View Full Version : Two Decades of War Have Eroded the Morale of America’s Troops
This article was found on Real Clear Defense. It is from The Atlantic which is a little left of center, but I thought it was interesting and thought provoking.
Left Behind: Two Decades of War Have Eroded the Morale of America’s Troops
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/05/left-behind/556844/
Averageman
04-16-18, 11:58
I'm sorry, that article (I made it about half way through before I had to exit) doesn't begin to touch what the real problems are, nor does it touch why they exist.
Deferring to racism and racism exists in every aspect of our society, is a cop out. It's not the real problem. the real problems are much deeper than that, they involve many more aspects of training and unit discipline and they run deep.
The worst thing that ever happened, in my opinion was the importance of the individual over the teams and that goes from Squad/Crew all the way up to Battalions and Squadrons.
Bluntly pointing out failures and fixing them, is the only way to prevent further failure. The system now seems to be adverse to any action that might result in someones individual feelings being hurt.
You have to train hard, you have to remain thick skinned and you have to build teams that want to be successful. Having said that, people who wont get on board with that need to leave.
Inspections aren't to standard, things aren't checked and rechecked and sometimes Junior leadership at the E-4 and E-5 level don't know "Right" because they haven't seen it. After all, failing an inspection could hurt someones feelings, which would lead to a "Sensing Session" which would lead to the person upholding the standard being identified as toxic.
Instead it is a "Go along to Get along system."
Until someone at the top decides training has to be hard, military members have to be harder and that all this "My Feelings" stuff has to be removed from a failing system they are doomed.
Anyone who doesn't embrace winning and training hard and upholding the highest standards needs to be removed and removed immediately.
RetroRevolver77
04-16-18, 12:41
Yah I couldn't get through that article. Anything that blames racism for societal problems is just furthering the leftist permanent victim hood agenda.
Averageman
04-16-18, 13:07
There is a blueprint out there of how these issues were fixed post Viet Nam.
Probably a dozen or more books, hundreds of articles and although then racism was claimed to be a major issue, we fixed it in the military as best we could and moved forward with the mission being first.
The problem is we've changed as a society, we're not raising young men to be warriors. Everyone wants to be an outstanding individual, that's an admirable goal, but it takes someone who works well as part of a team first.
Coal Dragger
04-16-18, 14:17
The author was a Public Affairs Officer.
Yeah I value his views about as much as those of a creepy child molester battalion chaplain.
The author was a Public Affairs Officer.
Yeah I value his views about as much as those of a creepy child molester battalion chaplain.
LOL! Tell us how you really feel. Spoken like a real man from Custer.
Dist. Expert 26
04-16-18, 16:44
Morale sucks because of toxic leadership, getting treated like children, spending more time on online training than anything useful and forcing out tons of good people over trivial BS.
I'm sorry, that article (I made it about half way through before I had to exit) doesn't begin to touch what the real problems are, nor does it touch why they exist.
Deferring to racism and racism exists in every aspect of our society, is a cop out. It's not the real problem. the real problems are much deeper than that, they involve many more aspects of training and unit discipline and they run deep.
You should have completed the article, the author dismisses the racism deal and stresses that 'a oneness of purpose' transcends race. I got that when I went through Boot Camp in 1972 in a platoon comprised of 70-80% blacks, most of whom had no use for my cracker ass, and, sad to say, at the time I had no use for their asses either. Nonetheless, most of them tolerated me tutoring them on general military subjects - when had the goal of becoming Marines that momentarily bonded us.
The worst thing that ever happened, in my opinion was the importance of the individual over the teams and that goes from Squad/Crew all the way up to Battalions and Squadrons.
Yeah, the Marines, and it was a Marine officer who wrote the article, never bought into that 'Army of One' or Be All You Can Be' bullshit.
Bluntly pointing out failures and fixing them, is the only way to prevent further failure. The system now seems to be adverse to any action that might result in someones individual feelings being hurt.
You have to train hard, you have to remain thick skinned and you have to build teams that want to be successful. Having said that, people who wont get on board with that need to leave.
Inspections aren't to standard, things aren't checked and rechecked and sometimes Junior leadership at the E-4 and E-5 level don't know "Right" because they haven't seen it. After all, failing an inspection could hurt someones feelings, which would lead to a "Sensing Session" which would lead to the person upholding the standard being identified as toxic.
Instead it is a "Go along to Get along system."
