"Operation Swarmer", 1950. A "simulated attack" field training exercise

[Solly Mack]

The largest peacetime airborne maneuver in history, "Operation Swarmer", 1950 - North Carolina. It was a training exercise. Got that? A TRAINING exercise.

Well, my take is - this current "Operation Swarmer" was nothing more than a modified version of the original FTX (field training exercise) of 1950 - i.e., they just did a replay of the 1950's "Swarmer" exercise and hyped it up by calling it an actual mission.

Add to it that the original "Operation Swarmer" also used the The 187th Infantry Regiment or the "Rakkasan" - they are now a part of the 101st airborne and have been since 1957 - briefly re-assigned until 1963, then back with the 101st airborne.

187th History
http://www.thedropzone.org/units/187history.html

"Operation Swarmer" - 1950


http://www.time.com/time/archive/preview/0,10987,812296,00.html

(pay article, sorry - but you can read enough to get the picture)

"The simulated attack on a peaceful section of North Carolina..."



Below link contains some of the "after-action" report for "Operation Swarmer", 1950. In this paper, they call it what it was, an "exercise".

http://www.qmfound.com/parachute_maintenance_company.htm

[Jara sang]

1. It's also a Presidential Continuity of Government exercise, 1980s-1990s

as per Codenames by William Arkin

[mom cat]

20. What the hell is a Presidential Continuity of Government exercise?

[Marie26]

23. Oh, shit. nt

[Solly Mack]

27. Most "operations" are geared toward a civilian population

and almost all can be adapted as such with a few changes made in the overall plan.

That's nothing new. And it's not new that such thinking has been directed against Americans. However, I doubt most Americans give it a thought - that it seems "far-fetched" to them that their own government would consider such a thing - when in fact they have plans for just that (for the "just in case" or "in the event of" - cough cough - war on terror/any other assorted manufactured crisis)

What's gotten worse is the likelihood of those operations being used on an American civilian population. It's become an all too real thing under Bush.

[MADem]

2. I totally agree--a morale booster for the Iraqi troops

See, ya lucky dawgs, ya git ta ride in the HEEE-LOW-COPTER!!! Ain't that COOOOOL??? Come on, boys, let's play soldier!!!!! See--it's FUN!!!!!!

Like they'd give a real operational plan up to a force that is so riddled with insurgents as to be a risk factor in and of itself!

[Solly Mack]

4. That's what got me too actually....

"Like they'd give a real operational plan up to a force that is so riddled with insurgents as to be a risk factor in and of itself!"

and a well studied exercise at that...with the same name

[Jara sang]

5. This helicopter operation will be played in the near future in Iraq:

[Solly Mack]

6. I keep thinking that

a mad dash to leave

[Jara sang]

7. Only after the country has been looted of all it's wealth.

[iamahaingttta]

12. Things that make ya go "Hmmm..."

Like maybe this is how they get rid of some of those insurgents in the ranks!

[Solly Mack]

17. Oh, I just find the whole mission suspect

but I think it was to show progress, so killing off the ranks of an army you're suppose to be building in such a public stunt would be kinda defeating the purpose of the entire show.

[file83]

3. This 2006 version probably had Psy-Op/propaganda elements to it

as well - being they wanted to see how they could make the media believe the operation was "real".

[Jara sang]

8. Here is one operation that had a pysop element.

Check ot the patch of the guy behind the woman Bush is looking at it's this unit here:



US ARMY CIVIL AFFAIRS AND
PSYCHOLOGICAL OPERATIONS COMMAND (AIRBORNE)

Plastic turkey, smiling soldiers and at least one soldier from Psy Op Command. Ask yourself who that psy op was directed toward. The American citizens. This constitutes the US Army conducting operations on US soil. That operation was to deliberately mislead the American public.

[MADem]

10. Well, that took place in Afghanistan, so it ain't yet the 51st state

And if that's their idea of psy-ops, they need to go back to the drawing board. People are STILL making fun of that stupid stunt!

The Commander in Chief has every right to visit with troops. They all have done it.

