PDA

View Full Version : More training, less parading urged.



SSG Rock
08-25-2006, 04:08 PM
Army chief Gen. Peter Schoomaker worries that soldiers are spending too much time marching in parades and “filling the bleachers” for retirement ceremonies.

So, on Thursday, the Army’s four-star leader challenged a group of trainers meeting at Fort Jackson to find better and more efficient ways to train soldiers.....http://ebird.afis.mil/ebfiles/e20060825452884.html

SWJED
08-25-2006, 04:45 PM
For those that cannot access Current News - Early Bird Edition - here is a link to the original article in The State - More Training, Less Parading Urged (http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/news/local/15356164.htm).

Stan
01-26-2007, 11:47 AM
Strange, I don't remember any parade being offered to me a decade ago when I retired. I do however remember being in many more than I care to count.

I would have thought with the current levels of activity around the world, the Army would be concentrating on sharpshooters and language experts.

Dress-Right-Dress has its roots and rationale, but practical at the moment ?

Regards, Stan

Uboat509
01-26-2007, 12:51 PM
There are, unfortunately, a lot of leaders out there who thrive on D & C. They don't really know why it is important but they are good at it because it is relatively easy to be good at and so they overemphasize its importance. I can remember being told when I was with 2nd ACR in the mid '90s that anytime we had a group of three or more soldiers going anywhere on foot, then one of them was required to march the rest. Typical Joes, we just spread ourselves out so that there was never more than two of us walking together. It was not uncommon to see five or ten groups of two guys walking at ten meter intervals down to the motor pool in the morning.

SFC W

Stu-6
01-26-2007, 01:34 PM
There are, unfortunately, a lot of leaders out there who thrive on D & C. They don't really know why it is important but they are good at it because it is relatively easy to be good at and so they overemphasize its importance. I can remember being told when I was with 2nd ACR in the mid '90s that anytime we had a group of three or more soldiers going anywhere on foot, then one of them was required to march the rest. Typical Joes, we just spread ourselves out so that there was never more than two of us walking together. It was not uncommon to see five or ten groups of two guys walking at ten meter intervals down to the motor pool in the morning.

SFC W
:D Don’t feel bad we were doing the same thing in 1AD.

D and C has its purpose but it doesn’t take much time be good enough at it. As for retirement parades and the like, total BS we waste soldier’s time and tax payers money just to stroke some fools ego. I’ll never forget we had a brigade change of command ceremony, the entire brigade had to come out for about 6 hours (counting practices time) the highlight was the wives’ choir singing every verse of the national anthem, soldiers where struggling to hold a salute for that long . . . what a waste of time.

SWJED
01-26-2007, 01:42 PM
From the MCG forum - Close Order Drill in Iraq? (http://www.mca-marines.org/forum/showthread.php?p=13#post13)

nichols
01-26-2007, 02:02 PM
There is no place for COD in today's military. Teaching and conducting it only enforces first generation infantry tactics plain and simple. COD promotes the concept of "strengh in numbers" and the only way to have it is by have the troops all lined up to look pretty and go over the top in WW I trenches.

We are pushing for the Strategic Corporal, Distributed Operations, COIN, LIC, DIME or whatever today's neat acronym is while we cognitively pass on to the junior leaders that good military leadership is founded in marching the troops in squares.

Why bother with language, culture, tactics, techniques, and proceedures when all no need to do is stand in formation. COD, spit shined boots, pressed out cammies are like a good coat of paint being applied to rusted metal. It looks nice but the foundation will crumble at the most unopportune moment.

I HATE COD

marct
01-26-2007, 02:19 PM
Hi Nichols,


There is no place for COD in today's military. Teaching and conducting it only enforces first generation infantry tactics plain and simple. COD promotes the concept of "strengh in numbers" and the only way to have it is by have the troops all lined up to look pretty and go over the top in WW I trenches.

Why bother with language, culture, tactics, techniques, and proceedures when all no need to do is stand in formation. COD, spit shined boots, pressed out cammies are like a good coat of paint being applied to rusted metal. It looks nice but the foundation will crumble at the most unopportune moment.

Do you feel that it has no place in moral and building an esprit du corps? I agree that as a combat drill, it is useless, but I think it still has an important moral function.

Marc

Tom Odom
01-26-2007, 02:42 PM
Admittedly I am something of a radical on this and related phenomenon. My take on it is that there is no place in the Army for the pomp and circumstance anymore beyond 3rd Infantry burial and tomb guard elements. That means all the bands, choirs, sports teams like the Golden Kinights (And I am a broken wing skydiver), boxing, pellet gun shooting, etc etc are wasted slots that should go to filling combat needs rather than entertainment and recruiting PR that is (again in my admittedly biased view) misleading to say the least.

OK throw rocks!

best

Tom

marct
01-26-2007, 03:00 PM
Admittedly I am something of a radical on this and related phenomenon. My take on it is that there is no place in the Army for the pomp and circumstance anymore beyond 3rd Infantry burial and tomb guard elements. ...

OK throw rocks!

Well, I must admit that I've never understood a military that requires 10 "support" people to send i fighter into the field :D. Personally, I think bands and, most definitely choirs (!) are great, but I really don't think that the members in them should be excused from combat duties.


Send the Pipers to Sadr City!
Let the Mahdi Army beware!


Marc (ex-piper)

Stan
01-26-2007, 03:46 PM
Marc,
I like your attitude, you would have made a great NCO, albeit waaay tooo intelligent for the job :cool:


Do you feel that it has no place in moral and building an esprit du corps? I agree that as a combat drill, it is useless, but I think it still has an important moral function.

You are indeed very correct, COD were and probably still are for basic training, a means of building a sense of spirit and team work. Had to, the Drill would punish all the rest for one small idiot's mistake. You would later work out the problems at night :eek:

I also like Tom's approach. But then, he thought I worked wonders at times. However, I didn't get their on my own, I also had a drill who set me straight and emphasized in no small way, how important this would later become.

I'll let Tom decide if my Drill "dun good".

Regards, Stan

marct
01-26-2007, 03:55 PM
Marc,
I like your attitude, you would have made a great NCO, albeit waaay tooo intelligent for the job :cool:

Hey, Stan. What can I say but that I'm a typical Canadian - read caught in the middle:wry:. My father and his father were NCOs and, on my mother's side, they were all officers (and portrait painters;)).


You are indeed very correct, COD were and probably still are for basic training, a means of building a sense of spirit and team work. Had to, the Drill would punish all the rest for one small idiot's mistake. You would later work out the problems at night :eek:

I also like Tom's approach. But then, he thought I worked wonders at times. However, I didn't get their on my own, I also had a drill who set me straight and emphasized in no small way, how important this would later become.

I'll let Tom decide if my Drill "dun good".

I think Tom does have a really good point, especially about the add-ons (i.e. too many people who don't know how to fight and will never face it). Honestly, for most of the support roles, you could hire civilians. Although, I am still in favour of combat pipers!!!!!

