#208: Small, Light, Fast, Agile...Lethal - 1st Special Forces Command BG Joseph Wortham, CSM Lee Strong, CW5 Jerry Brown

The battlefield is changing faster than ever before. Drones can find you. Technology can expose you. America’s adversaries are adapting in weeks instead of years. For U. S. Army Special Forces, rapid evolution while maintaining the people, partnerships, and culture that have made Special Forces effective for generations is the key to success on today’s battlefield. From the John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Museum https://www.swcs.mil/Resources/JFK-Special-Warfare-Museum/ at Fort Bragg, Fran Racioppi https://www.linkedin.com/in/francisracioppijr/ sat down with the command team of 1st Special Forces Command https://www.army.mil/1sfc: Brigadier General Joseph Wortham, Command Sergeant Major Lee Strong, and Chief Warrant Officer 5 Jerry Brown https://www.army.mil/1sfc#org-leadership. Together, they lead the US Army’s Green Berets, Civil Affairs, Psychological Operations, and the soldiers who enable them. Their mission - prepare, train and equip Army Special Operations Forces to win against an increasingly complex global threat. We discuss whether the legendary 12-man ODA is still the right formation for the wars of 2030 and 2040, and why the future may not require changing its core, but building new capabilities around it. Robotics and unmanned systems are rapidly becoming part of that evolution, including the development of specialized technical expertise designed to keep pace with technology that can change in a matter of weeks. But technology alone will never define Special Forces. We examine where Green Berets are supporting large-scale combat operations, how Special Forces can shape the deep fight for conventional commanders, and why Psychological Operations, Civil Affairs, and trusted partner forces become even more important against peer adversaries. The battlefield may look different from the one this generation fought throughout the Global War on Terror, but the requirement remains the same: create options, influence the fight, and give the joint force an advantage before the enemy ever knows we’re there. The next generation of Army Special Operations will fight with tools its predecessors could never have imagined. But its greatest advantage will remain the same: exceptional people, trusted partners, and a culture built to take on the missions others cannot. Highlights: 0:00 Introduction 2:23 Welcome to the Jedburgh Podcast 4:05 Importance of Partnerships 8:07 Command Priorities and Readiness 11:41 Evaluating the ODA Structure 20:02 Incorporating Robotics and Unmanned Systems 33:34 Special Forces in LSCO 47:28 Culture of the Regiment Quotes: “We don’t like to do anything by ourselves. We do everything with a partner.”“Those partnerships have to be genuine, they have to be authentic.”“It starts by being a genuine, authentic, good partner, not transactional.”“Humans are more important than hardware.”“When you take really good people that are fit, intelligent, of high character, and you assign them a mission, it doesn’t really matter what their MOS is."“How much demand can we put on them before they reach the point of saturation?”“It’s the smallest package we can get all of the warfighting functions in.”“It cannot be an additional task or an additional hat for someone on the ODA to wear.”“Here’s my rifle, here’s my NODs, here’s my radio, and oh, and here’s my drone.”“We’re small, we’re light, we’re fast, we’re agile, but we’re lethal.”"What we don’t bring in mass, we bring in mass through partnerships.”“Although we cannot prepare holistically for what’s next, we can get a head start this."“In my opinion, our culture is the best it’s ever been.” The Jedburgh Podcast is brought to you by OneBrief https://www.onebrief.com/; enabling military leaders to make innovative, informed and deliberate decisions faster than ever before. Superhuman command wins wars. Follow the Jedburgh Podcast https://www.instagram.com/jedburghpodcast/ and the Green Beret Foundation https://www.instagram.com/greenberetfoundation/ on social media. Listen on your favorite podcast platform https://pod.link/1558608802, read on our website https://greenberetfoundation.org/the-jedburgh-podcast/, and watch the full video version on YouTube https://www.youtube.com/@jedburghpodcast as we show why America must continue to lead from the front, no matter the challenge.

Speaker names marked ? are inferred from speaking time and the show’s known hosts — they are not voice-verified.

• 0:02Fran Racioppi?

  The battlefield is changing faster than ever before. America's adversaries are adapting in weeks instead of years. For US Army Special Forces, rapid evolution while maintaining the people, partnerships, and culture that have made Special Forces effective for generations is the key to success on today's battlefield. From the John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Museum at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, I sat down with the command team of First Special Forces Command, Brigadier General Joseph Wortham, Command Sergeant Major Lionel Strong, and Chief Warrant Officer Five Jerry Brown. Together, they lead the US Army's Green Berets, Civil Affairs, Psychological Operations, and the soldiers who enable them. Their mission: Prepare, Train, and Equip Army Special Operations Forces to Win Against An Increasingly Complex Global Threat.

• 0:47Fran Racioppi?

  We discuss whether the legendary 12-man ODA is still the right formation for the wars of 2030 and 2040, and why the future may not require changing its core, but building new capabilities around it. Robotics and unmanned systems are rapidly becoming part of that evolution, including the development of specialized technical expertise designed to keep pace with technology that can change in a matter of weeks. But technology alone will never define Special Forces. We examine where Green Berets are supporting large-scale combat operations, how Special Forces can shape the deep fight for conventional commanders, and why psychological operations, civil affairs, and trusted partner forces become even more important against peer adversaries. The battlefield may look different from the one this generation fought throughout the

• 1:28Fran Racioppi?

  global war on terror, but the requirement remains the same: Create options, influence the fight, and give the joint force an advantage before the enemy ever knows we're there. The next generation of Army Special Operations will fight with tools its predecessors could never imagine, but its greatest advantage will remain the same: Exceptional people, trusted partners, and a culture built to take on the missions others cannot. The Jedberg Podcast is brought to you by OneBrie, enabling military leaders to make innovative and form and deliberate decisions faster than ever before. Superhuman command wins wars. Follow the Jedberg Podcast and the Green Beret Foundation on social media, listen on your favorite podcast platform, read on our website, and watch the full video version

• 2:10Fran Racioppi?

  on YouTube as we show you why America must continue to lead from the front, no matter the challenge. General Wertham, CSM Strong, Chief Brown, welcome to the Jedberg Podcast.

• 2:22Speaker 01

  Well, thanks for having us. We're super excited to be here. I know this is my first time on the podcast. I think you have a repeat offender over there beside me.

• 2:31Fran Racioppi?

  He was a star.

• 2:32Speaker 01

  Yeah.

• 2:33Fran Racioppi?

  Huge star, from when the CSM was at SWCC. And so, yeah, we had a chance. How does it not?

• 2:37Speaker 01

  I didn't want you to say that either. Exactly. And then, of course, Jerry. Yeah, first time.

• 2:42Fran Racioppi?

  First time.

• 2:43Speaker 01

  Glad to be here.