They just shouldn't look like a doofus when so doing--and Monkeyboy hasn't managed that bit yet.

[Marie26]

24. I think that's just PR

Bush was actually there, smiling, with a turkey. Why would they need a psy-ops unit for that? It seems like the typical PR all politicians do.

[Solly Mack]

34. psy-ops is PR

it's what they do - among other things

PR shapes public opinion - a part of psy-ops is also shaping public opinion.

PR is propaganda - psy-ops engages in the use of propaganda.

propaganda can be true - there are 3 types of propaganda - white, black and gray.

I went looking for a link

http://www.stentorian.com/propagan.html

[Jara sang]

43. Indeed, white is the truthful propaganda

Black is a lie, and gray is the "partial truth". Here are some distinctive unit crests for psychological operations units in the army.




Shield: The black shield represents the untruth. The sunburst and lightning bolts symbolize the unit’s ability to enlighten error by the incursion of fact. The degree of truth is suggested by the white and gray areas of the shield: white denotes the truth and gray partial truth. The seventeen rays of the sunburst allude to the unit’s designation.

[Jara sang]

42. Yes it is public relations.

If you look at the name of that unit it's called the Psychological Operations and Civil Affairs Command, the "civil affairs" aspect of that units mission speaks volumes.

[spanone]

9. PR will not change the reality of the war. It won't work.

The Pentagon has a full court press on with the 'progress is being made' bullshit.

[Solly Mack]

11. Nothing changes the reality of war

I live with the reminders daily.

[leftchick]

13. well there you have it!

thank you Solly.

:hi:

[Solly Mack]

14. lol! Well, I don't know if I'm right but it sure does seem awfully

"odd"

same regiment, same company, same operation name...lot's of choppers

while watching the footage on TV, it just struck me as "for show"....same as any air show on any military base.

[Marie26]

28. According to CNN,

no reporters or TV crews were embedded into the units conducting the air assault, and key Pentagon generals were apparantly unaware of the Operation.

[Solly Mack]

31. but cameras were there - otherwise, where did the

footage come from that they showed on TV of the operation?

So while no member of the press was present - someone with a camera was...and the military has an entire MOS for media relations - reporters, camera people...the whole nine yards.

[Marie26]

35. Right, they said it was official DOD camera footage. nt

[Justice Is Comin]

15. If you think that's something,

check out the Raw Story article up now. The most valuable thing they found was a fresh baked loaf of bread that the soldiers were munching on as they left the cow pasture. :rofl:

[Solly Mack]

16. Exactly. Reeks of PR stunt

that's why I think it's the same FTX from 1950.

[annabanana]

18. Lookie here at the Time article on this NEW "swarmer"

Turns out we are right.. this one is nothing but crap too!

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1174448,00.html

[Solly Mack]

19. Time did the original 1950 Operation Swarmer story as well

LOL

[Catrina]

21. I'm not following you exactly ~ are you saying that there was no air

bombing in Iraq? What about those pictures of dead civilians, the children? Were they real or just playing along? Wouldn't someone talk? I hope it wasn't real. Maybe that's why Scottie was so evasive with Helen yesterday when she asked him if Bush had ordered the air strikes. He kept saying it was the commanders on the ground who make those decisions ~

Maybe someone should send this thread to Helen so she can ask Scottie about it?

[Solly Mack]

22. No

I'm saying that in 1950 there was a simulated training exercise called Operation Swarmer. It was a mock mission.

And I think this latest Operation Swarmer was a replay of that.

Here's a Time article on the 2006 Operation Swarmer


http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1174448,00.html

According to the article, no airstrikes took place and no shots were fired

[Marie26]

25. What would be the purpose of this?

A fake air assault wouldn't really change the poll numbers one way or another. It wouldn't scare the actual insurgents who know it's not real. What's the point?

[Solly Mack]

29. to boost morale and support

on the anniversary of the invasion, with war support in the tank and poll numbers getting lower...

and it wasn't meant for the insurgents - it was meant for Americans

I'm not saying they didn't actually fly in with a show of force and raid homes/buildings and such - I'm saying it was meant to be a show of force for the sake of the American veiwing public - and I think it was a replay of the 1950 simulated mission.