Marc

Stan
01-26-2007, 04:03 PM
Ya know Marc,
Most everybody in the Army (yes, even the Pipers) are still required to learn other things before.....I'm not going there :rolleyes:

Fighters, definitely not. But they are not excused from participation and accountability. You're next statement will then be very much correct, who would then send them to say, play the cry of battle. No One !

Ah, it was worth a shot !

Tom Odom
01-26-2007, 04:27 PM
I guess I have a hard time seeing what exactly is the combat multipler effect of a Army choir, rock band, or whatever when we are cycling units to theater repeatedly. Granted the numbers we are talking are small and I am trampling over real and perceived traditions; but other perceptions count more--at least to me.

Drill and unit cohesion go hand in glove. Certainly they are a bedrock of building Soldiers--and yes Stan I would give your drill a copy of my book to show him that he did indeed do good.

Best

Tom

Stan
01-26-2007, 04:36 PM
OK, if you buy "another" copy, I'll send it to the old fart !

Sorry, but I got a lot out of basic and COD. You take people from all walks of life and have (in my case at Ft. Bliss) 12 weeks to turn them into something.

I admit, CODs are different, but that was 1974. There was no Iraq, but in some way, the drill was expected to mold us into a team, perfecting our (ahem) mental faculties and moral character. Are you kidding ?

marct
01-26-2007, 04:46 PM
Hi Tom,


I guess I have a hard time seeing what exactly is the combat multipler effect of a Army choir, rock band, or whatever when we are cycling units to theater repeatedly. Granted the numbers we are talking are small and I am trampling over real and perceived traditions; but other perceptions count more--at least to me.

I suspect that the combat multiplier of an army choir would be low - hire a civilian group for that (I can recommend a really good one ;)). A rock band might be useful IFF they were into heavymetal :D.

I think it's important to draw a distinction between "morale" and "entertainment". For morale functions, stay in-house. For entertainment, hire civilians or make them honourary Colonels. (http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/showpost.php?p=8592&postcount=77)

Marc

Tom Odom
01-26-2007, 05:07 PM
I think it's important to draw a distinction between "morale" and "entertainment". For morale functions, stay in-house. For entertainment, hire civilians or make them honourary Colonels.

You are correct.

In the mid-80s when we were creating Light Infantry Divisions the Army used the metric of how many troops we could get on so many C141 sorties. That was how we decided to get rid of cooks, trucks, and a host of other things found in a standard infantry division (which really has never existed because they all end up locally modifying themselves to meet the combat zone).

When the force designers were looking at this, one hard and fast rule came down from Mount Dept of the Army: thou shall not cut the division band. The justification used for maintaining the division band in the LIDs was they would become stretcher bearers in combat. This was of course necessary because the LIDs organic wheeled transport was cut to the bone.

Of course LIDs proved very mobile when it came to getting on airplanes. The real crux came when they had to get off said airplanes and walk. Soldier loads in excess of 100 pounds added great mobility to that equation, bucked up no doubt by the fact that the band was there to play marching songs and carry them should they collapse. :cool:

Best

Tom

Steve Blair
01-26-2007, 05:24 PM
The whole band thing is even more amusing when you consider that they were not authorized during the period between 1866 and 1891.

Bands were maintained by subscription, typically found with the regimental headquarters, and manned by gunts detached from their normal companies. As an aside, during this period the band was also armed and held back as a reserve component if needed. Their band duties were considered secondary to their basic assignment.

Like so many "traditions," this one is more manufactured than real. It may hark back to the days when bugles and drums were used in place of radios, but then we should make all radio operators band members and be done with it...

marct
01-26-2007, 06:05 PM
The whole band thing is even more amusing when you consider that they were not authorized during the period between 1866 and 1891.

Bands were maintained by subscription, typically found with the regimental headquarters, and manned by gunts detached from their normal companies. As an aside, during this period the band was also armed and held back as a reserve component if needed. Their band duties were considered secondary to their basic assignment.

Like so many "traditions," this one is more manufactured than real. It may hark back to the days when bugles and drums were used in place of radios, but then we should make all radio operators band members and be done with it...

Really??? Hmm, I think we've had ours continuously. BTW, I wasn't joking, well, too much at any rate, about sending the pipers in. My old Pipe Major was a British WWII vet who was captured at Singapore,held for 3 years, escaped in Burma and proceeded to run "Pipe Raids" against the Japanese camps. These raids used to totally scare the snot out of the guards and they would increase efforts to capture the pipers involved - sometimes to the point of sending out entire companies into the jungle where they would be sniped at. The Pipe Raids were actually quite effective Psyops campaigns.

Marc

Rifleman
01-26-2007, 10:01 PM
It's well acknowledged that a man usually fights well when he has a strong sense of primary group. This manifests itself as current group, the men on his left and right, and historical group, those who've gone before.

Most people are capable of being moved emotionally by simple banners and symbols and a shared experience. Witness a shirtless, painted up idiot in freezing weather rooting for his NFL team. Gang violence over colors, symbols, and turf is another example.

To the extent that D&C can instill and reenforce a sense of primary group it remains a good thing.

Regimental days, parading in memory of some past deed of valor performed by a former member of the unit, can instill and reenforce a sense of primary group.

Retirement ceremonies do not.

Stan
01-26-2007, 10:06 PM
And to the Point, Well Put Rifleman !

jonSlack
01-27-2007, 12:33 AM
"I'd like to have two Armies -- one for display, with lovely guns, tanks, little Soldiers, staffs, distinguished and doddering Generals and deal little regimental officers, who would be deeply concerned over their General's bowel movements or their Colonel's piles; an Army that would be shown for a modest fee on every fairground in the country.

The other would be the real one, composed entirely of young enthusiasts in camouflage uniforms, who would not be put on display but from whom impossible efforts would be demanded and to whom all sorts of tricks would be taught. That's the Army in which I should like to fight." -- Jean Larteguy

Major recurring formal and ceremonial events requiring formal drill and ceremony should be handled by speciality units like the Old Guard. For recurring ceremonies and events, major installations should form a garrison "Old Guard" instead of "tasking" units in the garrison.

One of the biggest kicks in the junk is having to cancel a week of training on no notice so that you and your Soldiers can go stand in formation for a week for a ceremony and the numerous rehearsals required before hand.

JHR
01-27-2007, 03:03 AM
Drill does seem to have its benefits, though an excess of drill does not pass pass an excess of benfits.

The drill we use now was developed to aid and enhance a certain type of warfare or fighting. Perhaps it is time for a new form of drill. Best would probably include the speed, endurance and dispersion of soccer along with a built-in trigger to unexpectently switch the person calling commands.

Leave the parades to the drill team and the volunteer octet. Also, the drum major should be required to polish off a full glass of port upon finishing retreat as in Bugles and a Tiger (Col. J. Masters).

nichols
01-27-2007, 04:38 AM
I would agree with COD being needed for crowd control, other then that where does it fit into today's dispersed asymetrical battlefield?

nichols
01-27-2007, 04:51 AM
Hi Nichols,



Do you feel that it has no place in moral and building an esprit du corps? I agree that as a combat drill, it is useless, but I think it still has an important moral function.