• 2:44Fran Racioppi?

  All right, so you owe beer.

• 2:45Speaker 01

  I do.

• 2:46Fran Racioppi?

  The way it works.

• 2:47Speaker 01

  That's the way it works. I do.

• 2:49Fran Racioppi?

  So, and the boss owes whiskey because he's a general, so that's the way it goes.

• 2:52Speaker 01

  Fair enough.

• 2:53Fran Racioppi?

  General Under taught me that.

• 2:54Speaker 01

  Yeah, that's all. He would know.

• 2:56Fran Racioppi?

  He would?

• 2:57Speaker 01

  General Under would know, that's right.

• 2:59Fran Racioppi?

  Well, we're honored to sit down here with you. We're back in the JFK Special Warfare Museum here at SWCC on Fort Bragg. We feel like this is home, and so we want to give a quick shout out to Roxanne and her staff here. They do such a great job, and every time we come in here, there's new, there's so many new exhibits and how dedicated they are to telling the story of the regiment and Army Special Operations Forces throughout history, I think is unmatched. And so, we appreciate them, and we appreciate the time to sit here with you guys because First Special Forces Command is at the center of it all. We have a lot of units in the Army Special Operations Command, but for me, for you guys, this is home.

• 3:43Fran Racioppi?

  And your organization sits front and center when we talk about Army Special Forces capability. And so, when you look, sir, across the formation today, and we're going to talk a lot about the evolution of the current combat environment and our adversaries and what we're facing, what is your guidance on the mission to First Special Forces Command?

• 4:04Speaker 01

  First of all, what I think makes First Special Forces Command unique, not only in the use of SOC, but also for SOCOM and really the department, is we don't like to do anything by ourselves. We do everything with a partner. So, everything that, when we look at a problem and we train people, equip people, everything's done through the lens and the focus of it's partner-faced, and we don't like to go to war by ourselves. We will, and we've done that through our history, but our value is certainly being able to bring along size, partners, allies, and whoever, and do that. And we think that sets us apart from, and that's really our center of who we are.

• 4:45Fran Racioppi?

  Well, when we look at our partner forces and our ability to, as Green Berets primarily, and we have our CA and our PSYOPS units that we'll talk about, that relationship that we forge with our partners is critical to force multiplication.

• 5:03Speaker 01

  Yep.

• 5:04Fran Racioppi?

  Chief, you spent time at 110, so fellow 10th Group here.

• 5:07Speaker 01

  Just a little bit.

• 5:08Fran Racioppi?

  Yeah, just a small amount of time. But as a forward-deployed battalion, you have an opportunity at a greater scale sometimes than those who serve in like 10th Maine, to really interact and build those relationships, especially across the European theater. Talk about the importance of those partnerships and throughout a career, because, I mean, I'm still talking to the Italians that I met in Africa.

• 5:30Speaker 01

  Right. So, proximity is key, right? You're there in Europe with them, so it's unlike traveling from Konos to go and do small unit exchanges or JSets. And that's built on a legacy of those partnerships since 10th Group was first installed there in Germany in 1952. And it's just building on those relationships and that legacy of partnerships with our adjacent either like elements, whether they're SOF or even their conventional forces. And you name a country, each one of them wants an opportunity to work with US SOF and with the United States Army.

• 6:04Fran Racioppi?

  CSM, when we look at the formation, there's a lot of effort that we put on our language development, on understanding culture of our partners. How are we instilling the importance of cultural awareness, understanding, language capability, and being able to look at the problem set that's been given to us by our higher headquarters and our senior leaders within the government? But we got to look at that lens through our partners' eyes to best get them to support what our end state is. How are we instilling that within our?

• 6:43Speaker 01

  Yeah, I think, again, at the core of everything we do is partner operations, and then how do we create a culture that truly sees the value of partnering? And I think as we go and we deploy around the world, those partnerships have to be, they have to be genuine, they have to be authentic. And I think we start that initial foundation baseline training here at Language School. So, if we rewind, all of us, or we just graduated, finished Robin Sage, graduating the Q course, you're thinking, how am I going to learn a foreign language? That's like what's in your mind as a student, is the emphasis on learning that language. The true value of our course is the cultural piece of it, not the language. We're baselining people to learn about empathy and appreciate the situations of these people. And then, as you go forward and you go somewhere and you're eating lunch with those folks,

• 7:27Speaker 01

  you're living in their neighborhoods and walking a mile in their shoes, you start to build those real, genuine relationships, and you see those play out over generations. Where, two weeks ago, at the last regimental first formation, CSM Dorsch was the guest speaker, and he gave a great example of, they were trying to do something operationally down south, and it was the CW5 and 7th Group that had 10 years, you know, 20 years deploying the same area, and was able to pick up the phone and in one phone call, the relationship, eliminate friction and make things move fast. And I think that's the value of our relationship, but it starts by being just a genuine, authentic, good partner, not transactional.

• 8:06Fran Racioppi?

  When you look, sir, at the command, you have the Special Forces Groups, you have Civil Affairs, and you have Psychological Operations, those are the three core components of the command. You serve as a force provider who has to train, man-train and equip the organizations to then supply them, in a sense, to the T-SOCs for employment. How do you balance that? When you look at readiness, what are your top priorities?

• 8:35Speaker 01

  So, when I talk about readiness and we think about it, you know, there's three kind of core things that, when we think about our priorities, and one is lethality, right? And we think about warfighting. And when I think about that, I think about is what are the fundamental baseline tasks that, what makes an SFODA, right? You know, we're deployed, you know, in 70-plus countries around the world, those people want our teams and our people there because we're good at the basics, right? They know that the US and what we do is we're good at those baseline capabilities, and so they want to train with us, they want to be with us. And so, when I think about lethality, it's what it means to be a great team, and what

• 9:17Speaker 01

  it means to be, whether it's a Civil Affairs detachment, or a CA team, or any of our other units of action. And we've actually been on a great journey over this past year, really just to kind of what should be common to all, and really raise the baseline expectation. So, when those units do go out to a T-SOC commander, a theater special operations commander, they can expect like, hey, this is the minimum that they're able to do. And then that buys down their risk to mission, right? Because it's the less risk to force. So, our people are more prepared, that means that they are easier and they're more agile

• 9:59Speaker 01

  to be moved from what was an anticipated mission, and it gives commanders, especially out in the COCOMs, the ability to take one unit that maybe had not trained for that specific mission, but able to quickly allow them to pivot and do something.

