Topic: "I want to be Int" Mega-thread

[lou-reed]

As a retired INT O I am going to add this for thought.  Over the past several years I have seen some very good INT Os come in from Combat arms trades.  Most of them have had several tours and a lot of operational experience.  Some are good INT Os, others not so good.  However, they do not come with experience as an INT O.  Unfortunately, just as in any other trade this experience is only gained on deployment.  Thus, until an INT O has deployed in the capacity as an INT O he/she really has no more experience at doing their job in a theatre of war than a DEO would have on their first deployment.  Up until 2001 how many INT Os and INT Ops really knew a lot about the Taliban and Al-Qaida...Not that many - myself included.  It is knowledge we have gained over the past six years and from being in theatre. 

The real issue here is that people are too closed minded to consider the advantages of allowing DEOs into the INT branch.  I say give it a try - see how the first few make out.  Do not send them to Ottawa but send them to the brigades so they will be immersed in the environment.  Deploy them as soon as possible.  If it does not work out then we know for next time.  Until then, nothing ventured nothing gained. 

The bread and butter of the INT O and INT Op is to be able to analyze the information that they are seeing.  Analyze the threat and tell the commander on the ground what he/she really needs to know.

I have seen first hand INT Os and INT Ops who have a lot of combat arms experience but lack the necessary skills needed to conduct proper and sound analysis.  When this happens there is no value added and credibility wanes. 

Perhaps a DEO would require a bit of mentoring (but then who hasn't) and this could be done during the pre-deployment phase.  I personally would much rather take a green DEO civi U type with no operational experience who has sound analytical skills with the ability to express those skills than an ex-combat arms type who cannot write or spell or be nothing more than a news reporter.

But, hey, I am retired so I guess this debate will have to go on without me.       

[yukon]

I have seen first hand INT Os and INT Ops who have a lot of combat arms experience but lack the necessary skills needed to conduct proper and sound analysis.  When this happens there is no value added and credibility wanes. 

Out of curiosity is that not the fault of the INT selection process and standards during training?(not saying that it's lacking in any way) It goes without saying I guess that a good combat arms vet does not necessarily make a good INT O/Op or whatever else for that matter.

I realise that the training one receives is only an indicator of the future success a member may have while employed in his trade...but given the critical importance of INT perhaps some red flags should have went up before these member were posted or operational?

cheers.

[lou-reed]

Let's face it, every trade has training and standards issues. 

My main point is give the DEO course of action a chance to either prove successful or unsuccessful.  Maybe there is a requirement to put them through CAP and/or phase III infantry first then on to BIOC.  Just a thought.  Afterall, a newly commissioned 2LT in the infantry has no more operational experience than a newly commissioned INT O yet no one seems to think the infantry officer will not succeed.  Both require maximum mentoring from the Snr NCM level.    Just my thoughts

[Greymatters]

At least they are good ones and worth considering.  I agree that there are advantages to having a DEO, but IMO so far not enough to convince me they are worth more than OT transfers.  Many of the points you bring up as valid problems can in turn be rectified by improvements to the selection process, and more 'in-trade' courses to improve writing and analytical skills.

[yukon]

Let's face it, every trade has training and standards issues. 

Agreed...100%

My main point is give the DEO course of action a chance to either prove successful or unsuccessful.  Maybe there is a requirement to put them through CAP and/or phase III infantry first then on to BIOC.  Just a thought.  Afterall, a newly commissioned 2LT in the infantry has no more operational experience than a newly commissioned INT O yet no one seems to think the infantry officer will not succeed.  Both require maximum mentoring from the Snr NCM level.    Just my thoughts

As it stands now, watch and shoot:)
cheers.

[scoutfinch]

At least they are good ones and worth considering.  I agree that there are advantages to having a DEO, but IMO so far not enough to convince me they are worth more than OT transfers.  Many of the points you bring up as valid problems can in turn be rectified by improvements to the selection process, and more 'in-trade' courses to improve writing and analytical skills.

I don't have a problem with INT being opened to DEO for exceptional candidates depending on what skills they bring to the table.

What do people think about ROTP/RMC INT Os? 

[George Wallace]

I personally feel that they are coming in lacking in many of the issues Greymatters has been bringing up.  I think that DEO are not good for the INT Branch in the vast majority of cases.  The Branch does suffer from many personalities that shouldn't be giving anyone advice other than Steven Staples.  There is a lot of "Corporate Knowledge" being brought to the Branch by INT Ops and INT Os who have OT ed.  There is a lot of training that can be cut from the QL5 and BIOC due to their having this "Corporate Knowledge".  They already have working knowledge of what ORBATs are and how they function on both Blue and Red Force models.  They usually have good Map and Map Marking Skills.  They know how the CF functions and is structured.  They are usually physically fit and know how to wear their uniforms and handle a wide variety of weapons.  They have usually picked up other skills that are IT related, interests in Imagery, interests in Foreign weapons and vehicles, etc.  All qualities that many DEO candidates are lacking and would have to be extensively trained in. 