Marc

Marc,

I feel that COD promotes centralized command & control. Building moral is achieved through successful real world and training mission where the individual small unit leader made instant decisions without waiting for higher authority to tell him or her what to do.

We push for Commander's Intent in order for the subordinate to operate without micromanagement yet we love a parade.

To a person with a hammer, every problem is a nail.

COD bad, rapid decision making good.

nichols
01-27-2007, 04:55 AM
Leave the parades to the drill team

Eventually they end up in front line units.:(

Nothing like having a leader that can show you how to march in circles perfectly covered and aligned but can't navigate his way off of the drill field.

nichols
01-27-2007, 05:39 AM
To the extent that D&C can instill and reenforce a sense of primary group it remains a good thing.

I respectfully disagree with you on this point.:)

Sorry guys but this COD madness is like fingernails on the chalk board for me.:o

Training seastory time.

For just under five years I was granted the privilage of being a Platoon Sergeant to a Regimental Sniper Platoon that did not have a T/O on the books. We would detach from the Regimental S-2 and attach to C Co 3rd Recon operationally. We would give C Co 5-6 six man additional recon assests that had guns. The teams were large because of the radio requirements, 77/ky for VHF, 104/ky for HF, 113/ky for UHF, 68 for sniper team comms, and a DCT.

I always managed to find a way out of my requirement to hang out in C Company's COC and be a member of a team. My last mission with that unit had me locked into the COC, Budda smiled on me and one of the RTO's caught chicken pox so we left him at Camp Lester. The team that I inserted myself in was already short by one Marine (wish I could somehow blame this on COD). Due to mule shortage issues, this team didn't take the 113 so CAS was a non-player. I insert this team (with me) in an area that I felt wouldn't see to much activity and the Sergeant that was going to take my spot when I PCS'd, I put into an area that should have seen a lot of activity.

Our SOP called for the shot to be taken while the bird was terminal dropping ord on target. The thought was that the bad guys would think that the bombs killed the Commander and give us time to E&E before they figured out that it was a 7.62.

D+4 the aggressor Battalion to put up a COC in our playground. From our target profiles the Bn CO was clearly identified and targeted. The spotter and I stalked for a good 3 hours and waited for sunset to occur from our final firing position. 30 seconds before I pulled the trigger on my blank round 2 A-6s did a simulated bomb run on the COC. Once again Budda was smiling on me.

The data was sent to the evaluators, the Bn CO was taken out of the execise for 8 hours and I was pretty happy with my last mission.

It wasn't until 4 days after we were extracted that I found out that Budda had nothing to do with those A-6s showing up at the right time. My replacement with who I had been training with for the past 2 years called for the CAS and directed from 20 kilometers away. He did not have eyes on target but he knew that we didn't have a 113 and he also knew me.

The closest that we came to COD in that platoon was during the occasional humps, other then that the training schedule always had us out in the field whenever a drill requirement popped up.

jcustis
01-27-2007, 06:03 AM
I'm going to cut against the grain somewhat and say that parades, changes of command, and the occasional retirement, do build esprit de corps.

I have stood in my far share of retirement formations when I was a troop, for a retiree who I had never even seen before the first practice. Those can definitely go away, but for those old hands who are retiring out of a unit, I believe it is certainly appropriate to render him a proper send off.

Very few Marines actually request a formal ceremony, with commander of troops, representative platoons, and a pass in review. For those that do, they typically have a good farewell speech, and that can be motivating enough, yet hard to quantify the exact effect. I would argue that the words of encouragement, thanks, and recognition (to the young men enduring the speech) serve to further solidify that bond we share. Should we emphasis close order drill training on a regular basis given the "long war"? I don't think so, but I can attest to the fact that Marines who seem to be challenged at drill aslo seem to be challenged when it comes to weapons-handling and other rote tasks. Perhaps those men could use it...:D

It's almost hard to put the feelings into words, but a ceremony done right, and well-rehearsed, can really good evolutions despite the hours spent practising.

I can remember clear as day the night that members of my platoon and I escorted the US Ambassador and Gen Shalishkavili from the USLO compound to the Paki compound a mile or so away in Mogadishu. The Pakistanis had it all laid out and spared no dog or pony that day. They must have had components of a drum and bugle corps, with an attachment of bagpipers, and they put on an impressive show for close to an hour before the VIPs engaged in a dinner meeting.

Even then, I can remember watching the lower ranks loitering on the fringe of the ceremony. I could sense a level of pride swelling up in them, to the point that even sentries manning bunker posts were no longer maintaining observation, but mesmerized by the music and pageantry. When the music ended with what seemed to be the national anthem of sorts, the Pakistanis were at rigid attention. Long after the final note, it seemed as if their spirits were lifted, and the back-slapping continued until we left. Hell, my spirits were lifted, so let's not put away the ceremonies yet...

jonSlack
01-27-2007, 07:01 AM
If you have time to do "drill" you have time to practice combatives, practice stacking and room clearing techniques, demo knot and breaching charge construction lessons, weapons assembly, disassembly, functions check, and reduce a stoppage drills, radio and ANCD classes, and a host of more relevant training that is easy to resource and execute during short garrison lulls.

marct
01-27-2007, 07:06 PM
Hi Jon,

I've got to agree with JC on this. I do agree that training in something immediately operationally useful is very important. Still and all, "Man does not live by bread alone" - or, if you prefer Napoleon, "Morale is to materiel as three is to one". Regimental, corps, whathaveyou ceremonial is a "spiritual glue" that ties together those who have gone before, those serving now, and those who will serve in the future. Without it, there is no "sacred" reason for what you are doing; no "foundation story" or "elder tales".

American servicemen (and women) swear to defend and protect the Constitution of the United States" which, if you look at it objectively, is nothing but a bunch of ink spilled on a parchment over 225 years ago by a bunch of guys who are now dead. What, other than your oaths, links you to them, and how can you "see" / "feel" this linkage? This is the importance of ceremonial rituals.

Please believe me when I say that the REMFs who use those rituals as a way of polishing their own careers and justifying their own lack of actual combat skills / ability should be sent to Baghdad on 1 man missions. They are a disgrace not only because they do not have the skills and abilities they should have, and not only because they will lead their own men to death, which they probably will, but because they are breaking a covenant that streches back to your War of Independance.

This may sound somewhat wonky, but I want to finish my reply with a poem, written by a Canadian at the end of WW I that, I think, really encapsulates why ceremonial is so important.


In Flanders Fields
By: Lieutenant Colonel John McCrae, MD (1872-1918)
Canadian Army

IN FLANDERS FIELDS the poppies blow
Between the crosses row on row,
That mark our place; and in the sky
The larks, still bravely singing, fly
Scarce heard amid the guns below.

We are the Dead. Short days ago
We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
Loved and were loved, and now we lie
In Flanders fields.