Until someone at the top decides training has to be hard, military members have to be harder and that all this "My Feelings" stuff has to be removed from a failing system they are doomed.
Anyone who doesn't embrace winning and training hard and upholding the highest standards needs to be removed and removed immediately.
Hey, your the one that joined the Army. I got out of the Marines and entered the Army Reserves as an E-5. Night and day. My first freaking drill with the unit, I noticed a trash can overflowing and told a nearby SP4 'hey, Specialist, give me a hand taking this to the dumpster.' 'You're not in my chain of command.' 'Take me to your NCO' Turns out that in lego land what I did was detracting from the mission. I went to my PSG and told him "I'm done, I'm on a 'Try-One' and I've tried." The PSG, who was a former Marine, calmed me down and I spent the next tne years ignoring the rest of the Army Reserves as my platoon marched to the 11BY drummer.
Coal Dragger
04-16-18, 17:08
LOL! Tell us how you really feel. Spoken like a real man from Custer.
I might have been a bit harsh but seriously, the dude wrote press releases for a few years. He knows jack and shit about an actual grunt unit.
He went through TBS, good for him. He then spent his career with his mouth affixed to some colonel’s ass typing up pretty sounding bits for local newspapers and the Marine Corps Times.
Forgive me if I’m not impressed with his viewpoint.
If this were authored by some dude who is now an infantry Lt. Col after who knows how many deployments, I’d lend it a lot more credence.
LOL! Tell us how you really feel. Spoken like a real man from Custer.
As in Custer Hill, Fort Riley, Home of the Big Red 1, or Custer, as in George Armstrong Custer, the dude who didn't listen to others and got his command wiped out? Because one's better than the other.
I might have been a bit harsh but seriously, the dude wrote press releases for a few years. He knows jack and shit about an actual grunt unit.
He went through TBS, good for him. He then spent his career with his mouth affixed to some colonel’s ass typing up pretty sounding bits for local newspapers and the Marine Corps Times.
Forgive me if I’m not impressed with his viewpoint.
If this were authored by some dude who is now an infantry Lt. Col after who knows how many deployments, I’d lend it a lot more credence.
Seriously, did you read the article? Have you not been listening to the news about A/C and ships crashing? The .mil is getting wore down, and for what? Because they want to be thanked for their service? Sure guys will continue to fight and die for one another, but it would be nice if something was accomplished along the way.
Morale sucks because of toxic leadership, getting treated like children, spending more time on online training than anything useful and forcing out tons of good people over trivial BS.
Yup, this exactly. I haven't actually seen the last one, but I know it exists.
Coal Dragger
04-16-18, 17:34
Seriously, did you read the article? Have you not been listening to the news about A/C and ships crashing? The .mil is getting wore down, and for what? Because they want to be thanked for their service? Sure guys will continue to fight and die for one another, but it would be nice if something was accomplished along the way.
I’m not suggesting that .mil isn’t getting worn down.
The resons are those you already mentioned.
Moose-Knuckle
04-16-18, 18:03
I've never been in the .mil and will be more than happy to keep my civilian ass in my lane but I wonder....
If the morale issue has more to do with bullshit being forced down our fighting forces throats like the embracing of the LGBT agenda and other "social justice" tripe?
FlyingHunter
04-16-18, 18:16
“The war is not meant to be won, it is meant to be continuous. Hierarchical society is only possible on the basis of poverty and ignorance. This new version is the past and no different past can ever have existed. In principle the war effort is always planned to keep society on the brink.
― George Orwell
Keeping the bread and circus plan going...It seems to have nothing to do with right/wrong/win/solve.
Hey, your the one that joined the Army. I got out of the Marines and entered the Army Reserves as an E-5. Night and day. My first freaking drill with the unit, I noticed a trash can overflowing and told a nearby SP4 'hey, Specialist, give me a hand taking this to the dumpster.' 'You're not in my chain of command.' 'Take me to your NCO' Turns out that in lego land what I did was detracting from the mission. I went to my PSG and told him "I'm done, I'm on a 'Try-One' and I've tried." The PSG, who was a former Marine, calmed me down and I spent the next tne years ignoring the rest of the Army Reserves as my platoon marched to the 11BY drummer.
To be fair, you can't compare getting out of active duty USMC with Reserve-component Army. Apples to oranges. I was active duty Army in an Airborne Infantry unit and if an NCO asked for help with the trash (or told you to do it your damn self) you did it, period. Suggesting he wasn't in your chain of command would have been a good way to get your ass reamed when you did get to your chain of command!