• 10:15Speaker 01

  Completely different, maybe. So that's what I'd say. So it's first, it's lethality. Lee talked a little bit about people and he talked about the language parts of that and what we do. You know, first off, truth, right? Humans are more important than hardware. And so those humans, those people that are in our formation is what makes us great, right? And investing in them and making sure that they're prepared to go meet those challenges is really, really important. And we do that in a whole bunch of ways. One really important way is good, hard training so they will survive on the modern day, in the modern day environment.

• 10:54Speaker 01

  And then the third one is obviously as we transform or how we modernize our units to be competitive and help the army and the joint force win on the modern day. In modern day combat, we see that over in Ukraine, just like the rest of the world. So we take those lessons learned and we apply those across the force, ensuring that we're able to do those things and they're survivable. So those three kinds of bins are the things that we kind of think about at the command and we spend a lot of time. So when they do go out the door and we give them to every geographic combatant commander, every T-SOC that's out in the globe that we know and we can have confidence to tell all of those commanders

• 11:37Speaker 01

  that they are prepared for anything that you would ask them to do.

• 11:41Fran Racioppi?

  I'm gonna, I'm gonna ask you about something that was brought up in my last, well, the CSM and I talked about it in the last interview we had when he was at SWIC and then General Ferguson, your predecessor and now boss. So we're gonna invoke him now. He brought up, and so did the CSM and General Bullpayer during that conversation, the fact that we as a regiment have to question a couple of things. We have to question number four, structure and say, okay, the organization's been, as Chief said, been around since 1952 and we've had 12-man ODA's. And we have to ask ourselves, is the 12-man ODA what we need in 2030, 2040?

• 12:20Fran Racioppi?

  And are we doing the hard analysis to make modifications that our MTO may not be exactly what we need it to be for the next round of our adversary? So when you, and I go to all three of you, you know, as you look across the organization, is the 12-man ODA what we need? Are there still discussions about potentially having to make modifications to that? And then I'm gonna ask you about robotics.

• 12:49Speaker 01

  Sure, absolutely. I can go first or you guys wanna go first?

• 12:53Fran Racioppi?

  All you, sir.

• 12:53Speaker 01

  All me, okay. So yeah, we've had the 12-man ODA. We haven't always had a 12-man ODA. I think for most people, if you look through our history and you go back to the Jeds, I know it's been 16, 15, it's immorphed and exchanged. And we have certainly settled on a 12-man ODA for over, ever since Aaron Bank kind of wrote it all down. We've had those conversations of probably the past four or five years. The parallel I'll draw is like the infantry squad. Infantry squad's nine people. It's been nine people for probably longer, right? And the approach that we've taken is, hey, when you look at fundamentally what an ODA was built to do, right?

• 13:37Speaker 01

  When you look at what their purpose is, we talked about being able to partner. An ODA was built in general to be able to employ roughly a battalion size worth surrogate ally partner and be that force, you know, to add to a joint force commander or an army commander, another option, right? So we look at the parts and pieces that are in there that, that do that. When we do the analysis, we think we're pretty comfortable with the 12 people. We think what they're being trained on and what the skills that those 12 people have certainly are probably the harder look they're looking at. And that gets into the next topic that you wanna talk about. You wanna talk about unmanned systems, you wanna talk about other things that we think those people should be able to do.

• 14:22Speaker 01

  The ODA, at least from my, my experience, is the most diverse organization at the team level than any probably unit of action in the Department of War. It takes seven different MOSs to make one unit, right? And that's pretty unheard of. If you look at whether it's an NSW SEAL platoon or you look at an infantry squad or you look at a tank platoon, like they're generally, or any other kind of infantry ranger, they're generally one or two MOSs. We have seven that run 12. So the homework that we're on is like of those seven different skill sets, right? Those are military occupational specialties with a specific skill that when you squish them all together,

• 15:03Speaker 01

  build a capability. We're taking the approach like, hey, we need to look at what flavor and what things do we need to change within those military occupational specialties to make them more lethal in the future.

• 15:16Speaker 02

  See, now I'm super interested because I don't know how I answered the question the last time. So somebody's gonna go watch, somebody's gonna watch the original video and then call me out. But I'll answer the question now in my current role and how I see things. I think form follows function. So what is it that we need an ODA to do now and in the future? And as we define that mission and those requirements, we will task, organize and structure the ODA and quite frankly, the SF group and the command to meet those demands for the nation. Regarding the 12-man ODA, do I know if the 12-man ODA is the right structure or the right solution? I don't think anybody would, can honestly answer that question. What I do know is we assess and select some amazing people that are above average intelligence, above average fitness with extremely high levels of character.

• 16:01Speaker 02

  And when you take really good people that are fit, intelligent of high character and you assign them a mission, it doesn't really matter what their MOSs is. They generally rise to that occasion and they meet those demands. Now the question is, how much demand can we put on them before they reach the point of saturation? And we've all felt in our careers where one more rock was piled into that rucksack, where you hit a point where for me to do this good, something else has to atrophy. And I think we as a command need to regulate that throttle to, are we asking too much of the ODA? And if so, the mission still requires something different. How do we seamlessly integrate other capabilities within our command to make them more capable, whether it's space, cyber or things like that, to make the ODA, the AOB, the SODIF more effective?

• 16:43Speaker 02

  And I think what we'll, what we'll see in the future is an ODA, side ed and a CAT team are still, they're the core of what we provide, but there'll be additive capability of other functions that are bolted onto those at a moment in time when they're needed the most, right? And I think that is the secret sauce that our command brings, uniquely brings compared to anybody else.

• 17:01Speaker 01

  I don't think it's any different than our entire history.

• 17:04Speaker 02

  Yep.

• 17:05Speaker 01

  And you can pick whatever special mission that we've done in the past or anytime we've asked teams to go do things, we've always built for purpose around a core. And so when you think about that, we think that that core is close and we could obviously, everybody has their own opinion and thought, but I think the core is close. And so we're gonna focus on the things that we bolt onto the core, Jerry.

• 17:29Speaker 03

  The only thing I was gonna add into that, sir, is again, we've talked about Colonel Aaron Bank and we've talked about 1952, establishing the ODA as the unit of action. Now, keep in mind, when he first went to Germany, it was him, a warrant officer and eight NCOs. It wasn't the right size. And so what you've heard from CSM and from the CG is we're looking at a baseline capability and how do we do that with that structure that we have, which is 12 men? That enables us to do split team operations by doctrine. So you've got requisite MO, or you've got two of each MOS per split team and that's only gonna increase their capability. And what CSM is talking about is giving them the additional tools and capability for the modern fight to make them capable and effective in this era of warfare versus in the past.

• 18:13Speaker 03

  It's always been this, this modular thing that we can always adjust as needed, as the CG said. But then its core, 12 men, has been the right size since 1958.