Take up our quarrel with the foe:
To you from failing hands we throw
The torch; be yours to hold it high.
If ye break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
In Flanders fields.

Marc

jcustis
01-27-2007, 07:49 PM
What, other than your oaths, links you to them, and how can you "see" / "feel" this linkage? This is the importance of ceremonial rituals.

It all just needs to be done in moderation, which is usually where the "operators" and the "garrison gurus" vehemently disagree.

Stan
01-27-2007, 08:03 PM
Please believe me when I say that the REMFs who use those rituals as a way of polishing their own careers and justifying their own lack of actual combat skills / ability should be sent to Baghdad on 1 man missions. They are a disgrace not only because they do not have the skills and abilities they should have, and not only because they will lead their own men to death, which they probably will, but because they are breaking a covenant that streches back to your War of Independance.

Good Evening Marc !
Career justification and polishing is far too kind. Fortunately for those, they rarely attend the finals, when skills and abilities become reality. For somebody that never joined the U.S. Armed Forces, you seem to already grasp the often too obvious and better yet, eloquently pen it herein !

Regards, Stan

Rifleman
01-27-2007, 10:02 PM
These men paraded. Only once at full strength to be sure, but they paraded. It didn't seem to hurt their bush skills any.

"The Selous Scouts"
I used to sit by the water's edge & watch the campfire glow
& I'd listen to the night-birds cry & feel the breezes blow.
My belly full of the meat I'd shot, I'd sit for hours & muse
As the moon came up & the shadows changed to many different hues.

I used to roam through this country wide in search of game so fleet
& I'd listen to the lions roar as they too searched for meat.
I'd make my camp on the grassy plain or in the mountains tall
& I'd friends at every farm & store & every native kraal.

But now when I near a river's edge or roam this country wide
I've a lot of men to back me, & I think of them with pride.
They're a scruffy lot to look at, but they've a tracker's skill;
They're damned fine men in a follow-up, & damned good at a kill.

The Scouts they're called, & well-named, too, for the man whose name they bear.
Was the greatest hunter in this land, & these men fear no dare!
For the game they hunt is vermin that would pillage, plunder and maim.
& they do their job efficiently, with never thought of fame!

Click on the link, turn the volume up, then click on the center photo.

http://selousscouts.tripod.com/unit_profile.htm

I just love hearing that!

jcustis
01-27-2007, 11:37 PM
These men paraded. Only once at full strength to be sure, but they paraded. It didn't seem to hurt their bush skills any.

Being "on parade" seemed to be a common theme among all of the Rhodesian forces. Perhaps that's a regimental construct.

Then again, the enlisted, staff, and officer clubs also seem to have been patronized way more than we do today.

Stan
01-27-2007, 11:51 PM
Some veterans bear visible signs of their service: a missing
limb, a jagged scar, a certain look in the eye.

Others may carry the evidence inside them: a pin holding a
bone together, a piece of shrapnel in the leg - or perhaps
another sort of inner steel: the soul's alloy forged in the
refinery of adversity.

Except in parades, however, the men and women who have
kept America safe wear no badge or emblem. You can't tell
a vet just by looking.

What is a vet?

He is the cop on the beat who spent six months in
Saudi Arabia sweating two gallons a day making sure
the armored personnel carriers didn't run out of fuel.

He is the barroom loudmouth, dumber than five wooden
planks, whose overgrown frat-boy behavior is outweighed
a hundred times in the cosmic scales by four hours of
exquisite bravery near the 38th parallel.

She - or he - is the nurse who fought against futility and
went to sleep sobbing every night for two solid years in Da Nang.

He is the POW who went away one person and came back
another -or- didn't come back AT ALL.

He is the Quantico drill instructor that has never seen combat -
but has saved countless lives by turning slouchy, no-account
rednecks and gang members into Marines, and teaching them to
watch each other's backs.

He is the parade - riding Legionnaire who pins on his
ribbons and medals with a prosthetic hand.

He is the career quartermaster who watches the ribbons
and medals pass him by.

He is the three anonymous heroes in The Tomb Of The
Unknowns, whose presence at the Arlington National Cemetery
must forever preserve the memory of all the anonymous heroes
whose valor dies unrecognized with them on the battlefield or
in the ocean's sunless deep.

He is the old guy bagging groceries at the supermarket -
palsied now and aggravatingly slow - who helped liberate
a Nazi death camp and who wishes all day long that his
wife were still alive to hold him when the nightmares
come.

He is an ordinary and yet an extraordinary human being,
a person who offered some of his life's most vital years
in the service of his country, and who sacrificed his
ambitions so others would not have to sacrifice theirs.

He is a soldier and a savior and a sword against the
darkness, and he is nothing more than the finest, greatest
testimony on behalf of the finest, greatest nation ever known.

One fine man probably summarized it best...

"It is the soldier, not the reporter, Who has given us
freedom of the press.

It is the soldier, not the poet, Who has given us freedom
of speech.

It is the soldier, not the campus organizer, Who has given
us the freedom to demonstrate.

It is the soldier, Who salutes the flag, Who serves beneath
the flag, and whose coffin is draped by the flag, Who allows the protester to
burn the flag."

-- Father Dennis Edward O'Brien, USMC

nichols
01-28-2007, 02:32 AM
All of you are bring up some valid points....but I will not change my mind. My last 18 months was at MCI. DL courses held low priority during the summer.

At every parade I would watch the 03's in the marching companies do the art and remember how many times we were never at T/O in the fleet.

FWIW, I can drill a platoon and call some wickedly motivating cadence, but I Still HATE COD.

jcustis
01-28-2007, 05:50 AM
At every parade I would watch the 03's in the marching companies do the art and remember how many times we were never at T/O in the fleet.

So true, and yet every time a rifle is tossed in the air, it catches the imagination of a boy or girl, and they grow up to give something of themselves, and do great things as Marines.

So marct, how does all this tie into totemism? :D

marct
01-28-2007, 02:39 PM
Hi JC,


So true, and yet every time a rifle is tossed in the air, it catches the imagination of a boy or girl, and they grow up to give something of themselves, and do great things as Marines.

So marct, how does all this tie into totemism? :D

Well......

Totemism is really centered around "clans" and kinship group definitions. It sort of defines the relationships between clans, originally for biological reasons. Okay, most groups practice both exogamy (marriage outside of a specific smallish group) and endogamy (marriage within a larger cultural group) in their marriage practices. Clans, tribes, sibs, etc. all define exogamous groups and, in many cases, define the group where you should find your spouse.

I many cases, a clan is "founded" or "represented" by a totem who gives their name to the clan. Sometimes this is a mythical creature, sometimes a real creature (e.g. Bear, Elk, Whale, etc.), sometimes it's a god or goddess and sometimes it's what is called an "eponymous ancestor" - someone who is claimed to have started the lineage.

If you look at most regimental systems, they fall into that latter class. The Selous Scouts are a good example of this type, but most regiments that have a longish history would also be included. Another example would be the Roman Legions.

