This made me chuckle. . .

non pertinent stuff snipped


Specified commands still exist as well; FORSCOM in the Army, and I
believe
ACC would qualify in the USAF.

Brooks

Partially true Brooks. Specified Commands still exist in theory,
they
are
part of the Unified Command Plan, but there are none of them "stood
up".
Look at the link below for an explanation of the current structure.

http://www.defenselink.mil/specials/unifiedcommand/

Cheers,
Jim

Actually, I am a bit familiar with that site, but to my knowledge it
says
nothing about specified commands existing only in 'theory". FORSCOM
remains
a specified command, and IIRC like some other specified commands
(i.e.,
ACC), it also serves as the component command HQ for Unified Commands
as
required (i.e., NORTHCOM). Unified commands are nothing new, and AFAIK
nothing has yet written the demise of the specified commands that have
existed alongside them (or more accurately, depending upon the current
situation, under them).

Brooks


Brooks,

There are no specified commands. The only two specified commands, to my
knowledge and I was involved with this on a working basis from 1981
until
1997, were Strategic Air Command and Military Airlift Command.

Odd. "On July 1, 1987, as the result of the DOD reorganization directed by
the Goldwater-Nichols Act, FORSCOM became a specified command..."
(www.globalsecurity.org/military/ agency/army/forscom.htm ). In actuality
though, you are partly correct--FORSCOM gave up its specified command
status
a few years later, in 1993 (http://www.forscom.army.mil/info/history.htm).
So it appears that at least one other specified command was around during
that period you referred to.
Brooks

Well that's good to know. I'm an AF guy and didn't know that FORSCOM was a
UCP command. Thanks.
Jim

These units
ceased to be specified commands in the late 80's early 90's during a DoD
reorginization bringing the structure in compliance with the
Goldwater-Nichols Act of 1986 which ammended the National Security Act
of
1947. As you know, Strategic Air Command ceased to exist and Military
Air
Command exists today as Air Mobility Command, a USAF command and the AF
component of USTRANSCOM, a unified command. Since that time, there have
been no specified commands as defined by the Unified Command Plan.

That would be the same Goldwater-Nichols Act that made FORSCOM a specified
command...? FORSCOM's own site notes that the act you cite was what *made*
them a specified command for some six years.


Unified Commands do not have subordinate "specified commands". Their
subordinate commands are called sub-unified commands. A good example of
this is the relationship between PACOM and and United States Forces
Korea.


Air Combat Command is not a specified command and never has been even
when
it was Tactical Air Command. FORSCOM is not currently a specified
command
but I can't say for certain that it never has been. Currently, and for
the
last, at least, dozen years, FORSCOM is the Army component of U.S. Joint
Forces Command, a unified command. The purpose of ACC and FORSCOM is to
man,
train, equip, and furnish forces to combatant commanders as established
by
the Unified Command Plan. They have other responsibilities as well, but
those are the main ones for this conversation. The commanders of ACC and
FORSCOM are not combatant commanders and do not carry the title of
Commander
in Chief (CINC), as do commanders of unified commands. Those commands
are
Air Force and Army commands, not United States commands, and as such do
not
fight wars. ACC and FORSCOM units are CHOPped (Change of Op Control) to
unified commands for hostile action. The units are CHOPped back to the
service command at the discretion of the unified CINC.

Not quite completely accurate. Go to the FORSCOM pages I have already
provided you and you will see that FORSCOM is indeed the SCC HQ for both
JFCOM and NORTHCOM. Other than those two unified commands, you are correct
in stating that FORSCOM would merely provide units (as it does with
CENTCOM,
FORSCOM's Third Army being the SCC HQ). And don't get too tangled up in
the
"only unified commanders can be combatant commanders" bit..."Combatant
commands can be either specified or unified commands, though the nine
currently established are all unified commands."
(www.cadre.maxwell.af.mil/warfarestudies/ wpc/wpc_txt/org_nss/combc.htm )


This is silly Brooks. I'm not tangled up in anything. I know, and pointed
it out to you, that under the Unified Command Plan, two types of commands
can exist. Those are Unified Commands and Specified Commands. Obviously
the commander of either of those would be a combatant commander. Just read
the AFSC Pub 1 page I researched and provided for you to read. It's all
there so I'm obviously not tangled up in knowing this subject area. And I
did go to the FORSCOM page and I was completely accurate in stating that
FORSCOM provides units to the combatant commands, of which there are only
unified commands presently, when it is included in their Oplans. I stated
that in the paragraph above and, judging from your response above, you must
have missed it. I said "...FORSCOM is the Army component of U.S. Joint
Forces Command..." Naturally, since FORSCOM/CC is the service component
commander for NORTHCOM and JFCOM, he would bring his HQ with him. That
only makes sense if you understand the plan; FORSCOM is the army component
to those unified commands, who else would bring the land component HQ to the
fight other than the land component commander? Nothing too new or revealing
about that. HQ or not though, it's just a unit provided to the CINC of the
supported unified (or specified) command. And It's not "merely" providing
units, that's the life blood of the UCP, the service major commands
providing the muscle for the CINCs to fight wars.