• 18:23Speaker 01

  The smallest package, we can get all of the warfighting functions in, right? So if you go back to, you know, if you're truly trying to operate a battalion size just organization, what are the warfighting functions? And you look at our MOSs, they, they replicate warfighting functions and be able to allow us to do. So when you think about the model, we know we have to be able to do everything from a split team, small team operation, all the way up to maybe a detachment plus some special capability, a unilateral operation, all the way to, I need you to go somewhere and pick up 500 of these people that you've never seen before. And we've, we've seen that in our history.

• 19:05Speaker 01

  And be able to aim them in the right direction and to help do things for a army or a joint force commander. So when you think about the breadth of what we ask, you know, that core thing to do, we, I don't think we can get it any smaller. And then we start looking at trying to break things up and do things that are smaller if you make it any bigger. So again, I think when you go back to the purpose, like what is an ODA built to do? You look at our history, I think the core of it, I think the core is good. I mean, we can, we can debate, we can add eaches and ors, but we're, we've certainly gone back to the approach of adding built for purpose. And I think if you ask Admiral Bradley, that was kind of his kind of guidance.

• 19:48Speaker 01

  Look at all of SOCOM and all of SOF, we, we weren't gonna redesign ourselves for just a new technology. We were going to take SOF as it was designed to and then let the technology enable us. Does that make sense?

• 20:02Fran Racioppi?

  It does, because the CSM said in his last time we sat down with him, I think, I think it made you famous, actually. The quote made you famous. It was something along the lines of, good people make technology better.

• 20:17Speaker 01

  True.

• 20:18Fran Racioppi?

  And so if you field that to, you know, as you mentioned, this core group of highly capable folks, whatever technology you're gonna throw to them is gonna be enhanced to even at times, I think, above its maximum capability. Our warrant officers chief are our technical experts across the army, not only in SF. And we've had the opportunity to sit down with the 160th, who are probably some of the most technical warrant officers that we have out there. But across the regiment, there's been the discussion of robotics. And how do we incorporate robotics, unmanned aerial vehicles, unmanned systems in? And a lot of that's come back to, well, let's have a warrant officer do it, right? Because they're technical experts. And I know that conversation, and we're gonna talk about it next week

• 21:01Fran Racioppi?

  with General Slider and SWIC and some of the initiatives they've had around there. But when you look at the incorporation of probably what, what we would argue is one of the most critical, enhancing technologies that we need to see at the most tactical level of the ODAs, is the incorporation of unmanned systems, both probably in an offensive and a defensive capability. What are you looking at?

• 21:23Speaker 03

  What we've determined is it cannot be an additional task or an additional hat for someone on the ODA to wear. So as a result of that, we're going to create a new MOS specifically for robotics. The amount of turnover and how quickly that field or tech innovates and changes in about a six-week cycle requires someone to have a constant stare and to be able to train with industry, to take the best practices and best TTPs, not only from the military application, but also from the civilian application, fuse those together and then provide the best capability for the unit of action on the ground. So to take an 18 series as it exists right now and give them an additional feather in their cap or tool would be too

• 22:07Speaker 03

  difficult because they've got their already primary mission to focus on. So we determined an additional MOS with someone who could focus on that specific tech capability, whether it be ground, air, or just unmanned systems as a whole is the better approach or the better approach to infusing or integrating what will be required of us in the future fight.

• 22:29Speaker 01

  Yeah. And I'd add in the model of, we talked about enabling, having tech enable a team. So the team will have a, and I think we talked to the team next week about robotics. We are certainly integrating baseline, how to use unmanned systems, just like we teach them how to use machine guns, anti-tank weapons. It's a weapon system. So there's some baseline commonality. And then we take and create, as Steve was talking about, these higher level experts to bolt on to them for specific missions, right? So it's not necessarily, we're not making it on a team. It's, I'm making a technical MOS that resides higher

• 23:09Speaker 01

  echelons, just like you would see our historical EW or those kinds of things added to them for a specific mission. That's where we see the value and then being able to help them not only from a technical, as technology evolves really quickly, but be able to advise commanders at echelon on, hey, the employment and capabilities of those, both for an offensive and defensive capability. We think it's really important. Our forefathers that made the SF warrant that preceded us being a branch, that was even before as being 18s, we were, before we were just MOSs, they saw the wisdom and being able to have a warrant officer.

• 23:53Speaker 01

  And as the son of a SF lieutenant, right? If you go to my office, you'll see a picture of my dad as an SF lieutenant in Vietnam. We decided it didn't bring the technical expertise and it didn't bring the continuity that really drove the capability and increased the capability at the detachment levels. Like, okay, I have a lieutenant. That's great, but there's a lot of things you have to teach your lieutenant. Same thing if you apply that logic to unmanned systems. I have to be able to take that technical expert and be able to apply that and give that to them. So it's not a burden, but they're able to apply the technology at the pace and speed and integrate it. And it be something that they can actually make them better, if that makes sense.

• 24:37Fran Racioppi?

  You mentioned the six-week cycle of required innovation. We've seen in the conflicts in with Russia and Ukraine, rapid advancement in a variety of different technologies. And we're learning a lot out of the current conflict with Iran as well, about a lot of systems. How are you taking those lessons that are coming off the battlefield? And we have the luxury now of near real time, which we didn't have if you were younger, but you're taking those in near real time and being able to then incorporate them back in. And I asked that question specifically to you at your level because we can have that conversation with SWIC and they're going to write policy and doctrine and two years when it goes through,

• 25:21Fran Racioppi?

  you know, army review, it's going to become a standard operating procedure and they can incorporate into the schoolhouse. But you don't have that luxury when we talk about readiness and preparing an ODA to deploy for in a month, two months, three months, next week. And they have to take those lessons now. When faced with a challenge, Green Berets adapt, overcome, and keep moving forward. Now's your chance to stand with them. Join the 1952 Society with a monthly gift of just $19.52 to provide critical medical devices for wounded, ill, and injured Green Berets. Your support fuels their recovery, helping them return to duty or continue serving their communities. A Green Berets mission never stops. Neither should our support. Join the

• 26:04Fran Racioppi?