Now these ceremonials and traditions are designed to allow people to "experience" what other people who have served in that unit experience. It creates a bond through space and time, a bond of "shared experience" and "shared tradition". Anthropologists call this bond "communitas" - a bond of comonality that transcends time and space and creates a community between the living and the dead. Sound like mystical BS? Well, it mostly operates at a sub-conscious level to motivate people. Think of phrases like "In the best traditions of the Corps", etc.

Ceremonial for the sake of ceremony, however, is really an abberation. It can lock people into a single set of responses that, in a military unit, can get them all killed because they don't have the actual operational skills to survive in the modern battlefield. It's also highly attractive to a certain personality type that thrives on exact ordering and can't deal with "messy" reality.

The really interesting thing about the use of ritual and ceremonial is that it doesn't have to be "formal". Stan mentioned this a couple of times with people getting straightened out by their DIs, and we've had a few discussions about how youngsters learn from elders in totally "informal", but highly ritualized, settings.

I think JC hit it on the head when he said


It all just needs to be done in moderation, which is usually where the "operators" and the "garrison gurus" vehemently disagree.

Let me make one last comment about the use of ceremonials and then I'll shut up (for now :D).

I think JC raised a really important dichotomy between operators and garrison gurus. When troops are in garrison, ceremonial becomes more important, especially in peace time. When you have to go out in the field, it becomes less important, although some of it is still necessary to maintain the link to "why we are fighting" and to access and reinforce he "best traditions of the Corps".

Marc

marct
01-28-2007, 02:51 PM
Good Evening Marc !
Career justification and polishing is far too kind. Fortunately for those, they rarely attend the finals, when skills and abilities become reality. For somebody that never joined the U.S. Armed Forces, you seem to already grasp the often too obvious and better yet, eloquently pen it herein !

Regards, Stan

Hi Stan,

Maybe its the effect of having a degree in Sociology - the "science of the blindingly obvious" :D. Actually, most of what I wrote in that post came from discussions a long time ago with my Great Uncle who fought in most of the large battles of WW I. As a Canadian officer, he was treated as a barbarian by many of the British staff officers - a "colonial" whose troops were wholly expendable.

He also told me stories about how he and other junior officers would try to bring new recruits up to speed once the hit the trenches, and about a fair number of the "rituals" they would use to try and give these people a chance to live longer that a day or two. Needless to say, COD was only partially used, but they did try to maintain it when they were away from the front as a way of cushioning people from the horrors of the trenches.

Marc

Stan
01-28-2007, 08:56 PM
Good Evening Marc !
Oddly enough, I recently had a strange conversation (actually several emails) with a relatively young soldier perplexed about his boss. I intend to keep both names out of this.

It took me several hours to think over my response. Although I've been retired for nearly a decade, I have not forgotten nor neglected what I was taught and when said lessons were appropriate (in the form of advice), etc.

Yes, Marc, it's going to get more confusing, but you somehow already knew that :D

I only know one of the them, but I chose to remain somewhat neutral with my response. Rather, I decided to tell the other what our primary responsibilities are, be it Drill and Ceremony with accompanied boredom at post, or abroad with upheaval and hostility, where we are at times measured as individuals, but still very much team members.

I believe the other used the term "not this cat" in his response.

I will PM you and you decide. I am more than interested and value your opinion (go figure !).

Regards, Stan

marct
01-28-2007, 09:00 PM
Hi Stan,


Good Evening Marc !
Oddly enough, I recently had a strange conversation (actually several emails) with a relatively young soldier perplexed about his boss. I intend to keep both names out of this.

It took me several hours to think over my response. Although I've been retired for nearly a decade, I have not forgotten nor neglected what I was taught and when said lessons were appropriate (in the form of advice), etc.

Yes, Marc, it's going to get more confusing, but you somehow already knew that :D

I only know one of the them, but I chose to remain somewhat neutral with my response. Rather, I decided to tell the other what our primary responsibilities are, be it Drill and Ceremony with accompanied boredom at post, or abroad with upheaval and hostility, where we are at times measured as individuals, but still very much team members.

I believe the other used the term "not this cat" in his response.

I will PM you and you decide. I am more than interested and value your opinion (go figure !).

Regards, Stan


Damn, Stan! Keep his up and they may cal you back as an officer!:D Sure, I'll wait for you pm.

Marc

120mm
01-29-2007, 07:06 AM
As preparation for an OIF deployment, I recently spent a couple of weeks at 89th RRC's Pre-Command Course. 1/3d of the time there was spent on D&C, the rest on stateside, administrative bull####.

The entire 89th RRC, except for the headquarters, which dreamed up this course, has been deployed at least once for OIF. These guys are in "Condition White" permanently.

Steve Blair
01-30-2007, 03:36 PM
So true, and yet every time a rifle is tossed in the air, it catches the imagination of a boy or girl, and they grow up to give something of themselves, and do great things as Marines.

So marct, how does all this tie into totemism? :D

This all ties into both totemism (as Marc answered earlier) and the regimental ideals (as you mentioned/asked earlier, jcustis).

There was a time not so long ago when Army Regulations called for an evening parade every day except Saturday and Sunday, and there was a full-dress inspection Sunday. Part of the reason for this was roll call and the reading (called "publishing" in those days) of orders for the coming day, but it was also intended to give soldiers a sense of belonging to something greater than themselves. This was never specifically said, but if you read the recollections of both officers and enlisted men from the period this sense comes through strongly.

As the Army drifted away from the regimental system, I believe the meaning of D&C was lost as well. It's hard to form pride when you're only going to be with this bunch of bozos for a year or so...two if you're lucky. And how do you feel pride for your unit when it was mechanized infantry yesterday but now through the grace of some nitwit in higher-land it's now armor?

I would also say that the career justification phase is a direct legacy of World War II and raised to an art form in Vietnam. One of the legacies of Marshall and Eisenhower, raised to a fine pitch by business school grads in the 1950s and '60s, this mindset has done great damage.

kwillcox
02-07-2007, 01:34 PM
COD should have its cadence in elementary arabic or farsi. Every soldier should know 500 emergency words in both. Every soldier should learn how to sit sharpsooter still for six hours before shooting a target. Every soldier should compete on watching video monitors from stationary or moving/robotic monitors for suspicious activity. Those are good drills.

Every command should trade in every single piece of ornamental stuff, band instruments, budget for drill, and spend the money on the best protection from mines or ambushes, or top equiment in non-painful lie detectors, thermal scans, MRI machines, voice stress. Every Iraqi neighborhood should expect 5% of its people to be rounded up every day, and given simple lie detector tests - one question - which of your neighbors is an insurgent. Then release them, round up the insurgents, send them to (Greenland, Alaska, the Falklands) someplace cold and wet, and give them jobs.

That is what I would do if I were in Iraq.

nichols
02-07-2007, 02:00 PM
COD should have its cadence in elementary arabic or farsi. Every soldier should know 500 emergency words in both. Every soldier should learn how to sit sharpsooter still for six hours before shooting a target. Every soldier should compete on watching video monitors from stationary or moving/robotic monitors for suspicious activity. Those are good drills.