The worse thing that the INT Branch can do, is put a slovenly INT Op or INT O in front of a group of Cbt Arms types and expect them to garner anything of value from that briefing.  Image means a lot; both visual and spoken.  If an INT O or and INT Op can't walk the walk and talk the talk, they are hamstrung from the get go.  A DEO who can analyze better than any man on the face of the planet, and use big words that an Infanteer can only guess at, is totally ineffective. 

Can an effective INT O be culled from the DEO herd?  I guess the answer could be a "Yes"; but I feel that this would be one heck of an exceptional person.

[Greymatters]

Can an effective INT O be culled from the DEO herd?  I guess the answer could be a "Yes"; but I feel that this would be one heck of an exceptional person.

Ive met a few and they were indeed exceptionally bright, able to adapt to the new environment, and great fun to work with.  Unfortunately they were the exception and not the standard.  'Minimum standards' during recruitment would not be likely to capture the same level of competence these people had, and of note none of these men and women I use as an example of good DEO candidates were right out of university, they each had quite a few years of experience in the private business sector under their belt.   

[meni0n]

But, not all OTs into Int are from combat arms. What if you have a sailor OTing into Army Int op.

[Greymatters]

But, not all OTs into Int are from combat arms. What if you have a sailor OTing into Army Int op. 

Its been done.

[meni0n]

I know it can be done, I was referring to George's post about knowing ORBATs, combat experience and cutting the QL5As on the assumption that all individuals getting the OT are combat arms.

[George Wallace]

I know it can be done, I was referring to George's post about knowing ORBATs, combat experience and cutting the QL5As on the assumption that all individuals getting the OT are combat arms.

So?  They still bring a lot of "Corporate Knowledge", no matter what Trade.  They understand how the CF and other Nations militaries work.  They still have knowledge of Naval ORBATs.  They also don't usually go "Army", so that is a misleading statement, as they would/could take their "Naval" experience into the SEA side of the Branch.  Same goes for AIR.  Not everything in INT is Army.  So anyone with previous "Corporate Knowledge" gained from prior Service would require less 'indoctrination' than a person hired straight off the street.

Greymatters has pointed out that some exceptional people have come in off the street, but they have usually had the required skill sets developed over time in 'the profession' (in other agencies) or in a 'corporate environment' as a professional; not as a freshly graduated university student. 

[Greymatters]

I know it can be done, I was referring to George's post about knowing ORBATs, combat experience and cutting the QL5As on the assumption that all individuals getting the OT are combat arms.

Ive looked it over again, but I dont see the reference or the inference that all individuals getting the OT are combat arms... but then I dont agree with everything in George's comment.  Some basics you have to include to ensure all trade candidates have the same basic skill level, unless you move it from the training aspect to the selection aspect, then it would work.  

[Nerf herder]

I know it can be done, I was referring to George's post about knowing ORBATs, combat experience and cutting the QL5As on the assumption that all individuals getting the OT are combat arms.

Anyone can OT to the Int trade but combat arm troops are in high demand by the Army Int environment itself. It would be the same for every other element I would think.

Regards

[meni0n]

But there is a chance that they might be told they will have to switch uniforms or they've requested it by personal choice. I am all for the INT trade being OT only.

Recce, indeed they are but that doesn't guarantee that someone from a non combat arms trade not get his OT into the army element.

[George Wallace]

But there is a chance that they might be told they will have to switch uniforms or they've requested it by personal choice. I am all for the INT trade being OT only.

You are correct.  Right now the Air side is taking in the majority of OT, VOT, CT and Re-enrollees.

[Nerf herder]

Recce, indeed they are but that doesn't guarantee that someone from a non combat arms trade not get his OT into the army element.

There are no guarantees IRT an OT.       

Regards

[lou-reed]

Another point to consider is that, due to manning shortfalls, many INT positions are being filled by Air and Navy INT Os and INT Ops.  The ASIC is full of air and navy personnel - and they quickly learn about the army way of things.  Let's not forget that the ASIC also has civilians doing analysis - these civilians, many have no military experience other than being paid by DND.  From my experiences, absolutely excellent people to work with and have excellent knowlegde of how the military works.  I do not see what the difference is from a civilian or a DEO?