  1952 Society today and stand with those who stand for us.

• 26:10Speaker 01

  I'll start and let the guys hop in. So the approach that we've taken for the very reason that you just said, like we don't have the time, is to focus it on how they are training. And so we talk about how they implement, and I'll talk specifically in this case, unmanned systems, because we're talking about that fight, is putting it into the hands of the, of all echelons at the lowest level. That's like thing one, like you can't train on something if you don't have it. And that was a challenge that we are, that we certainly have and we're, we're working through. So getting the, the actual unmanned system, you pick the system, air, ground, water, that matter, but you have to give it to them so that at least they know, like, hey, it's something I have to

• 26:51Speaker 01

  do. So that's thing one. Uh, thing two would be, all right. And then is making sure that they integrate that into what we call our baseline lethality standards. Like, hey, for every, we went through every O3 unit of action and to include not just our civil affairs, Psyop and SF, but every, you think, SAD, EW, space. And we baseline them and we made sure that that was a training task throughout their readiness cycle and their ramp up, that they have to integrate those things. That's thing kind of two. And thing three, we've encouraged and really asked the groups and the brigades to come back and help us

• 27:32Speaker 01

  see where not only have they changed their training pathway and ingested those, is, hey, how are you changing your courses? Everybody knows that groups have their own kind of advanced skills company that generates their own skills. Hey, come back and show me the actual, the instructions and the things where you have changed how you're doing those things. So it's kind of those, that kind of layered approach. You first have to give them the systems. Every unit should be able to think, hey, here's my rifle, here's my nods, here's my radio and oh, and here's my drone. And so when they go out or unmanned system, when they go out to do whatever mission or task they have, it's a, okay, how would I use

• 28:13Speaker 01

  this for this task that you gave me? And it could be a, a large range of things. And then, then holding them kind of in a means of like, hey, let's measure how we're doing that, both the employment of that capability, but also our ability to protect ourselves from that capability. That what basic TTPs have to change that we've done. Like, hey, an ORP can't be out of sight and sound, just a couple hundred meters off the objective anymore. You have to incorporate and understand how some of those basic fundamentals of whether it's patrolling or how you operate have fundamentally changed. And so we're having

• 28:53Speaker 01

  a lot of those conversations and seeing it implemented in their training. I think probably the best comments when we talk to team sergeants is they'll say like, hey, the basics that us old people had to deal with is, you know, like map, compass, maybe had like a plugger follow. Yeah. And like you had like a couple rifles and maybe a sniper rifle and, and the things that you were having to contend with. And you weren't worried about having an adversary that not only contested us in all domains, in some places are as good as us in some place, even, even better. So how do you create a training environment

• 29:33Speaker 01

  that they feel like they are exposed to and feel the pressure, weight and true capabilities of a peer adversary in a frequent venue? And those are the things that we're creating for them. Those venues and giving them the resources or trying to get them the resics in an environment against a peer adversary that truly would have those, not only for them to use, but also that would be used against them.

• 30:00Speaker 02

  Yeah. I think our speed of innovation works at a couple of different paces, in my opinion. The first one is the speed of like commands and communication. The second one is kind of a, the speed of the industry, our training. And then there's also the, at the bottom up, the ODA level. And I think I'll start with the speed of innovation at the command. I think what General Rhythm's done a great job is he has created an environment where we communicate as fast and as flat as possible across the enterprise. Information comes from the theater, whether it's sit reps, O and Is, whatever. And we try to get that information out as fast and as flat as we can to the whole formation. That is, as you would expect, there's always a lag in communication. But then he does a really good job following it up with battlefield circulation. I got to communicate, then I got to circulate. I think what you see is, is we're talking about things and the, the

• 30:43Speaker 02

  third floor of one SFC, when you're out on the ground at Fort Campbell or JBLM and you talk to a team or you go see a team on the range, you see the lags of that communication and you try to fill those gaps because it's our job to resource them, right? And that's where that connection to industry comes in of, here's where we're at, how can we move faster and, you know, put some gas on this fire? And that has some issues as well. And then there's also just, uh, I think where it works really well is like the ODA or the unit of action is the one that incurs the highest risk. And they, they care about their, first that they are programmed to want to use that stuff offensively. And as they get on the range and they train and they realize they want to see sense and engage something as far and as fast as possible, they also start to think, oh, how do I protect myself

• 31:24Speaker 02

  from the same capability? And you see a lot of great bottom up innovation. And I'll, I'll give a great story or a vignette of maybe somewhat intangible, why we are changing. And it's impressive going back to the people we bring in. I have a guy who lives down the street from me. I first met him when he was a staff sergeant over a decade ago. And he's your stereotypical Green Beret, six foot tall, 10% body fat. He's got an applied physics degree, does CrossFit workouts for fun. He's like everything you want. He's also like a complete gun nerd. When I would go to his house when he was a single 18 Echo, I would be like tripping over firing pins on the floor of his house. It was just, it was like IPSEC targets and gun parts all over his house. And he wanted to, you know, he went to CIPSEC and then he nerded out on how do I kill somebody a mile away with a sniper rifle, all the things you want from a great team guy.

• 32:09Speaker 02

  I went to his house a couple of weeks ago and I walked into his nerd room. The firing pins have been replaced with like diodes and wires and soldering. He, uh, he has figured out that the battlefield has changed and he wants to be an expert at his trade. And he is all in drones all the time. It doesn't mean he atrophied on his shoot move communicate skills, but he has figured out very quick. And he's a team sergeant now and he's been to Rusik, the artist formerly known as Rusik. Now, now into the evolution of Arctic. He is going to integrate that capability because that's what makes him and his team the most effective. Now it's our job to take what they're doing on the range, integrate it with industry and the resources we have available with what's going on in the battlefield. To iterate as fast as possible to maintain the advantage.

• 32:52Speaker 01

  Listening to CSM and General Wathem talk, I'd circle back to your earlier question or comment about 180 alphas being the, the tech on a team. With that in mind, unlike any other warrant officer in the army inventory, we don't have a system. If I think about a nine 15 alpha, it's a vehicle or it's motor stable. If I think about a four 20 alpha, it's all IPSA and admin actions. For a 180, that unit of action or that, that thing that we maintain is an ODA. In my mind, I distill it down to its basic form and CSM, when you mentioned weapons, I think about an M4. Think about how long the M4 has been in our inventory and in existence. We've put different pieces on there, floating barrels, different rails, different hand grips.

• 33:36Speaker 01

  But at its core, it is the same weapon system we've been using since Vietnam. We've just modified it over time to make it fit suitable for the modern day battlefield or for what we need it to do currently. I think about that the same way that we talk about the ODA and adding capability to it. So whether it be unmanned systems and then giving them the tools that they need to be successful. I just wanted to give you that little addition to your comment earlier about 180s.

• 34:06Fran Racioppi?

  When we talk about the capabilities, the innovation, modernization, innovation, rapid fielding initiatives, you know, the Department of War, the army are, I would say, always talking about, you know, how do we get things through industry faster? You know, how do we cut the red tape and how do we get into the hands of the warfighter? The environment we're in now is vastly different than where we spent

• 34:34Speaker 01

  That's right.

• 34:35Fran Racioppi?

  20 plus years in the global war on terror. And in a lot of ways, you, so you referenced the Jedbergs and the capabilities they needed when they parachuted into occupied France on the night of June 5th and the 6th of 1944. And what was their job? Now that was LSCO.

• 34:54Speaker 01

  Yeah, a hundred percent, a hundred percent.

• 34:56Fran Racioppi?

  And they had to find a way to fit into LSCO. So where does do our modern special forces capabilities fit into the large scale combat operations that we're seeing on the news every day?

• 35:12Speaker 01

  All right. That's a great question. So General Ferguson, when he was in this job and now it's his DCG, he started us on that, hey, let's, let's think about how we do that. And so we've been at this, what is our role in the current modern conflict? We've been optimized, talked about over 20, 25 years for a kind of steady state counterterrorism. And it's really, we've really changed our structure, formation, trainings, all those things that I can think of. I'll give you one that's near and dear to every ODA, you know, like Sofalk. Like it didn't exist pre nine 11. We didn't have the course, didn't see the need, and we evolved the capability to do those things. Just as I used to talk about training and adding a capability to all teams.

• 35:55Speaker 01

  When we think about what our role is, we've gone specifically to a couple, uh, and you had, uh, you've had a, one of the potential JTF commanders, General Anderson on here as a core commander. We've talked to General McFarland, General Admiral at a couple of core commanders. And we're like, hey, what do you need us to do? Like, how do we help you as a JTF or a core commander solve the problems that you have? What we did for the Jedbergs or what we did in first of the 10th and the Cold War, or you know, some of those things have evolved. And so we're having that evolution today. What we think, what we're hearing from and what we're aiming the force at are kind of three basic things.

• 36:40Speaker 01

  A JTF or a core wants us to be focused on deep sensing and impacting their key things that they want to get after in kind of in their deep area, right? So they're focused on trying to shape the fight in the main battle areas where divisions, brigades kind of conduct their fights or the Marines or whoever. So if you think of us in what we would call the core deep is being able to shape those operations. Everything from what you would see from the Jedbergs to sabotaging rail lines, fuel lines. And you watch the Ukrainians do this today, right? They're shaping that deep area for them. We can do that with a partner, without the partner.

• 37:21Speaker 01

  Probably what's new for us is probably we talk about long range fires. Um, you know, you're seeing that evolution of warfare. That's something that we saw or in the SF group's going to have organically in the next two to three years. It's some things that we're doing currently. And so being able to shape that deep area for a JTF commander or a core commander. So he can help control the timing and tempo of that fight is really important. So that's thing one. And then you can think of all the ways from your experience, how we can do that by, with and through. Thing two, and we talk about PSYOP, right? You talk about influence. It's taking kind of our historic CT and campaigning influence operations and capabilities

• 38:06Speaker 01

  and focusing it on what we actually saw ourselves do in history. And it's focusing and what we're hearing from the core commanders is, hey, we need to help us influence the decision-making of my adversary. Like who is the red force commander on the other side? And help me to influence how he makes decisions or she makes decisions so that we can buy them time in the operations. You know, when we first asked 18th airborne corps commander, General Anderson, he's like, hey, it could be as simple as I just need a 15 minute time window to move a force or do something. If you can get them to see doubt, disbelief and cause them to either send a resource or capability someplace else, then that helps them with their fight.

• 38:50Speaker 01

  So that's thing kind of two. Uh, thing kind of three that they, they think about when you think about our civil affairs capability. They really ask us, and this is, they think about like, how do we help them consolidate gains? And how do we help them really bring in the Civ mil infrastructure and help them to understand how to use that? And you can think of that just like you would in the example we talked about with the Jeds. Like, hey, where are the bridges, the railroads, like that were out in front of the army corps that were moving across Germany afterwards. They wanted to know where all that stuff was. So it helped with their, how they planned. And then more importantly, when you look at it from a partnered or allied perspective, how do we get our allies with us to free up some of their combat power?

• 39:35Speaker 01

  So they can focus it forward on the main efforts. And so those are the three kind of bins that as I've kind of talked to those three commanders that they've asked us to do. So we've tried to focus those lethality baseline standards on answering that problem, that question. And that could be applied to any kind of, you think, modern day ground commander. So it could be a marine commander or whatever, but it's really being ahead of them, being in their deep space, influencing a adversary commander's decision-making process, getting inside their OODA loop, if you will. And then really helping them with leveraging our partnerships to help them consolidate their games and conserve their combat power.

• 40:20Speaker 01

  If that makes sense.

• 40:21Speaker 02

  Yes. Yeah, I guess so. Yeah, I think the best description I heard actually came from General Anderson. He, he came out to our, our commander decision round table last year. We've read the doctrine and it's your interpretation and unless you, you know, you're really familiar with the doctrine or you. As he described it, um, he, he talked a lot about pace and tempo and the value SOF could bring to attrit the enemy so that a core is not facing an enemy at full capacity. Right? And I'm a C average student, so he's, he's describing our own doctrine to us. I'm having like visualizations going to my head of how, how can I describe this to an E5, right? And then if I can describe it to an E5, I'll understand it. So I think what SOF brings is we're, we're small, we're light, we're fast, we're agile, but we're lethal. And we operate in the periphery in the deep.

• 41:04Speaker 02

  And what we don't bring in mass, we bring in mass through partnerships. So we have a ton of options that we can provide a commander in that regard, but we have to be used kind of toggled on and off at a right time, a place to have a, have an effect that supports a core or division in a fight. If we think of a boxing match, that core is in that 12 rounds, head to head opponent on opponent. But imagine our, our team gets to go back to the corner, get a drink of water and get touched up in between rounds. And on the adversary's side, there's somebody in the corner, just giving you a thousand jabs to the ribs, wearing down the body before you got to go back in the ring to fight, fight the main, main opponent. Right? And I think we're off in the corner, giving somebody a thousand jabs to the ribs, giving the core an advantage as it gets to start the next round.

• 41:48Speaker 01

  Your question, you led with industry, you talked a little bit about the.

• 41:54Speaker 03

  Rapid fielding initiative that we're familiar with in GWAT, I'll offer, we didn't start the way we finished it. We didn't have everything that we needed when we first set foot into Iraq or Afghanistan. Over time, we adapted, industry adapted to our requirements to meet the need of the warfighter on the ground. So if you think about it, I recall driving down certain MSRs in a light-skinned vehicle, a Toyota Tacoma. That was before IEDs were a real threat, right?

• 42:22Speaker 01

  No whammies.

• 42:23Speaker 03

  Yeah, that's correct. And then over time, the vehicles that we utilized downrange changed, as did our body armor. We had side plates that we didn't start with. And so I would say that although we cannot prepare holistically for what's next, we can get a head start this time. And I believe that once faced with a challenge and once we're asked to perform, you even said it yourself, we will find a way to be successful. I think everything else will catch up with us in time, but we want to give the ODAs and our units that we put on the field a head start. We want them now to be looking forward at what they might have to do in the future fight. And then as we fast follow what's happening in industry, it will continue to catch up with us

• 43:08Speaker 03

  and provide us what we need to be successful.

