With regards to the CF is there a difference between SOF and SF?

[danteh]

There was a thread I saw on reddit about a fallen American soldier having our jump wings and I saw a comment chain talking about CANSOF and people were talking about how our guys (CSOR, CJIRU, JTF) are not special forces, they are special operation forces. I thought it was a weird argument to have so I googled it and saw that the Americans distinguish the two ie;

"To summarize, Special Operations Forces (SOF) is a generic term that you can use to refer to any and all special operations units. Special Forces is the title of a very specific unit, and is not a generic term for other units." from an article I saw.

I couldn't find anything with regards to the CF and I do understand what the SOF in CANSOF is but would I (or anyone) be wrong by calling our boys in tan special forces rather than SOF?

 

[dapaterson]

Legally speaking, there are three components to the CAF: The Regular Force; The Reserve Force, and when so constituted, the Special Force.  The latter has not been constituted since the Korean War.  Calling them "Special Operations Forces" ensures we don't confuse them with the component of the CAF.

 

[PuckChaser]

In the US, the term "Special Forces" denotes someone with a Special Forces tab, so they're very careful how they use it. Much like our engineers are colloquially called sappers, but in the US they have a Sapper tab you earn from completing the Sapper Leader Course, so they don't throw sapper around lightly either.

 

[FJAG]

In the US, the term "Special Forces" denotes someone with a Special Forces tab, so they're very careful how they use it. Much like our engineers are colloquially called sappers, but in the US they have a Sapper tab you earn from completing the Sapper Leader Course, so they don't throw sapper around lightly either.

To expand on that, the distinction between Special Forces and Special Operations Forces in the modern sense comes from the US terminology where the term Special Forces refers to the US Army 1st Special Forces Command and particularly the 1st, 3rd, 5th, 7th, 10th, 19th and 20th Special Forces Groups (Airborne) more popularly known as the Green Berets. The SF came into their fore during the Kennedy era and Vietnam and continue as very specialized forces trained specifically (but not limited to) unconventional warfare in training and supporting foreign troops within their own countries.

Over the years since Vietnam additional needs for unconventional warfare were identified and a great expansion of the system took place. These newer forces and the umbrella structure to which they belong are called Special Operations Forces. In this respect, 1st SF Command is a subordinate formation to the US Army Special Operations Command (USASOC) which in itself is subordinate to US Special Operations Command (USSOCOM or just SOCOM) - SOCOM commands all Army, Navy, Air Force and Marine SOF as well as the highly specialized Tier 1 Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC)

So in short: in the US, "special operations forces" is the broad based term for all special operations forces while "Special Forces" refers specifically to the Army's Green Beret component.

In Canada, all our special operators belong to the Canadian Special Operations Forces Command (CSOFCOM). The term "Special Force" does not in any way or form relate to special operations forces but instead, as dapaterson points out, is a component of the CF which at this point in time is archaic and not used. It was last used for Korea where various units and individuals of the regular force and reserve force were assigned to the Special Force for deployment with the UN. The Special Force was not employed during Afghanistan and frankly I doubt it ever will be again.

These days in Canada we tend to use the terms "special forces" and "special operations forces" synonymously although the more appropriate term is "special operations forces".

You should note that virtually every country has some type of special operations forces and the terminology varies widely.

:cheers:

 

[brihard]

To further muddy the waters, the growth of CSOR has led directly to the creation of a new trade in the CAF: Special Forces Operator.

When we thinkf of 'Special Operations Forces", we often think of the Tier 1 units - SAS, JTF-2, Delta, SEALs, etc. The guys we think of as the 'doorkickers' who excel in extremely precise and generally quite small and distinct missions- go rescue those hostages; go find and destroy those SCUDs. Go. Shoot this bad guy in the face a couple times. "Special forces" in the US context, which CSOR seems to be mirroring to an extent, still has a definite direct action combat capability, but also trains for and is employed in missions like helping develop and train foreign militaries or paramilitary police for counterinsurgency ops, PSYOPS stuff, etc, working with local militias/tribal groups in insurgency operations, etc. Lots of overlapping stuff, but still some distinctions in the 'flavour' of what they do.

 

[FJAG]

To further muddy the waters, the growth of CSOR has led directly to the creation of a new trade in the CAF: Special Forces Operator.

When we thinkf of 'Special Operations Forces", we often think of the Tier 1 units - SAS, JTF-2, Delta, SEALs, etc. The guys we think of as the 'doorkickers' who excel in extremely precise and generally quite small and distinct missions- go rescue those hostages; go find and destroy those SCUDs. Go. Shoot this bad guy in the face a couple times. "Special forces" in the US context, which CSOR seems to be mirroring to an extent, still has a definite direct action combat capability, but also trains for and is employed in missions like helping develop and train foreign militaries or paramilitary police for counterinsurgency ops, PSYOPS stuff, etc, working with local militias/tribal groups in insurgency operations, etc. Lots of overlapping stuff, but still some distinctions in the 'flavour' of what they do.

It really does get murky.

The US Green Beret Special Forces were never designed to be direct action types (although it is one of the capabilities in their repertoire.) Their entire organizational structure (ODAs, ODBs and ODCs - detachment, company and battalion respectively) were designed to be the adviser core elements of larger foreign formations (company, battalion, brigade/regiment respectively)

Neither were they designed as the combat enablers to support Tier 1 forces which is the role that went towards the 75th Ranger Regiment.

In Afghanistan however the Green Berets core tasks slipped from their traditional unconventional warfare and foreign internal defence to direct action roles often with Afghan partner units. The training of the Afghan National Army, rather then being SF tasks, became the role of the various mentoring teams under Op Phoenix (primarily under the command and manned by rotating National Guard Divisions)

Similarly, in Afghanistan and Iraq, as commanders started to reach down and touch not just high value terrorist targets but also mid value and low value ones, they needed more manpower and the Ranger Regiment started deploying platoons etc independent of Tier 1 operators on direct action missions.

The big difference was that the Green Berets remained an asset of the Combined Joint Special Operations Task Forces (both CJSOTF-Iraq and CJSOTF-Afghanistan) while the Rangers as well as the Tier 1 operators reported to Joint Special Operations Command even though they did missions throughout the same areas of operations. (Don't even get me started at the roles of allied special ops forces and the much later ISAF special ops HQ)

Anyone who would like to work through some of this muddle is encouraged to read A Different Kind of War: The US Army in Operation ENDURING FREEDOM 2001 to 2005 put out by the Combat Studies Institute Press  A pdf copy of which can be found at: http://usacac.army.mil/cac2/csi/docs/DifferentKindofWar.pdf  While this publication does not cover the later phases of the Afghan war, it does cover the timeframe within which the system changed as the US thought Afghanistan was pretty much won and changes like the stand up of Combined Joint Task Force PHOENIX and the emphasis by the US shifted towards Iraq.

For anyone more interested in the history etc of JSOC I would strongly recommend Sean Naylor's Relentless Strike: The Secret History of Joint Special Operations Command which can be purchased here: https://www.amazon.ca/Relentless-Strike-History-Special-Operations/dp/1250014549

:cheers:

 

[daftandbarmy]

Another big difference is the size of the paycheque