Did any of you happen to see a Foxnews headline a week or so ago where the retired MSGT was suing the Air Force for getting assaulted and thrown out of a retirement ceremony? The crime? The guy retiring requested this other retiree who was a member of the honor guard for years, performed a flag folding speech he had done at retirements for years, for many including full birds and stars. Why? Because that speech mentioned God, more than once, and by God that commander could have none of of that and ordered a Chief, 1st Sergeant and a Senior to throw his ass out.
Things like that plus the SJW crap, endless online training for sex harassment, lack of discipline with newer generation... it goes on. It’s not just one thing. It’s complicated, but toxic on the whole.
Averageman
04-16-18, 20:10
We're running out of qualified volunteers.
If the physical, legal and educational requirements cannot be met and then there is the ASVAB, the tendancy of late has become to lower standards or offer waivers.
So if you are one of the 20% who would qualify to the unwaivered, originally intended higher standard,
Who will you work with?
Who will be your small unit Leadership?
What will, as you're more fully capable than your peers, be your work load?
As odd as it may sound, the only way to fix it is to demand higher standards overall.
Otherwise your pushing away the better applicants in favour of the lesser candidate.
Morale sucks because of toxic leadership, getting treated like children, spending more time on online training than anything useful and forcing out tons of good people over trivial BS.
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 war is not meant to be won, it is meant to be continuous. Hierarchical society is only possible on the basis of poverty and ignorance. This new version is the past and no different past can ever have existed. In principle the war effort is always planned to keep society on the brink.
― George Orwell
Keeping the bread and circus plan going...It seems to have nothing to do with right/wrong/win/solve.
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.
To be fair, you can't compare getting out of active duty USMC with Reserve-component Army. Apples to oranges. I was active duty Army in an Airborne Infantry unit and if an NCO asked for help with the trash (or told you to do it your damn self) you did it, period. Suggesting he wasn't in your chain of command would have been a good way to get your ass reamed when you did get to your chain of command!
I know, I was kind of fake newsing it. It was a shock, though. I did a lot more babysitting of young troops on JAATT missions and 4-day fly-away drills than I ever did on active duty.
I loved the little fockers, but most of our non-NCO's were high school kids who had gone to basic the summer they turned 17, then jump school the next summer, then a year or so in the unit before the Pathfinder course. Some never really figured out they hadn't been on active duty, and weren't quite as bad ass as the active component guys. It got embarassing at times.
Dist. Expert 26
04-16-18, 22:23
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
04-16-18, 23:57
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.
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.
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
Those reasons, plus doing missions and taskings for which you are not trained, and being thrown under the bus by leadership.
Averageman
04-17-18, 13:10
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/2018/2/15/17007678/syria-trump-war-win-interview
Interesting article related to the subject.
https://www.vox.com/2018/2/15/17007678/syria-trump-war-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
04-20-18, 12:47
https://wtop.com/white-house/2018/04/army-wont-meet-recruiting-mission-lowers-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.
https://wtop.com/white-house/2018/04/army-wont-meet-recruiting-mission-lowers-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.
The Draft is coming !
Settle down, Francis.....
MountainRaven
04-29-18, 15:21
Settle down, Francis.....
Which do you think America will grow the spine to do first:
End the unnecessary conflicts it constantly gets itself involved in; or,
Bring back the draft?
Which one is more politically suicidal for the 535 people in DC claiming to represent the American People?
I mean, we can just keep printing money to allow us to have things both ways on other issues, but we can't just make new people.
Which do you think America will grow the spine to do first:
End the unnecessary conflicts it constantly gets itself involved in; or,
Bring back the draft?
Which one is more politically suicidal for the 535 people in DC claiming to represent the American People?
I mean, we can just keep printing money to allow us to have things both ways on other issues, but we can't just make new people.
You can question Iraq, although personally I think they were guilty as charged with chem weapons. That has been a debate since April 2003.
Afghanistan is NOT debatable. You know why we were there. Now, the subsequent 15+ years and how it was handled can also be debated, and I'd agree. But the reason we went there you are surely old enough to remember.
MountainRaven
04-29-18, 17:50
You can question Iraq, although personally I think they were guilty as charged with chem weapons. That has been a debate since April 2003.