Besides, I do not recall ever starting any of my briefings with my resume.  INT is personality based - the commander will either be receptive to what you tell him/her or will not. 

Again, it comes down to keeping an open mind.  I stand by my earlier post of giving DEO a try.   

[Greymatters]

INT is personality based - the commander will either be receptive to what you tell him/her or will not.  

Are you refering to the personality of the briefer, or the commander, or both?

[simonsimon]

Hey guys, thanks a lot for the information and opinions. I appreciate the discussion about the value of DEO candidates too. Although it seems most are skeptical, I am still intent on exploring this possibility, and have more questions regarding the job in general and the recruitment process. I've been to the CFRC and called the local Int Coy (although they don't seem to pick up the phone), but am interested in sounding out the forum for perhaps better-informed opinions

I'm currently learning Pashto in the hope of doing a DEO, starting BOTC this Fall, completing CAP and BIOC by the end of 2009, and deploying to Afghanistan in 2010. I want to know if this is realistic.

1. Is it possible to complete BOTC, CAP and BIOC within a year? Do IntO even have to do CAP? And how often is the BIOC offered in the year? Once you've finished those, is it possible to start training for deployment immediately - and how long does this last? 6 months like for infantry?

2. How does selection for deployment work? Do you apply for it? Are you assigned according to relevant skills?

3. If you know the local language on a deployment, what kind of different work could you be expected to do? Would you ever be going off base and talking to locals, or more translating enemy documents on-base?

4. Do any Int O work on PRTs?

5. When you're not on deployment and are working at your local Company, what kind of work are you doing exactly? Are you working with deployed forces?

Thanks again for all the help, it's been very useful. Cheers,

[MedTech]

I'm currently learning Pashto in the hope of doing a DEO, starting BOTC this Fall, completing CAP and BIOC by the end of 2009, and deploying to Afghanistan in 2010. I want to know if this is realistic.

No.

1. Is it possible to complete BOTC, CAP and BIOC within a year? Do IntO even have to do CAP? And how often is the BIOC offered in the year? Once you've finished those, is it possible to start training for deployment immediately - and how long does this last? 6 months like for infantry?

That depends. Are you attempting to apply to RegF or PRes? Is it possible? No. Why? Because you are assuming that you pass every single one of your courses without fail, which may happen but may not. You are also assuming that courses are back to back to back, which they're not. If you are PRes, which by the latter questions you are, the likelihood of you doing everything in one go is at the mercy of whether or not you've missed the que for certain courses. IntOs do CAP in the RegF without question of element. Navy IntOs in the PRes do not, but they do in the Army. BIOC is element dependent, and depending on when you finish your course, you may have missed the opportunity to join a BG.

2. How does selection for deployment work? Do you apply for it? Are you assigned according to relevant skills?

Depends.

3. If you know the local language on a deployment, what kind of different work could you be expected to do? Would you ever be going off base and talking to locals, or more translating enemy documents on-base?

Can't say.

4. Do any Int O work on PRTs?

Can't say.

5. When you're not on deployment and are working at your local Company, what kind of work are you doing exactly? Are you working with deployed forces?

Things that you're trained to do in support of your local CBG and units.

[George Wallace]

It really amuses me when I see this type of post on the internet.  Does the person making the post really have any idea of what they are doing, or what the job is that they are talking about.  In this case no.  This is a case of someone who has no concept of what the job is; no concept of what Security Concerns are, and not concept of the proper channels to go through to research the matter.  I would start with a quick view of Killing with Keyboards and a visit to the CFRC where a more secure environment exists to make your query.

[Greymatters]

Do you know where the website is for that version you quoted in the old thread?  The version you posted has extra parts that are missing from the version Ive seen.

[simonsimon]

That depends. Are you attempting to apply to RegF or PRes? Is it possible? No. Why? Because you are assuming that you pass every single one of your courses without fail, which may happen but may not. You are also assuming that courses are back to back to back, which they're not. If you are PRes, which by the latter questions you are, the likelihood of you doing everything in one go is at the mercy of whether or not you've missed the que for certain courses. IntOs do CAP in the RegF without question of element. Navy IntOs in the PRes do not, but they do in the Army. BIOC is element dependent, and depending on when you finish your course, you may have missed the opportunity to join a BG.

Thanks for the input MedTech, much appreciated.

I am currently a civilian, but would want to join the RegF. Do you know if there is a high failure rate for the different courses (BOTC, CAP, BIOC)?

[Tanner]

Look up an Int branch and call the recruiting WO and they should be able to answer any questions about the trade.