Regards,

JB



Much of the knowledge I have on this subject came from attending Air
Command
and Staff College, attending Joint Forces Staff College, and completing
National War College by correspondence. I also served on the Joint
Staff
from 1992-1995 where, for a time, I was the DoD/JS lead on a tempest in
a
teapot with STRATCOM over OPCON of the NEACP (now the NAOC). This issue
involved me deeply in the Unified Command Plan and we successfully
fought
off the STRATCOM attempt to wrest control of the NEACP from the JS
(which
operated the E-4B for the SECDEF). I think now STRATCOM does own the
NAOC,
c'est la guerre! (sp) ;-) Due to this experience and training, I was
nominated and selected as a Joint Staff Officer. Not trying to toot any
horns here, just establishing credentials.

Hey, you would be correct, as far as I can determine, in stating that
FORSCOM is no longer a specified command; my mistake. However, you appear
to
be off-base with your notion that FORSCOM does not also serve as the
service
component command HQ for a couple of unified commands, or that SAC and MAC
were the *only* specified commands that existed during the period you
noted,
so I'd be a bit wary of doing much tooting... :-).

Brooks

I never said FORSCOM was not a unit provider to any unified command. Off
base about what? I said FORSCOM was an army MACOM (Army term I believe)
which, when provided for in a unified (or specified) commands Oplan, would
provide units to that combatant command. What you said in the response
above is just affirming what I said earlier...Army/Navy/AF/Marine Majcoms
(AF term) provide units to combatant commanders for hostile action. Thats
what I said and that wouldn't make me off base in thinking that FORSCOM
would provide units to NORTHCOM or JFCOM. One of those units would,
obviously, be an HQ unit since FORSCOM/CC is the army/land component
commander for both NORTHCOM and JFCOM. Who else would provide the land
service component HQ for a unified commander but the army component? (Come
to think of it, the Marines could)

As I said earlier, I'm not tooting any horns, just stating the facts as they
were taught to me and what I learned in the jobs I held. I missed on a
history point, and I sincerely thank you for pointing that out, but nothing
else. It's not magic, it's all in AFSC Pub 1.

Regards,

Jim



More information on the subject is available online from the Joint
Forces
Staff College, JFSC Pub 1. In particular, Page 1-29 para (4)(b) which
states in part "...There are currently no specified commands but the
option
to create such a command still exists." That's why I said they exist
"in
theory" in my previous post. The entire Pub 1 is available at the link
below. You'll need Adobe Acrobat Reader to look at it.



http://www.jfsc.ndu.edu/current_stud...pub_1_2000.pdf

Best Regards,

JB

"Kevin Brooks" wrote in message
...

"Jim Baker" wrote in message
...

"Kevin Brooks" wrote in message
...

"Jim Baker" wrote in message
...

"Ed Rasimus" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 16:15:51 -0600, Scott Ferrin
wrote:



From this week's AW&ST

"Air Force May Form Strategic Command"


Would that also be known as "Strategic Air Command" with the
associated acronym of SAC?

Actually, it is a review of the "unified" command structure,
considering combining of the recently established Northern Command
with the long existing Southern Command to form a sort of N/S
America
continental command. Other unified commands include Eucom, Pacom
and
Centcom for examples.

Strategic Air Command was a "specified" command which gave it a
separate status from the operational control of the unified
commands.
The other specified command was MAC.


Ed Rasimus

According to Aviation Week (April 12 2004 issue, page 23), it's not
a
Joint
Staff initiative but rather an AF plan. The USAF is considering
reshuffling
it's commands to better provide forces for US STRATCOM. Currently,
8th
AF
provides much of the manpower and equipment for use by STRATCOM and
for
reasons unstated in the article, they think creating a new command,
"AFStrat", (Air Force Strategic Command) would do a better job than
8th
AF.
This has nothing to do with the Unified Command Plan in a structural
sense,
it's all about the AF performing it's role in
manning/training/equipping
the
units that serve the combatant (Unified/Specified)commands. Just a
guess,
but maybe the bombers that are still nuclear capable would move from
8th
to
AFStrat under this plan.

JB

Specified commands as combatant commands? Are you sure of that? The
usual
procedure is for the specified commands to provide resources to the
unified
commands, which form the combatant HQ--or they can be a subordinate
component command HQ, as would be the case with FORSCOM under NORTHCOM
during the homeland defense mission.

Brooks

Yes, I'm sure specified commands were, and would be if stood up,
combatant
commands. The usual procedure is for service commands (i.e. FORSCOM or
ACC
or AMC or Pacific Fleet) to provide men and equipment to the Unified and
Specified commands for warfighting. Currently, there are no specified
commands. In the US armed forces, "all" (I'm sure there must be an
exception somewhere) commands that aren't unified commands, are service
commands, do not have CINC's as commanders and their chief
responsibilities
are manning, training, equipping, and providing of forces to the unified
commands.

OK, that jives with what I just read elsewhere--specified commands can
indeed be combatant commands if so designated.

Brooks

Well.....not "if so designated". Specified Commands are combatant
commands...period. The fact that there aren't any now in now way lessens
the fact that under the Unified Command Plan, there are two types of
commands...Unified and Specified. These commands are referred to as
"combatant commands". It's in AFSC Pub 1. As Yogi said, "you could look it
up".

Jim