I don't think it had much of an impact, as many people do think it was a ruse to garner support.

[Marie26]

41. Or maybe

I agree w/that. Could it also be practice? The original "Operation Swarmer" went so well, the 187th Airborne Division was selected to lead the Korean air assault a few months later. So, could this "exercise" also be practice for a future air assault in a different country? The exercise would build public support (they hope) & also help train a division that isn't really used very much in the Iraqi occupation.

[Solly Mack]

44. The military doesn't tend to name a mission after a training exercise

So I don't think they would use a plan that is public and was a much discussed training exercise (as the 1950 Swarmer was). The enemy would also know such a plan - since it was in publication to the public.

I think what happened the other day was a FTX(field training exercise) - but it was "hyped" as a mission for PR purposes- and I think the FTX they used was the 1950 Swarmer. Also, it plays well calling it a joint mission with Iraqi troops (looks like success if the Iraqi troops are going on such an important "mission")...

Some military families and other people woke up to news full of "Operation Swarmer" - "air assault" "biggest ever since..." (when if you don't know what an air assault is, it sounds scarier than it is) - so people all over America were bracing themselves for more death ...and I think the hype was intentional. Get people focused on the war (and away from other things) - and get them worried. When an unpopular war looks to be heating up, it can regain some popularity because people are afraid - it can also lose even more popularity.

When the WH claims Bush didn't know - they're lying. Because "the biggest air assault since 2003" wouldn't have taken place without the CinC being aware....or other top Generals being aware. I think the WH wanted to distance themselves from the "mission", in case people smelled a PR stunt.

[Sparkly]

26. From what I've read, the helicopters were there for support only

and perhaps to intimidate fear on the ground. They carried supplies etc. that allowed ground forces to move in, but nothing was fired from the air, nor were bombs dropped.

It was odd that it was publicized as an "air" assault, and I believe I read there were no casualties, as they "met no resistance."

[Marie26]

30. unless they're planning a real air assault in the near future.

That could be the point.

[Solly Mack]

32. Google and read up on the original Operation Swarmer from 1950

it was a mock mission to move troops and supplies into an area for the purpose of capturing and securing.

I'm saying as this current 2006 Operation Swarmer did little more than move troops and supplies into an area they're were supposed to secure - the 2 operations are a wee bit alike.

[Sparkly]

33. I see what you're saying.

Why the big brouhaha in the media over it, if it was intended as a mock operation?

[Solly Mack]

36. the original was mock, in 1950

this one was intended to be "real" - but I don't think it was...not real in the sense that they planned on actually encountering hostile fire or laying down fire themselves...

not saying the soldiers won't get fired upon....just saying it has a staged feel about it...and a long time ago there was another operation swarmer, that was a mock exercise

[Sparkly]

37. A very interesting parallel.

Thanks for pointing it out. I agree, this seemed like they either thought they were going to meet some resistance, OR it was sort of like the dramatic "rescue" of Jessica Lynch from the hospital... Something dramatic drummed up to grab headlines for a day -- "staged" as you say.

[Solly Mack]

38. I thought the parallels interesting

Did you notice the exact same regiments were involved with both?

I just don't think any low is too low for the Bush Regime.

[Solly Mack]

39. kick

[meganmonkey]

40. Kick-a-roonie-doonie!

:o

Fascinating stuff, Solly! There are no coincidences, are there? Everything happens for a reason :scared:

[Solly Mack]

47. Hey Meg! How did your day go?

those coinky dinkies are piling up

[Rex]

45. They usually name these things after historical events.

"largest peacetime airborne maneuver in history". Hm, airborne, oh my. Guess they didn't have air assault back in the 50s. :eyes:

[Solly Mack]

46. lol the "coincidence" are many

they don't usually name an actual mission after a much publicized and well studied training exercise either

[Rex]

49. They got that one wrong too.

Or did they?

[lovuian]

48. Getting ready for Iran

:nuke: