Task force suggest soldiers in mid 20's are more lethal

[platoonDaddy]

Very interesting concept on the transition into a grunt

Retired Army Maj. Gen. Robert Scales, chairman of the Pentagon's Close Combat Lethality Task Force, has suggested that Marines should have to go through four years in a different career field and wait an enlistment before transitioning into the infantry.

As part of this effort, Scales — an Army field artillery officer who earned the Silver Star in Vietnam when his base was overrun — has been working to convince the Defense Department that soldiers in their mid to late 20s are more lethal. The retired general told Military Times this is, "the optimal age for a close-combat soldier."

https://www.businessinsider.com/top-...-not-18-2018-8

[26 Inf]

Very interesting concept on the transition into a grunt



https://www.businessinsider.com/top-...-not-18-2018-8

At four years if you are worth a pooh you should be picking up Corporal, shouldn't you? How's that going to work?

I can hear the Career Planner now: 'Corporal Smith, you've down an outstanding job as an air frame mechanic, well worth the nearly a year in formal schooling the Corps spent training you, now you need to reenlist reenlist and go 03 you Devil Dawg, you!'

So how about we just raise the enlistment age to 25? That would work.

[flenna]

My father enlisted in the Marine Corps at 17 yoa and was in the infantry. At 18 he did his first tour in Viet Nam. At 20 he did his second tour as a platoon sergeant (and de facto platoon leader since 2nd LTs were hard to come by and hard to keep) in which he was awarded a silver star. I guess he and the rest of the young men he led were too young? I would think 18-22 are the best years to handle the rigor and stress of a Marine infantryman. And why is a retired ARMY general suggesting what Marine infantryman should do?

[uffdaphil]

The lone 24 year old in my boot camp cycle (‘68) was called the old man. Funny how perspective changes as we age.

[ggammell]

An Army Artillery Officer making recommendations on what the Marines should do...alrighty then.

[SeriousStudent]

General Scales was actually asked by Secretary Mattis (peace be unto him) to do this. Mattis approached Scales after reading these two books:

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/16...?ie=UTF8&psc=1

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/07...?ie=UTF8&psc=1

I possess and have read both books. They are worth the read, and contain valuable ideas. I would be curious if anyone else here has read them.

Frankly, as a former Marine NCO who wandered about the landscape with a heavy piece of iron, I'd not be so dense as to assume the Corps is the sole voice of wisdom. "Not Invented Here" has crippled many a military effort.

Why else does the Corps do exchange tours with foreign services?

I have zero doubts that SECDEF will examine all the ideas floated, and chose appropriately.

[SeriousStudent]

The lone 24 year old in my boot camp cycle (‘68) was called the old man. Funny how perspective changes as we age.

I turned 26 in boot camp. I was older than everyone in the recruit training company I was assigned to, with the exceptions of the company Gunny and the Caption that was the CO.

My Senior Drill Instructor would yell "Get yer ass out of the rack, Pappy!" when the lights flipped on. He also yelled other things.

Yeah, my nickname was Pappy for about the first two years I was in. It was a lot better than the names he called other people - like Shitbag, Turd Thief, and JizzStain.

[ABNAK]

I turned 26 in boot camp. I was older than everyone in the recruit training company I was assigned to, with the exceptions of the company Gunny and the Caption that was the CO.

My Senior Drill Instructor would yell "Get yer ass out of the rack, Pappy!" when the lights flipped on. He also yelled other things.

Yeah, my nickname was Pappy for about the first two years I was in. It was a lot better than the names he called other people - like Shitbag, Turd Thief, and JizzStain.

I went through Army Infantry OSUT in 1983. We had a guy who was 37yo go through my cycle......but there was a catch. He was a 'Nam SF vet. For some reason (I surmise because he had been out for too long) they made him re-do OSUT from Day One. He was made a Platoon Guide right off the bat. Soft-spoken guy, we all knew (the Drill Sergeants included) who/what he was. He did everything with us, no slack cut there. However, the DS didn't f**k with him either. He is the only guy, and that means the DS too, who had shaded glasses on in my basic "yearbook". On graduation day he had a full rack of ribbons, SF combat patch on his right shoulder, Combat Infantry Badge, jump wings, and those damn shades! One of my senior drills walked up to him in, gave him a once over, and walked away as he smiled and shook his head......that dude's uniform blew his away!