Afghanistan is NOT debatable. You know why we were there. Now, the subsequent 15+ years and how it was handled can also be debated, and I'd agree. But the reason we went there you are surely old enough to remember.
I know why we went there in the first place. And I never said it was unjustified.
But we're still there. And we'll still be there for the foreseeable future.
FlyingHunter
04-29-18, 17:57
From unz.com and very astute:
Why does the military not win wars? In part because winning is not in the interest of the Pentagon and those who feed on it. Wars generate profitable contracts for all manner of supplies and equipment. Either winning or losing ends the gravy train. For example, the war on Afghanistan of almost two decades has become an entitlement program for the arms industry, accomplishing nothing, killing countless peasants, and lacking purpose other than maintaining an unneeded empire and funneling money to the Complex.
How did the Complex free itself from civilian control? The crucial step in depriving the public of influence was the neutering of the constitutional requirement that wars be declared by Congress. The military thus became the private army of the President and those who control him. Then came the All Volunteer Army, which ended inconvenience to or mutilation of the children of people of importance, leaving the body bags to be filled by deplorables from Memphis or Appalachia or Mexico. America’s wars then became air wars and finally drone wars, reducing casualties to very few. The public, both ignorant and uninvolved, became acquiescent.
As in Custer Hill, Fort Riley, Home of the Big Red 1, or Custer, as in George Armstrong Custer, the dude who didn't listen to others and got his command wiped out? Because one's better than the other.
Custer, SD in the Black Hills. So yes G. A. Custer.
From unz.com and very astute:
Why does the military not win wars? In part because winning is not in the interest of the Pentagon and those who feed on it. Wars generate profitable contracts for all manner of supplies and equipment. Either winning or losing ends the gravy train. For example, the war on Afghanistan of almost two decades has become an entitlement program for the arms industry, accomplishing nothing, killing countless peasants, and lacking purpose other than maintaining an unneeded empire and funneling money to the Complex.
How did the Complex free itself from civilian control? The crucial step in depriving the public of influence was the neutering of the constitutional requirement that wars be declared by Congress. The military thus became the private army of the President and those who control him. Then came the All Volunteer Army, which ended inconvenience to or mutilation of the children of people of importance, leaving the body bags to be filled by deplorables from Memphis or Appalachia or Mexico. America’s wars then became air wars and finally drone wars, reducing casualties to very few. The public, both ignorant and uninvolved, became acquiescent.
Of all the conflicts in our history there have only been five wars declared by Congress: The War of 1812, The Mexican American War, The Spanish American War, WW1 and WW2. WW2 was the last War we were involved in where we fought with a total commitment to win. President Eisenhower himself warned of the military industrial complex.
Averageman
04-29-18, 20:51
Perhaps a combination of things need to happen?
We need to be able to react quickly, but at the same time, we need a nod from the Legislative Branch to go. Getting the House and Senate to do anything 'timely" seems counter to history and makes any vote a political football.
We need to redefine what "Winning" looks like. Our enemies are mercurial, they have few flags, no capital and we treat them as criminals rather than a foreign power projecting military force. Guantanamo isn't the answer, military courts and firing squad might be.
We need to break shit with overwhelming force and then go home ASAP. Nation building is for the guys left sitting in rubble.
We need to build strong Junior Leaders starting at squad and platoon level.
We need to rewrite our ROE. I don't want Mai Kai, but having had to wait for "permission" to fire at an armed enemy, I don't want that to ever happen again to anyone.
From unz.com and very astute:
Why does the military not win wars? In part because winning is not in the interest of the Pentagon and those who feed on it. Wars generate profitable contracts for all manner of supplies and equipment. Either winning or losing ends the gravy train. For example, the war on Afghanistan of almost two decades has become an entitlement program for the arms industry, accomplishing nothing, killing countless peasants, and lacking purpose other than maintaining an unneeded empire and funneling money to the Complex.
How did the Complex free itself from civilian control? The crucial step in depriving the public of influence was the neutering of the constitutional requirement that wars be declared by Congress. The military thus became the private army of the President and those who control him. Then came the All Volunteer Army, which ended inconvenience to or mutilation of the children of people of importance, leaving the body bags to be filled by deplorables from Memphis or Appalachia or Mexico. America’s wars then became air wars and finally drone wars, reducing casualties to very few. The public, both ignorant and uninvolved, became acquiescent.
I could'nt agree with you more..
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.