• 43:10Speaker 01

  Yeah, that's good. And we have a conversation about creating an environment for those units, just the teams, the units at echelon, so they can onboard the technology as it evolves and they don't have to figure out what to do with it. So how do they start to think about it now, knowing that when you go to war with the army that you have? But as you stay in it longer, the technology is going to come, right? And you can give a bunch of historical examples. He talked about the current fight, you can go back to WW2, right? You know, the army that we deployed to Africa early on was not the army that hit the beaches in France from equipment to, I said, those things caught up.

• 43:53Speaker 01

  And so, but being able to create in their minds, how would I use this? What are the TTPs? Especially when you think about unmanned systems, because that's kind of new. When we talk to the formation, when I talk to the formation, we talk about unmanned systems. The closest comparison that I have that was kind of common to us in the military is the machine gun, right? When it's invented, it's invented at the end of kind of our war in the States, right? It's really not fully adopted onto the next major theater in, you know, over in France in that conflict. And in WW1, and we didn't know what to do with it, right? We put them in big machine gun battalions, right? They were in battalions.

• 44:33Speaker 01

  And if you look at Ukraine, the parallel I personally draw is Ukrainians make battalion-sized, large sizes of unmanned systems battalions, that's how they fight. You fast forward from WW1 to WW2, a machine, there's two machine guns in every squad, right? So we went from, this is a new technology, I don't know what to do with it. And so we put it in these units and it evolved in about 30 years to, well, it's in common in every squad. We got a bunch on a team. We're on that same journey with unmanned systems. And so how do you get them to be able to adopt those systems? So that we can shorten the timeline between, you know, 1918 and the next war.

• 45:17Speaker 01

  So that's kind of, so how do you create that environment so they can onboard that technology quickly? If we are asked to do that.

• 45:24Fran Racioppi?

  How are we doing on differentiating? And make our Navy SEAL brothers mad. How are we, I don't care. I gotta go see the Navy in a couple of weeks, I gotta be nice to them. One of the things that I think we struggled with, or at least felt the effects of, a very tactical level throughout the global war on terror was this, everybody was synonymous, like, oh, hey, okay, well, we got a problem set, all right, well, grab a SOF unit of action. And a lot of times it didn't matter, it felt like it didn't matter if that was a SEAL platoon or an ODA or a Marsoc team, you know, they just kind of said, throw somebody at it and, you know, they'll do the same job. But the reality is, is like, you're responsible for force readiness and training of the special forces teams in the army.

• 46:09Fran Racioppi?

  They don't necessarily, yeah, we do some things that Navy SEALs do, we do some things that a Marsoc team does, but your core capabilities are slightly different. How are we doing in today's conflict in differentiating the tool that is required to then, to the fight?

• 46:27Speaker 01

  Yeah, I think, you know, if you were to step back in, you definitely wouldn't see that anymore. You would definitely see, as we've gone back and focused on really, you know, you look at the NDS and peer capabilities, it's kind of focused us respectively across SOCOM on kind of your initial roles that we were born, like if, you know, when I think about SOF, we were all born during combat, right? So we do things in competition, certainly, but we were born out of a need, right? When you look at our histories and all of our original, out of combat. And in those founding units, right, it was a very, usually a niche capability. You talked about NSW and the things that they do and all those things.

• 47:11Speaker 01

  I think you'd be, when you go to, talk to them, I think when you look across SOCOM at large, very much back to kind of your core purpose, right? And so, and I think that is, as we focus back, as Admiral Bradley's guidance, to the focus back with our services, and that's been his guidance for, like, I need you to focus on how you can help your service. And we've talked a lot today about how we help the army, acknowledging that when we deploy, we deploy in support of the joint force. I would imagine when you have that conversation with the folks in NSW, that they'll be able to tell you, hey, a lot of their focus is back in what you would expect it to be in the water, in that domain, and how they support the force.

• 47:50Speaker 02

  Yeah, I agree. I think going back to our core purpose and our relationship with our services has helped guide that.

• 47:57Speaker 01

  Yeah, I'm in agreement.

• 47:59Fran Racioppi?

  We got a couple of minutes left and I want to focus on the culture of the regiment. We spent, everybody here referenced the importance of the people and the quality of the people. How we recruit, assess and select our team members who come on. And we tend to focus in these conversations on Green Berets. And, but, you know, our civil affairs and our PSYOPs folks are a critical part of what we do as an organization. When you look at the culture of the regiment from your perspective, number one, what do you see? And number two, what do you want it to be?

• 48:35Speaker 01

  No, that's good. Your comment about it's more than SF regiment, right? We're three regiments, but even much more than that, right? We know we are 23,000 people in First SFC, a long way from the 2,300 slots that Aaron Bank got, you know, in 1952. We're comprised of every Army MOS, right? We have an MI battalion, we have a sustainment brigade, we have most of the groups, right? If you looked at an SF group, about probably 60% of them are non-18 series, right? So everything that we do is absolutely a whole team, whole culture effort. So that culture piece is really important, just not for the SF regiment or the CA regiment or the PSYOP.

• 49:19Speaker 01

  Like that group culture, that First SFC culture is really, really, really important because we can't do any mission without all the parts. So when you ask me what I think of our, our culture, the first thing that comes is, and I saw somebody, we think about us as a regiment, there's a, we are masters of the basics. We should be like, everything that we do, we focus to be excellent to base. And since you've heard the SMA talk about that for a long time, she's been in that seat. But when I think about our people, I think about, they just really want to be good at what they do. They love the people that they're with. I think about how they interact and think about other people.

• 50:01Speaker 01

  We talked about, as we brought people in, the importance of having a cultural awareness and understanding so they have empathy for other people, just not within the formation, but with their partners and allies. So our culture, I think, is in a good place. I think when you think about what the nation has asked us to do over time, I think it is that culture that was really formed, really during, really the first groups as they stood up from the people that started that whole, that team mentality, right? Even whether if I can go to a, I can go to any section in the building, or I can go to an MI battalion, I can go to the sustainment brigade and that, that team collaborative culture about how they want to solve problems,

• 50:46Speaker 01

  be really, really good at what they do and be good teammates. That's kind of how I think about it.