We are focusing on tactical language, not close order drill at the current time.

SGTMILLS
02-09-2007, 03:46 PM
Ok, I am not concerned at all with the number of people in a band, a sporting team, recruiters, etc, etc. that are exempt from combat. That is their profession, and if that is what the military hired them for, why would we NEED them on the battlefield? We had the 101st band come to Tikrit, and it was nice, but once they did their thing, they packed up and moved on. We have people on bases right now who have one task...pulling over speeders. seriously, traffic cops on FOB/ COB's. THOSE are the ones i have a problem with, not the band geeks. the people with practical combat training (I.E. security forces from the air force) NOT doing combat patrols. serious mis-allocation of time, expense, and talent.

voodoo6
02-18-2007, 04:22 PM
As a civilian outsider and contractor, I saw alot of Field grade officers who were more concerned with being politically correct and/or punching their ticket to get promoted rather than being a warrior. Most MAJ's, COL's and GEN's are merely political animals and have lost their warrior ethos. They are closed minded and have had their hands tied by DOD policy. There is no ability to modify their tactics without approval from "on high"...very similar to Hitler controlling Panzer movement or Johnson guiding the bombing in North VN. Let the boots on the ground fight the war with realistic rules of engagement. Just my $0.02.

SWJED
02-18-2007, 05:42 PM
As an insider and outsider - active, reserve, government and contractor - I cannot agree with the sweeping categorization that most MAJ's, COL's and GEN's are merely political animals and have lost their warrior ethos. In fact, I take exception to that statement. Yes, we all have our stories and experiences related to those who are not our best and brightest. Still, my experience is that amongst the captain through lieutenant colonel rank we have a treasure trove of talent and professionalism. We also have a stable of colonels and above of the same mettle. For every Franks we got - we had a Zinni... I'd feel more comfortable with your statement if I knew a bit more of the situation (s) that led you to your conclusion.

120mm
02-18-2007, 07:23 PM
I know that every time I hear the phrase "warrior ethos" I want to puke and claw out my eyes.

I'm the kind of guy who is going to die early of being a "type A" personality. I mean, I really, really love fighting. I have since I was a little kid. It has hamstrung both my military and my civilian career(s). So when a guy with a $40 haircut and manicured nails starts talking about "warrior ethos" my blood pressure starts to spike. (I'm not talking about anyone in particular, just generalizing.)

But... having said that, we have some really, really smart killers out there wearing O-3 through O-10 rank whom I respect and am in awe of. Does the Army promotion system have some issues? Yes. But the things we call "bull####" (and are more the exception than the rule) in the military are multiplied 1000-fold in the civilian "leadership" world.

Beowulf
02-19-2007, 05:14 PM
Does someone have the original article? I can only find things like this:
http://www.keepmedia.com/pubs/ColumbiaState/2006/08/25/1775741?extID=10037&oliID=229

V/R

SGTMILLS
02-25-2007, 04:12 AM
I know that every time I hear the phrase "warrior ethos" I want to puke and claw out my eyes.

I'm the kind of guy who is going to die early of being a "type A" personality. I mean, I really, really love fighting. I have since I was a little kid. It has hamstrung both my military and my civilian career(s). So when a guy with a $40 haircut and manicured nails starts talking about "warrior ethos" my blood pressure starts to spike. (I'm not talking about anyone in particular, just generalizing.)

But... having said that, we have some really, really smart killers out there wearing O-3 through O-10 rank whom I respect and am in awe of. Does the Army promotion system have some issues? Yes. But the things we call "bull####" (and are more the exception than the rule) in the military are multiplied 1000-fold in the civilian "leadership" world.

Ok, so "warrior ethos" seems to be a buzz word used by, "a guy with a $40 haircut and manicured nails" it also is being pushed by drill sgts in basic and AIT. the newbies coming fresh out of school are being trained to live by this. The unit that replaced us in Tikrit had a 35-40% population of E-1 - E-3's. They were gung-ho, without any real-world experience. Still, they had the mission in their hearts, and good leadership. THAT above all else, is what matters. Those kids will grow to understand the real meaning of "warrior ethos"
I have met some really good officers, aaand some NOT SO good ones. just like with any work force, good leaders are made, not born.

120mm
02-25-2007, 07:36 AM
Ok, so "warrior ethos" seems to be a buzz word used by, "a guy with a $40 haircut and manicured nails" it also is being pushed by drill sgts in basic and AIT. the newbies coming fresh out of school are being trained to live by this. The unit that replaced us in Tikrit had a 35-40% population of E-1 - E-3's. They were gung-ho, without any real-world experience. Still, they had the mission in their hearts, and good leadership. THAT above all else, is what matters. Those kids will grow to understand the real meaning of "warrior ethos"
I have met some really good officers, aaand some NOT SO good ones. just like with any work force, good leaders are made, not born.

I have a quote in the back of my head that is, I think, from Vegetius:

"'Warriors' are meat on the table for 'Soldiers' with discipline."

I would also submit that one builds "Strategic Corporals" and wins "Small Wars" with the head, not the heart. I've been in the Army long enough and have studied enough history to distrust buzz-words and the people who use them. What I want in a soldier is someone who will tell me "Sir, are you sure you want me to do this?" when appropriate, yet do the "hard things" when necessary, and to have the intelligence and presence of mind to know the difference. "Warriors" have a certain utility, but in the pre-buzz-word sense of the word, a "warrior" has limited utility when the center of gravity is Humanitarian Aid, for instance.

Stan
02-25-2007, 02:33 PM
I have a quote in the back of my head that is, I think, from Vegetius:

Yes, he was good at quoting in the 4th Century, but would he make it in today's reality ?

http://en.allexperts.com/e/v/ve/vegetius.htm

Publius Flavius Vegetius Renatus was a celebrated military writer of the 4th century. Nothing is known of his life, station and military experience.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vegetius

In particular he stresses the high standard of the recruits and the excellence of the training and the officer corps. In reality, Vegetius probably describes an ideal rather than the reality. The Army of the early Empire was a formidable fighting force but it probably was not in its entirety quite as good as Vegetius describes.

Being that I have worked Humanitarian Aid both as active duty and civilian for now 17 years, I'm not sure Vegetius could have handled it. A tad too linear for today.

Bill Moore
02-25-2007, 05:01 PM
Concur wholeheartedly we need to make an effort to purge the military of foolish, empty buzz words and sayings that have been forced upon the masses like Maoist or Stalinist propaganda. Yes the masses will utter them, but not from the heart. While we may disagree on the ability to do so, I think we all agree we need to strive to develop strategic corporals, and this approach doesn't work. You see the political czars (the officers) and their henchmen (the SGMs) stand in front of the formations echoing their empty slogans with false grins on their faces, when everyone knows they have more productive things to do. This falls under the category of parading, all show, but no go. You measure motivation not with uh-ahs (which no one in Special Forces ever wants to hear, it is like being exposed to a Muster agent), but with physcial training tests, skill tests, number of AWOLs, etc. This type of motivation mean anything, yet we mindlessly pursue it just because we always have.

jonSlack
02-25-2007, 11:47 PM
"Concur wholeheartedly we need to make an effort to purge the military of foolish, empty buzz words and sayings that have been forced upon the masses like Maoist or Stalinist propaganda."