Maybe they were talking about retention of career Soldiers - those who had already reenlisted once.
Perhaps a combination of things need to happen?
1) We need to be able to react quickly, but at the same time, we need a nod from the Legislative Branch to go. Getting the House and Senate to do anything 'timely" seems counter to history and makes any vote a political football.
My belief is that the only time American Forces should be used without Legislative Branch approval is in defense of American soil or lives. Doing it by Executive finding in any case other than that should be a no-go. Any conflict which involves protracted conflict must be a declared war. As someone said in an earlier post WWII was the last declared war in which America participated.
2) We need to redefine what "Winning" looks like. Our enemies are mercurial, they have few flags, no capital and we treat them as criminals rather than a foreign power projecting military force. Guantanamo isn't the answer, military courts and firing squad might be.
and
3) We need to break shit with overwhelming force and then go home ASAP. Nation building is for the guys left sitting in rubble.
Two and three are related. You can not just show up, kick ass, take no names and leave. That creates a vacuum that many nefarious dudes are willing to try to fill. As long as there are two 'enemy combatants' left alive they will multiply.
Winning will never be eliminating them from the face of the earth, or neutering them so that they can't fight. Winning means standing up a Government that has the means to effective counter the enemy combatant's continued threat AND and at the same time is acceptable to the majority people being governed.
That isn't ever going to be accomplished quickly. It will never be accomplished piecemeal. It will always require overwhelming commitment of arms, personnel, and resources.
See point number one - it has to be mandated by the American people, not the President.
4) We need to build strong Junior Leaders starting at squad and platoon level.
5) We need to rewrite our ROE. I don't want Mai Kai, but having had to wait for "permission" to fire at an armed enemy, I don't want that to ever happen again to anyone.
Point four is obviously necessary.
You are never going to have ROE's that are acceptable to everyone. While I do not believe we should error on the side of enormous civilian deaths to protect our troops, it is safe to say there is much more controversy over collateral damage in a campaign that does not have widespread acceptance by the American public. Once again, point one.
I know why we went there in the first place. And I never said it was unjustified.
But we're still there. And we'll still be there for the foreseeable future.
And that is where we would likely be in agreement. Something should have been done differently, but that is up to a higher pay grade than I ever occupied. Good start might have been not diverting resources from Afghanistan to Iraq.
Perhaps a combination of things need to happen?
We need to be able to react quickly, but at the same time, we need a nod from the Legislative Branch to go. Getting the House and Senate to do anything 'timely" seems counter to history and makes any vote a political football.
We need to redefine what "Winning" looks like. Our enemies are mercurial, they have few flags, no capital and we treat them as criminals rather than a foreign power projecting military force. Guantanamo isn't the answer, military courts and firing squad might be.
We need to break shit with overwhelming force and then go home ASAP. Nation building is for the guys left sitting in rubble.
We need to build strong Junior Leaders starting at squad and platoon level.
We need to rewrite our ROE. I don't want Mai Kai, but having had to wait for "permission" to fire at an armed enemy, I don't want that to ever happen again to anyone.
I tend to agree with that thought. We will destroy you. We will NOT rebuild you. Do it again and we will destroy you once more. Rinse and repeat.
Averageman
04-30-18, 21:37
I tend to agree with that thought. We will destroy you. We will NOT rebuild you. Do it again and we will destroy you once more. Rinse and repeat.
I asked some guys, "Why aren't you using these tanks instead of getting hit by IED's while patrolling in Humvee's ?"
The answer I received was, "The Tanks are too hard on the streets and the infrastructure."
I don't know if that was the real reason, but I believe that was the Troops believed.
When it's gone that far, even if it is a belief and not 100% fact we've went too far.
Bear in mind the locals were disposing of thier trash at the time by throwing it off of balconies and it was waist deep around many complexes.
The moral wasn't the best after Vietnam either. Wars with out profit are foolish.
[QUOTE=Averageman;2622737]I asked some guys, "Why aren't you using these tanks instead of getting hit by IED's while patrolling in Humvee's ?"
The answer I received was, "The Tanks are too hard on the streets and the infrastructure."
I don't know if that was the real reason, but I believe that was the Troops believed.
When it's gone that far, even if it is a belief and not 100% fact we've went too far.
Bear in mind the locals were disposing of thier trash at the time by throwing it off of balconies and it was waist deep around many complexes.[/QUO Do the soldiers actually know why they are there?
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.