Al Blue4.6l
Well-known member
agreed.
Trump
- Thread starter Jeff B
- Start date
agreed.
Assange did not commit treason, Manning did. Does that answer your question?
No it is not worth it. Manning should be put to death in my opinion.
SARTech
Well-known member
Agreed, Treason and purposely jeopardizing American lives should be dealt with a firing squad.
When there is no justice there is no peace!
McDew comments
Ray-
Would you mind elaborating on this? Are you referencing the difference in D2D wrt AD vs ARC?
Cheers,
Jay
Ray-
Would you mind elaborating on this? Are you referencing the difference in D2D wrt AD vs ARC?
Cheers,
Jay
Ray_G
Well-known member
Jay-
Apologies for not hitting you back on this, I walked away from this thread for a bit (mostly to argue over on Dweb) and totally didn't see this. Without breaching non-attrib the remarks regarding the dwell time spoke to the optempo that the crews are facing (not to mention the rather old airframes) and how long that is sustainable. Keep in mind I'm a ground guy, and a Marine, so what I know about USAF is from the experiences downrange and my classmates-but broadly when you look at what is considered steady state ops in a post 9/11 environment we are flying the wings off all type/model/series and when you are pulling from a community that has to also live civilian lives how long will they keep flying near wartime levels during 'peace.'
Moreover, how do you recruit against for that, at some point everyone's patriotic capacity runs out. Esp with the airlines needing pilots and paying better (that isn't a slight on airlines Dave!). How do you retain?
Basically it was a fascinating conversation when you start looking at numbers and realize that the all volunteer force throughout the active/reserve/national guard has a lot of bend in it before it breaks-but if you keep it bent for a long time what is the effect when you need it for a full blown conflict?
A larger discussion would discuss how much of our current demand signal is real in terms of threat to the nation vs how much is post 9/11 perpetuated reality.
Oh, and the reason I dug the thread back up was to circle back on those who'd asked me about Flynn, and I'd noted my reservations...well. Here:
https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/...eaves-trump-national-security-team-in-turmoil
r-
Ray
The Reserve and NG are almost unrecognizable today from their pre-OIF state. The idea of one weekend a month and two weeks a year is pretty much non-existant. MUTA-6 three-day drills/battle assemblies are common and many annual trainings are greater than two weeks. Many of the ATs are OCONUS and conducted at major active component exercises like UFG, Key Resolve, Cobra Gold, etc and you're often returning home from AT to your job and family feeling jet-lagged and spent from weeks of 24-hour ops. On top of that, the annual training requirements are typically assigned as "homework" that must be completed at home prior to BA/drill. Reserve duty feels like a second part-time job where you're working at least 15 extra hours each week if you want to meet the standard and far, far more if you're in command.
I left the USAR last month for the IRR. I served in Civil Affairs and MEB units for the last six years or so and it totally burned me out. I have a busy civilian career and a family and it was killing both.
Bolstering active duty forces with the reserves will work for short-term conflicts but I don't think it's sustainable in the long term. I've never worked in force planning, though. I'm just a weekend warrior who's served mostly in battalion-sized line units.
I left the USAR last month for the IRR. I served in Civil Affairs and MEB units for the last six years or so and it totally burned me out. I have a busy civilian career and a family and it was killing both.
Bolstering active duty forces with the reserves will work for short-term conflicts but I don't think it's sustainable in the long term. I've never worked in force planning, though. I'm just a weekend warrior who's served mostly in battalion-sized line units.
rocky
NAS-ROW Addict
That's exactly the approach the UK took decades ago. Reserves (Territorial Army) involved on a near full time basis. Not an approach I advocate.
Was it really about lying to VPOTUS? Although I suppose that's enough.
Ray_G
Well-known member
I think your perspective is exactly what GO's are concerned with; current optempo and demand signal from combatant commanders that nobody wants to say no to coupled with the need to recoup capability means that the reserve & national guard are getting tapped more and more.
The question to pose is when are we going to start saying no to stuff, or when are we going to better define what is really a vital interest and what isn't.
The_Vermonster
Well-known member
It will depend on what a few individuals have to gain. There is a reason lawyers and Business-people go into politics and not doctors, firefighters, teachers, ect.
Ray_G
Well-known member
Is it safe to assume by that you are touting the military industrial complex and the idea of war for the sake of profit? Some of that is tough to deny, a lot of that notion is also simplistic and fails to take into account a number of factors (for example, strategic rivalry between countries has, in the span of history, always helped both countries grow economically so long as it was absent major conflict. Since we haven't had a major conflict since WWII...but have had unprecedented growth compared to the scope of human history...anyway).