• 50:51Speaker 02

  I think we have an awesome, healthy culture and it's just getting better every day, but that's not to say we can't make improvements. I think at the core, you know, we all want to rally behind the beret and we, you know, be the quiet professionals and live up to the Kennedy quote, you know, a symbol of excellence, badge of courage, march of distinction. But what does that really mean to each one of us? So a while back, I think it was March, I did a offsite with all the CSMs. We went down to Fort Benning, Georgia, and we did it intentionally. We spent the morning with some 18 x-rays to kind of remind ourselves of where did our journey begin? Cause all of those guys at OSIT, their shaved heads in week eight of infantry basic training was all of us 20 years ago. So it's me and all the group and some of the battalion CSMs. So that was very eye-opening because it was a reminder of our own history, our own lineage as us as individuals, but also to

• 51:35Speaker 02

  our regiment. At the same time, we were doing all the offsite conversations in the 75th Ranger Regiment Headquarters. And we were getting to see another unit's very awesome, very strong culture. And then we asked the Rangers, a couple of their first sergeants, their S3 sergeant, a few others to give us an outsider's perspective of us. Cause when we get in the room, we talk about ourselves.

• 51:55Fran Racioppi?

  Right.

• 51:56Speaker 02

  It's all like, we're great. High fives, right? In some ways, I was very pleased with what another organization had to say was, anybody has any doubt of what our strong, healthy culture is, go down to Fort Benning and visit the regiment, right? But in some cases, they gave us some really tough love and it forced us to take a critical look at ourselves. And what we found was, we identify a lot with what we do and our operational kind of tempo, but we were leaving out some of the most important things of who are we? What are our values? On the backside of that, two of our battalion CSMs, a guy, CSM Josh Thompson from second battalion, third group, and a CSM Roger Cassane from 210 have kind of taken on a project of, they're going to better define what SF culture is and our values and some sort of culture statement that all of us can rally behind, like rally

• 52:39Speaker 02

  behind the beret to help just strengthen that, that culture. But I think at the core of it, what we see is, you visit any soldier at any one of our formations, not just an ODA, they all want to be expert soldiers. They want to be the best at their job. They know when they're in this organization, in these units, they're going to be expected to go to the places and do the things that quite frankly, and not a lot of other people want to do. It's, it's hard places in the cold, in the wet, in the rain, in the trenches, in the grit, in the grime. We're uniquely positioned for that based on the people we bring in that are willing to do that kind of fight. And then you go beyond that, they're all really here for a very similar reason, and that's, that's each other, for that sense of service to their faith, their family and each other. It's super inspiring to be around. So to answer your question, I think we have a great culture and it's just going to keep getting better every day.

• 53:22Speaker 03

  In my opinion, our culture is the best it's ever been. I mean, let's think about an hour a day, singular enemy, singular focus, whether it be Russia. Our national defense strategy was suggested, that's our pacing, I am, that's who we're up against. This current group, this generation of SOF, they have their hands full. I mean, you name a country and they present a threat or an emerging threat to us, yet we have people that volunteer to continue to join our ranks every day. As a matter of fact, sometimes two and three times they'll go to selection if they're offered the opportunity to do so. Once they arrive or get with it, or are allowed to join our ranks, they stay. And to CSM's point,

• 54:05Speaker 03

  they stay for the people they get to work with to get the most challenging jobs, the most difficult work on the planet. And they continue to strive and succeed at doing those things, the hardest job on our most difficult day. There's people asking to do those things, they're lying up for it. So I would prefer that our culture throughout history has been something that people have been drawn to. They want to work with the best and they want to be given the most difficult task to accomplish. And they will continue to do so. It's our jobs to ensure that we give them the tools that they need to continue to be successful in the modern battlefield.

• 54:43Fran Racioppi?

  Well, I'll tell you that that culture exists, well, that culture doesn't end when you leave the regiment and you take the beret off. You take the uniform off and being on the other side now, and you know, there's, there's a lot of days where, you know, I look at our team in FR6 and my security company and on the podcast and I, and I will, they'll tell you I yell at them, probably opine on some of the cultural standards that I want to see amongst our unit. And we're very fortunate actually in my company to have a bunch of SF guys. So a couple of guys out of 10th group, 19th group, 20th group. And so we've done a good job of really building that and bringing everybody along. And so, you know,

• 55:24Fran Racioppi?

  I think that when I look at the organization, I look at the command, you know, that what is instilled in you, having the opportunity and the honor to serve in this command, sticks with you for the rest of your life. And it becomes, you know, a pinnacle and a real, something that you look back on as an honor. And so I appreciate, and I say all that to, thank you for spending more time with me here today and really getting this message out and showing all of those who are serving today, want to serve in the future, and those of us who are on the back end of service, that, you know, the organization remains strong, it stands ready, and that we have a lot of work to do out there because we have a lot

• 56:09Fran Racioppi?

  of people who want to take away our freedoms and our ability to be the world's sole superpower. But with you guys there, I feel pretty good about it.

• 56:17Speaker 02

  So appreciate it.

• 56:18Speaker 01

  Thank you. Yeah, we appreciate the opportunity just to spend some time with you today. And you get to tell, we get the 80,000 foot view of the command, and I'm glad you're getting out to the other O6 commands that are out there to hear their stories too, and hear from them, I think is really important. The benefit, I guess, that we get to sit here is we get to see all of them. It's kind of like having, you know, 11 different kids, right? Everybody loves all 11, right? And on, and on others days, you know, he's your favorite or she's your favorite, and then whether it, but they're all our favorites. And so being able to tell it from our perspective is a perspective, I guess is what I'm trying to tell you. And if you, and we encourage you and we'll get to other folks and, and

• 57:00Speaker 01

  I know you've talked to some already, but getting their perspective, I think is also really important.

• 57:05Fran Racioppi?

  Yeah. Well, thank you. I appreciate that support. We'll get the intergroup rivalry going. Don't worry.

• 57:09Speaker 01

  Absolutely. Absolutely.

• 57:12Fran Racioppi?

  Thanks.

• 57:13Speaker 01

  Thank you very much. Appreciate it.

• 57:16Fran Racioppi?

  American Jedbergs went on to form the foundation of the United States Special Forces and the Special Activities Director of the Central Intelligence Agency. Thanks for listening to the Jedburgh Podcast, an official program of the Green Beret Foundation. I'm your creator and host, Fran Rychowi. Join us next week for a new episode on Apple, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts. Check us out on YouTube for full episodes, highlights, and other long and short form content. If you like what you heard, give us a like and leave a review. Follow the Jedburgh Podcast and the Green Beret Foundation on LinkedIn, Instagram, Facebook, extra threads. Send your comments and inquiries to [email protected]. As former members of Special Operations Forces, the Jedburgh Media Channel, and the Green Beret Foundation remain committed to supporting all generations of US Army Special

• 57:58Fran Racioppi?

  Forces and their families. Thanks for joining us on this episode. How you prepare today determines success tomorrow.