly attached.
front
11-06-2003, 02:24 PM
"Pinkeye, shut your hole...Deut is in Special Forces."
Keep a civil tongue in your head TF160SOAR. You are not contributing anything when you post two-liners which insult people and have no bearing nor relevance on those threads.
And here's some news just in: Special Forces do not need cheerleaders. :-)
cheers
front
Argyll
11-06-2003, 02:26 PM
They do for a little R&R ;)
yay for Saranof for mentioning the camel with the 4 seater sedan on his back. What's hilarious is that the camera zoomed into the camels head and the camer stuck out his tongue with all this food goop all over it. I figured I'd save you guys the gross out factor. :)
Merik
11-06-2003, 05:44 PM
That was a camel doing the work? Sheesh.
http://media.militaryphotos.net/misc/sf-d-10.jpgROFL
mocking_loudly_died
11-07-2003, 11:38 PM
rofl
Nice pic.
budanski
11-08-2003, 12:29 AM
Watching the show again, I forgot about the guy with the mohawk. Reminds me of Tears of the Sun. Life imitating art? :D
Mayhem_Dog-Soldier14
11-17-2003, 02:02 AM
aww missed it
Nawlins
11-17-2003, 02:09 AM
At a glance, I didn't even realize that was a pic of a camel with a car on its back. Damn, that's funny.
errm...deuterium, if you're sure that the show (i didnt see it) was no problem with OPSEC/PERSEC....then
COULD YOU PLEASE GET THE SOCNET OPSEC/PERSEC WHINERS OF OUR BACK?!?!?!
cus theyve been a pain in the ass about it all along, even when it was simply DoD released photos...
JunglistSoldier
11-17-2003, 06:17 AM
I'm with Deut.
The way I see it, it's NOT OPSEC nor PERSEC breach, it's more about wheather or not you wan't to have your picture taken and posted. An integrity thing. I wouldn't want my pic taken and published without permission in the local papers let alone the WWW.
Edited for spelling
:) It's been said that the average person who works in a city has their picture taken at least several times a day. It's not really avoidable in this day and age.
JunglistSoldier
11-17-2003, 12:37 PM
There is imho a SLIGHT difference in by accident being in an image and have your mug shot published.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.10 Copyright © 2012 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.