Along with the dog tag accessories that go with them.

Charlie 14
05-29-2007, 04:46 PM
Marc,
I like your attitude, you would have made a great NCO, albeit waaay tooo intelligent for the job :cool:



You are indeed very correct, COD were and probably still are for basic training, a means of building a sense of spirit and team work. Had to, the Drill would punish all the rest for one small idiot's mistake. You would later work out the problems at night :eek:

I also like Tom's approach. But then, he thought I worked wonders at times. However, I didn't get their on my own, I also had a drill who set me straight and emphasized in no small way, how important this would later become.

I'll let Tom decide if my Drill "dun good".

Regards, Stan

Ahem...So just how borderline dull/normal do you prefer your NCO's?

And yes, COD is essential for turning 120 individuals who joined an Army of One (Thank God they ditched that little promotional device) into something resembling troopers, much like confidence courses, fearing-then-hating-then-loving drills, and getting the fat kid over the wall on the obstacle course, or any other team building activity is in basic training...

By the time you get done their eyeballs should snap when they do, "Eyes right."

And one of the few institutions in this country (USA) with traditions is the armed forces. Traditions require ceremony, but the less dog and pony shows, and mindless chicken#### regs, the better, at least as far as anyone who has cleared AIT goes. There are better things to do.

FascistLibertarian
05-29-2007, 08:40 PM
This reminds me of that jerk in Catch-22 who gets everyone to drill all the time. And then they make him in charge of everyone in Italy. :D

Charlie 14
05-29-2007, 10:08 PM
This reminds me of that jerk in Catch-22 who gets everyone to drill all the time. And then they make him in charge of everyone in Italy. :D

Heh, heh...Well, OK, had to bring that up didn't you...

Lieutenant Scheisskopf longed desperately to win parades and sat up half the night working on it while his wife waited amorously for him in bed thumbing through Krafft-Ebing to her favorite passages. He read books on marching. He manipulated boxes of chocolate until they melted in his hands and then maneuvered in ranks of twelve a set of plastic cowboys he had bought from a mail-order house under an assumed name and kept locked away from everyone's eyes during the day. Leonardo's exercises in anatomy proved indispensable. One evening he felt the need for a live model and directed his wife to march around the room.
"Naked?" she asked hopefully.

Lieutenant Scheisskopf smacked his hands over his eyes in exasperation. It was the despair of Lieutenant Scheisskopf's life to be chained to a woman who was incapable of looking beyond her own dirty, sexual desires to the titanic struggles for the unattainable in which noble man could become heroically engaged.

"Why don't you ever whip me?" she pouted one night.

120mm
05-30-2007, 04:29 AM
Ok, so "warrior ethos" seems to be a buzz word used by, "a guy with a $40 haircut and manicured nails" it also is being pushed by drill sgts in basic and AIT. the newbies coming fresh out of school are being trained to live by this. The unit that replaced us in Tikrit had a 35-40% population of E-1 - E-3's. They were gung-ho, without any real-world experience. Still, they had the mission in their hearts, and good leadership. THAT above all else, is what matters. Those kids will grow to understand the real meaning of "warrior ethos"
I have met some really good officers, aaand some NOT SO good ones. just like with any work force, good leaders are made, not born.

I know it's a necro-post, but one thing has bothered me about this, but I let it drop. Until now.

The problem with teaching "everyone" about the "warrior ethos" and using it as a buzz-words, is that there are damned few people out there who are really warriors. The rest are just Joes doing a Job.

You cannot teach someone to be a warrior; they either are or they are not.

Trust me. I'm a warrior. I know other warriors when I see them. Not being a "warrior" is not a handicap. In fact, being a warrior is an incredible handicap in life. You are constantly riding to the sound of the guns, and fighting the good fight, even when it is not the smart fight. Then, when you are inevitably discarded because you don't "fit in" with all the normal human beings, you get to grow older and bitter. And you feel useless to society.

Frankly, I take the "warrior ethos" push by the Army as an insult. And alternatively, incredibly funny. The Army is no place for "warriors". They are much too regimented and closed-minded for "real" warriors to truly thrive.

FascistLibertarian
05-30-2007, 11:33 AM
You cannot teach someone to be a warrior; they either are or they are not.
The Spartans and the Japanese did a pretty good job.
Of course they started early.

Charlie 14
05-30-2007, 12:21 PM
I know it's a necro-post, but one thing has bothered me about this, but I let it drop. Until now.

The problem with teaching "everyone" about the "warrior ethos" and using it as a buzz-words, is that there are damned few people out there who are really warriors. The rest are just Joes doing a Job.

You cannot teach someone to be a warrior; they either are or they are not.

Trust me. I'm a warrior. I know other warriors when I see them. Not being a "warrior" is not a handicap. In fact, being a warrior is an incredible handicap in life. You are constantly riding to the sound of the guns, and fighting the good fight, even when it is not the smart fight. Then, when you are inevitably discarded because you don't "fit in" with all the normal human beings, you get to grow older and bitter. And you feel useless to society.

Frankly, I take the "warrior ethos" push by the Army as an insult. And alternatively, incredibly funny. The Army is no place for "warriors". They are much too regimented and closed-minded for "real" warriors to truly thrive.

I was hoping 120mm might expand on that last statement a little bit.

nichols
05-30-2007, 03:08 PM
Newest buzz word is battlefield ethics.

That generated a lot of time during last week's meeting at Pendleton.

TRADOC's saying the same thing.

nichols
05-30-2007, 03:14 PM
I was hoping 120mm might expand on that last statement a little bit.

My guess would be along these lines:

tact kills the warrior...
concerns about promotion kills the warrior......
traditional command and control kills the warrior......
centralized command and control kills the warrior......

Charlie 14
05-30-2007, 03:28 PM
My guess would be along these lines:

tact kills the warrior...
concerns about promotion kills the warrior......
traditional command and control kills the warrior......
centralized command and control kills the warrior......

Well, there have been distictions made between garrison troops and field troopers since long before any of us trod this Earth, but I'm left wondering if the Army isn't the place for "warriors", where is?

I mean is this setting up the traditional pissing match between the Army and the Corps? That's a pretty blanket statement...So where is warrior Valhalla? Blackwater?

nichols
05-30-2007, 03:39 PM
Charlie,

I think you may be taking this incorrectly.

I don't think there are any pissing contests in this forum between Army and Marines.

120mm is Army.

The guess that I took about tact, promotion, and C2 isn't service specific.

Charlie 14
05-30-2007, 03:41 PM
Charlie,

I think you may be taking this incorrectly.

I don't think there are any pissing contests in this forum between Army and Marines.