He was rumored to have been trying to get back into SF. Don't know if it ever happened, but it wouldn't surprise me if he had done it.

I can remember once or twice he was called into the DS CP ("head shed") and he was in there for a while both times. We wondered if they dared to try and smoke him, but he never had a bead of sweat showing! I would wager that the senior DS (most of them 'Nam vets too at that time) told him to have a seat and they bullshitted.

[Coal Dragger]

I don’t think the concept is such a bad idea, at least the age notion of mid 20’ to late 20’s being a more optimal time for a man to be a grunt.

Look at it this way, the average male brain fully develops around 25, so a 25 year old is invariably smarter and more mature than an 18 year old. Far more capable of effective rational independent thinking and action at that point, which in a small unit conflict is very important. A 25 year old who is active and trains physically is also probably going to outperform an 18 year old who has also been active and training physically. He’s had more time for his body to fully mature and build muscle mass.

So if you are magically able to change the entire service and how rank is awarded and clear other logistical hurdles why wouldn’t you want to be recruiting 2nd enlistment soldiers and Marines to be grunts? They’re more mature in life experience, biologically their brains are also more mature, and assuming a 2nd enlistment they’ve had 4 years of structured physical activity so chances are they’re stronger too.

Make the base pay considerably higher, and offer substantial bonuses for optioning to infantry if a candidate can meet the standards. The notion of paying everyone the same based on rank regardless of MOS has been pretty stupid for a long long time. Paying an Air Force jet engine mechanic essentially the same as an infantryman is insulting, how often to mechanics die in combat, get maimed, or suffer career ending training injuries compared to a grunt? How much time do they spend sleeping on the ground? Eating MRE’s? Shitting in a hole they had to dig? The dude who signed up for the misery and risk taking should see some reward$$$$$.

[Wake27]

The basis for some of the arguments here that are against this so far is pretty weak. It’s probably a safe assumption that there is some evidence to support his claim that ignores the fact that he’s from a different branch of service.

I don’t think the concept is such a bad idea, at least the age notion of mid 20’ to late 20’s being a more optimal time for a man to be a grunt.

Look at it this way, the average male brain fully develops around 25, so a 25 year old is invariably smarter and more mature than an 18 year old. Far more capable of effective rational independent thinking and action at that point, which in a small unit conflict is very important. A 25 year old who is active and trains physically is also probably going to outperform an 18 year old who has also been active and training physically. He’s had more time for his body to fully mature and build muscle mass.

So if you are magically able to change the entire service and how rank is awarded and clear other logistical hurdles why wouldn’t you want to be recruiting 2nd enlistment soldiers and Marines to be grunts? They’re more mature in life experience, biologically their brains are also more mature, and assuming a 2nd enlistment they’ve had 4 years of structured physical activity so chances are they’re stronger too.

Make the base pay considerably higher, and offer substantial bonuses for optioning to infantry if a candidate can meet the standards. The notion of paying everyone the same based on rank regardless of MOS has been pretty stupid for a long long time. Paying an Air Force jet engine mechanic essentially the same as an infantryman is insulting, how often to mechanics die in combat, get maimed, or suffer career ending training injuries compared to a grunt? How much time do they spend sleeping on the ground? Eating MRE’s? Shitting in a hole they had to dig? The dude who signed up for the misery and risk taking should see some reward$$$$$.

At least one problem with that, however, is the fact that an aircraft mechanic would probably make a lot more money in the civilian sector so there wouldn’t be a whole lot of reason for those guys to stay in if the pay isn’t even fair across the board. Plus I know plenty of non-infantry types who have had a lot of risk and misery. Probably not as much, but it’s a foolish notion to think that just because someone isn’t infantry, they’re not enduring some suck too.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk