Two Decades of War Have Eroded the Morale of America’s Troops

[Dist. Expert 26]

Yup. The online “training” and constant classes on how to be nice is a huge impediment to the training that will prepare us for war. But the brass calls this crap “readiness”. My blood pressure goes up 10 points everytime I hear some CSM or General explain how its so important that we get %100 of Soldiers certified in composite risk management (again) because we have to maintain “readiness”. And I have to cancel real training for this crap. Last year, I had to pull my entire company out of the EST 2000 (electronic shooting trainer) for three hours so they could attend some sort of being nice to trannies class that “just came up”, and had to be done immediately. I was livid.



The military works for the guys making money off of them at this point. Its....frustrating.


All this said, the GWOT has also taken a big toll on morale, in my opinion.

I talked to some MSOB guys when I was coaching at Stone Bay years ago. They were splitting their last 3 weeks before deployment on rifle qualification (which has no training value whatsoever) and MarineNet classes. Because that's what's really important.

I'm not convinced the GWOT has a direct impact on morale. 90%+ of guys do one enlistment and get out. The fact that the war started when they were in elementary school doesn't really matter, at least not to anyone I knew. In fact, going on a MEU instead of a combat deployment was the biggest hit to unit morale I ever saw.

[LowSpeed_HighDrag]

I didn't read the article.....

But I thought the Marine Corps sucked for these reasons:
Toxic Leadership
So much worry about safety briefs and stand downs
More training on sexual assault prevention and suicide prevention than actual warfighting

I was a POG, and did not fire a round in anger, so keep that in mind.

[1168]

I talked to some MSOB guys when I was coaching at Stone Bay years ago. They were splitting their last 3 weeks before deployment on rifle qualification (which has no training value whatsoever) and MarineNet classes. Because that's what's really important.

I'm not convinced the GWOT has a direct impact on morale. 90%+ of guys do one enlistment and get out. The fact that the war started when they were in elementary school doesn't really matter, at least not to anyone I knew. In fact, going on a MEU instead of a combat deployment was the biggest hit to unit morale I ever saw.

I agree that rifle qual has little training value for troops that get to train with their weapons throughout the year. However, as an Infantry guy that quit active duty and joined the Reserves (incredibly stupid decision), I am frustrated by the lack of time available to train. The drills we qual are among the few that we actually touch anything that isn’t a computer. We try to use three days on nothing but familiarization, dime drills, EST, and shooting. So qual has huge training value for us. Plus, popups are good fun.

While many do one enlistment and leave, in my peer group the war got stale many moons ago. I have a drawer full of black bracelets to keep my morale in check.

[BWT]

Outsider looking into a family of three officers.

The constant deployments and cutting of staff as well.

It seems that the guys I know are constantly being deployed and changing posts. Not to War zones always either but like Western Europe for 9 months to represent NATO with their unit or small countties in the Mid East to again show support, etc. one of my friends after becoming an officer was deployed for 18 of his first 24 months (one to Afghanistan but also different war centers for training, etc.) then when he was on another deployment after that his unit was dismantled while he was out of country and he wasn’t sure where he would be posted when he got back.

This has been a change in philosophy from what I understand that leads to guys not being able to maintain relations, etc.

That also with the massive reductions in force (along with what you guys are saying) are what IMHO is taxing morale.

I left out details of countries and units because it’s not my story to tell.

God Bless,

Brandon

[chuckman]

Those reasons, plus doing missions and taskings for which you are not trained, and being thrown under the bus by leadership.

[Averageman]

Those reasons, plus doing missions and taskings for which you are not trained, and being thrown under the bus by leadership.

I was embedded with an engineer unit.
I don't know a thing about Engineers, but I fixed their stuff. Every third day I would meet the XO at Bn S-3 and go over any concerns or missions.
I was always amazed at the number of staff in the shop. It was so crowded that I wondered who was out on mission because there were a half dozen NCO's E-6 and above at any time in there.
Not my business and I don't know theirs, but I found it odd. Half way through their deployment they packed up and went to Afghanistan. Same mission, route clearance and security. I was left behind with the equipment I worked with, so I didn't move forward.
I later was told a lot of those young guys were WIA and a few were KIA.
I've often wondered, if you cleared out that Office and broke everyone's coffee cup and told them to "Saddle Up, you're going out." Would some of those E-4's and E-5's leading those missions have come home?

https://www.vox.com/2018/2/15/170076...-win-interview
Interesting article related to the subject.

[26 Inf]

https://www.vox.com/2018/2/15/170076...-win-interview
Interesting article related to the subject.

Short answer: Our forces knew what to do, they were victims of the Bush and Obama administration trying to do it on the cheap without the consensus of the nation behind them.

[Averageman]

https://wtop.com/white-house/2018/04...ers-2017-goal/

The U.S. Army will not meet its mission to recruit 80,000 active duty soldiers this year and has officially lowered that goal. But Army leaders said the service has been able to encourage more experienced service members to stay on the job to satisfy a growing demand for troops.

Army Sgt. Maj. Daniel Dailey said Friday that the updated goal will be 76,500. Six months into the recruiting year, the service has brought in just 28,000 new soldiers. Army officials are expected to provide more details on the issue later Friday.

Dailey said the goal is to grow the Army to 483,500, as approved by Congress, and it’s up to the Army whether to use more recruiting or re-enlistment. He said that retaining current soldiers has been more successful this year than in the past, with 86 percent staying on, compared with 81 percent in previous years.

Army Secretary Mark Esper said there is a mismatch between the number of soldiers in the Army and the demand for more troops, and acknowledged that the “strong economy does make it challenging.” He said, however, that the Army will not sacrifice quality for quantity and that standards will not be lowered to meet recruiting goals.

Wait a minute, you lowered the goal,-standard already.

Military leaders have increasingly warned of recruiting challenges, noting that lower unemployment, a strong economy and the declining quality of the youth market have steadily shrunk the number of young people considered eligible to be recruits.

Defense officials have also complained that despite the last 16 years of war in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria, the American public is increasingly disconnected from the military, and they say many people have misperceptions about serving and often don’t personally know any service members.

[ABNAK]

https://wtop.com/white-house/2018/04...ers-2017-goal/

The U.S. Army will not meet its mission to recruit 80,000 active duty soldiers this year and has officially lowered that goal. But Army leaders said the service has been able to encourage more experienced service members to stay on the job to satisfy a growing demand for troops.

Army Sgt. Maj. Daniel Dailey said Friday that the updated goal will be 76,500. Six months into the recruiting year, the service has brought in just 28,000 new soldiers. Army officials are expected to provide more details on the issue later Friday.

Dailey said the goal is to grow the Army to 483,500, as approved by Congress, and it’s up to the Army whether to use more recruiting or re-enlistment. He said that retaining current soldiers has been more successful this year than in the past, with 86 percent staying on, compared with 81 percent in previous years.

Army Secretary Mark Esper said there is a mismatch between the number of soldiers in the Army and the demand for more troops, and acknowledged that the “strong economy does make it challenging.” He said, however, that the Army will not sacrifice quality for quantity and that standards will not be lowered to meet recruiting goals.

Wait a minute, you lowered the goal,-standard already.

Military leaders have increasingly warned of recruiting challenges, noting that lower unemployment, a strong economy and the declining quality of the youth market have steadily shrunk the number of young people considered eligible to be recruits.

Defense officials have also complained that despite the last 16 years of war in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria, the American public is increasingly disconnected from the military, and they say many people have misperceptions about serving and often don’t personally know any service members.

The Army had an 81% retention rate? I thought the majority of people did one enlistment and then got out? Maybe they were talking about senior NCO's or something. I did my 4 active and 3 in the NG and was good with that. I find it hard to believe that 81% re-enlist.

Also, that disconnection from the military is disgraceful. While I served over 30 years ago I still feel a kinship (if you will) with guys who have served afterwards, to include those who've "seen the elephant" the last 16+ years. I cannot fathom your average, never-have-served civilian's disconnect with the military. Maybe it's because I was in that I feel this way, but the .mil folks are tops in my book and I have an ongoing interest in all things military, i.e. I pay attention to what is going on.

[lowprone]

The Draft is coming !