The people/predisposition thing can go too far; for example it is also correct to say that many contemporary terror leaders have an engineering background. That doesn't make engineers necessarily predisposed to terror.
I was talking with my (active duty) wife tonight about this. She's off at CGSC for the next four months so she's living and breathing force management doctrine right now. She asked me for specific examples but I could really only provide my personal anecdotal evidence.
I told her that I see the Army Reserve as having two general types of servicemembers: you have the meat-and-potatoes Soldiers and their leadership who fulfill most of the combat service and support roles. These are your transportation and quartermaster line units, the horizontal and vertical engineer units doing construction and route clearance, etc. My basic branch is engineer and I served as a PL in one of these units. The joes and the officers alike were mostly blue collar guys. Prison guards, construction workers, truck drivers, etc. Unless the economy is really booming, there will always be plenty of bodies to fill these jobs no matter the OPTEMPO.
The other type, in my view, is the specialists. These are your civil affairs specialists, your medical folks, the JAGs, the civil engineers, etc. These are people that the military most desperately needs because they are the ones bringing their knowledge from their civilian jobs to the field and they're vitally important to any stabilization operation. They're also the most likely, I think, to be burnt out by overuse and mismanagement but that's exactly what we're doing to them. They're being run into the ground with long OCONUS exercises and ridiculous annual computer-based training requirements. Commanders often make things even worse by being neglectful of their civilian employers when they do things like springing last-minute schedule changes on their troops. (No shit, I once found out about my Captain's Career Course date at Ft. Bragg with only three weeks notice.)
This is just how I see it from the Army Reserve perspective. I'm sure that the situation is similar for Air Force Reserve pilots and the rest. The nation really needs participation from civilian professionals in the military but so many commanders just seem clueless about what it takes to retain these people.
Well, that was a lot of bitching. Nobody needs a complainer without solutions so here are a few ideas:
First, offer the part-timers with civilian professional careers the option of condensing their battle assembles/drills into one or two week-long periods every year. My last unit, a Maneuver Enhancement Brigade, did this and it was great. I would still be there if they weren't based in Hawaii and it didn't cost me $2K out of pocket to participate.
Second, reduce or eliminate the annual training requirements. I'm talking about AT level 1, cyber awareness, SHARP, etc. The frequency of this training is ridiculous, especially for a reservist. You end up spending half your unit time working on this training that has nothing to do with your MOS. Make these things once every four years requirements instead of once a year.
Third, require every commander to send their Soldiers home with a commander's letter to their civilian employers. I had one commander that did this and it was fantastic. Introduce yourself, explain what will be required of the Soldier, demonstrate willingness to be flexible in the event of civilian job time conflicts, and provide a contact phone number.
Finally, allocate some funding to pay for Soldiers' lodging and transportation so that professionals with specific and vital experience can feasibly travel from out-of-state to participate. This was the killer for me. My Hawaii-based MEB only offered up $200 in travel pay and this was so flaky and unreliable that I actually never once received it. Total crap.
Ray_G
Well-known member
Chris-
Fascinating. I am astounded, dismayed, and impressed all in one shot. As an active duty guy the whole time I can't fathom putting up with the shit you guys do in order to serve. Admittedly I feel spoiled and coddled particularly after your first and fourth bullets.
The 2nd...from what I've seen that is a facet of our beloved Congress and the predisposition of mandating (right behind that is a bloated DoD infrastructure implementing 'mandatory' training using Congressional oversight) and to a degree Executive decree-as their cover for status for bureacratic cowardice.
The third point strikes me as an excellent demonstration of leadership but that would appear to be an uncommon virtue.
Thank you for the perspective.
r-
Ray
Fascinating. I am astounded, dismayed, and impressed all in one shot. As an active duty guy the whole time I can't fathom putting up with the shit you guys do in order to serve. Admittedly I feel spoiled and coddled particularly after your first and fourth bullets.
The 2nd...from what I've seen that is a facet of our beloved Congress and the predisposition of mandating (right behind that is a bloated DoD infrastructure implementing 'mandatory' training using Congressional oversight) and to a degree Executive decree-as their cover for status for bureacratic cowardice.
The third point strikes me as an excellent demonstration of leadership but that would appear to be an uncommon virtue.
Thank you for the perspective.
r-
Ray