120mm is Army.

The guess that I took about tact, promotion, and C2 isn't service specific.

Oh, and let me be clear, I'm not trying to start anything...I can completely understand frustration with nonsensical orders and edicts from on high that seem to defy field reality, but to say, "The Army is no place for "warriors". They are much too regimented and closed-minded for "real" warriors to truly thrive," kind of begs the question...

I'm just trying to get smarter here, that statement covers a lot of ground...

nichols
05-30-2007, 03:52 PM
I'm just trying to get smarter here, that statement covers a lot of ground...

Charlie, keep in mind I was posting a guess, nonsensical orders and edicts from on high that seem to defy field reality are not service or work specific.

120mm lives in the Graf/Vilseck/7th CATC area I think. He is probably on his way home from work, he'll probably expand on that statement when he has time to get back on line.

Charlie 14
05-30-2007, 04:00 PM
Charlie, keep in mind I was posting a guess, nonsensical orders and edicts from on high that seem to defy field reality are not service or work specific.

120mm lives in the Graf/Vilseck/7th CATC area I think. He is probably on his way home from work, he'll probably expand on that statement when he has time to get back on line.

I'd say roger that, but I'll steer clear of the buzzwords, and just say I comprehend what you are saying...I'm sure he didn't mean the entire Army, I'll check my headspace and timing in the interim...

nichols
05-30-2007, 04:04 PM
Charlie,

Solid copy, anyways welcome aboard.:)

Charlie 14
05-31-2007, 04:08 PM
Charlie,

Solid copy, anyways welcome aboard.:)

Well thank you, sir, for that welcome, I'll work on my entry techniques. I could have done that a little better. I understand what 120mm is getting at, I think, I saw something on the tube about today's Army BCT and I thought it was a bit theatrical, the whole "warrior ethos" deal, but hey, if it works...I'm in no position to know today, some of these active duty folks are.

I don't want to get too far afield here, I just thought a blanket statement covering the entire Army, well...It just had me looking for a clarification...

sullygoarmy
05-31-2007, 07:39 PM
Tom- couldn't agree with you more. Everytime I see the "Soldier Show" come to a post, I keep thinking there's about a platoon of troops not in the fight. Same goes with alot of the other "morale" building tools out there like the rifle team, silent order drill team, etc.

After four years of nearly daily drill and ceremony at West Point, I'll be the first to say how much I hate it and how useless I think it is other than for important ceremonies. Jon hit it on the head. What ends up happening is valuable combat training gets put on hold to rehearse and "Pass and Review" for some change of command. Leaders go nuts with rehearsals and visions of Napoleanic maneuvers for what should be a simple ceremony. When I changed company commands, I refused to have any high flutin' ceremonies that would waste soldiers time. We did a quick rehearsal about a hour prior to the ceremonies, no marching, and that was it.

I think this goes along the lines of building a more practical army. Same with the old PT standards of the "turn and bounce" and all that other eight count PT exercises I hated as a PL. Most units have gotten smarter and now use more practical PT models like crossfit to get soldiers into good combat shape, not PT test shape. It all comes down to how we think. Do we want to spend hours teaching our infantrymen how to conduct a "Right Wheel" on the parade field, or how to breach and clear a room with bad guys in it?

Marc-As a piper, I couldn't agree with you more reference sending in the combat pipers. I brought my pipes to Iraq in 2004 and our Iraqi battalion HATED the things. I used to stand out on the roof of our barracks on a "Man-love Thursday" and play just to piss them off a little bit! Nothing better than some pipes blasting out Black bear to get your blood boiling! Send in the Pipers!!!

Charlie 14
05-31-2007, 07:43 PM
Tom- couldn't agree with you more. Everytime I see the "Soldier Show" come to a post, I keep thinking there's about a platoon of troops not in the fight. Same goes with alot of the other "morale" building tools out there like the rifle team, silent order drill team, etc.

After four years of nearly daily drill and ceremony at West Point, I'll be the first to say how much I hate it and how useless I think it is other than for important ceremonies. Jon hit it on the head. What ends up happening is valuable combat training gets put on hold to rehearse and "Pass and Review" for some change of command. Leaders go nuts with rehearsals and visions of Napoleanic maneuvers for what should be a simple ceremony. When I changed company commands, I refused to have any high flutin' ceremonies that would waste soldiers time. We did a quick rehearsal about a hour prior to the ceremonies, no marching, and that was it.

I think this goes along the lines of building a more practical army. Same with the old PT standards of the "turn and bounce" and all that other eight count PT exercises I hated as a PL. Most units have gotten smarter and now use more practical PT models like crossfit to get soldiers into good combat shape, not PT test shape. It all comes down to how we think. Do we want to spend hours teaching our infantrymen how to conduct a "Right Wheel" on the parade field, or how to breach and clear a room with bad guys in it?

Marc-As a piper, I couldn't agree with you more reference sending in the combat pipers. I brought my pipes to Iraq in 2004 and our Iraqi battalion HATED the things. I used to stand out on the roof of our barracks on a "Man-love Thursday" and play just to piss them off a little bit! Nothing better than some pipes blasting out Black bear to get your blood boiling! Send in the Pipers!!!

I'll buy that, but while we're getting back to basics, what's with all the simulators? I'm amazed watching Holder Complex in motion these days with nice clean simulators training armor crewmen to presumably do armor crewmen tasks in an environment that looks, well, remarkably nice...

What happened to diesel fuel, ammo, and field time? Do they have a tank recovery simulator too? Maybe they could make a close order drill simulator...

Train like you're going to fight...

Edited to add: Please forgive my geezing...

120mm
06-01-2007, 04:35 AM
Charlie -

Nichols accurately describes what I mean. If I may add, "warriors" cannot turn off being a warrior, by and large. If they could, they wouldn't "be" warriors, they would be acting like one. And a warrior in a garrison environment is very similar to a tiger in a cage. Just pacing and pacing, thinking about eating the little kids with the balloons. ;)

As far as "the Army is no place for warriors" being a blanket statement, I've met as many, if not more "accountants at heart" in the combat organizations I've been a part of, as in CS and CSS units. Certain organizations are better homes for warriors than others, but the Army is a large bureaucratic organization, and large bureacratic organizations are antithetical to "warriors."

The bottom line is we really don't want an Army of warriors. First, I suggest they are rarer than one might think. Second, they tend to fight, whether you want them to or not. Soldiers, with discipline and a fundamental understanding of mission are much more useful, especially in the "Small Wars" venue.

The internet is a very bad place for your typical "warrior". They tend to wander from place to place, picking fights, sometimes without even knowing it.:D

BTW - I am Army, but I think the Marine Corps rocks. If they were less picky about back injuries, I woulda been one!

Charlie 14
06-01-2007, 07:19 PM
Charlie -

Nichols accurately describes what I mean. If I may add, "warriors" cannot turn off being a warrior, by and large. If they could, they wouldn't "be" warriors, they would be acting like one. And a warrior in a garrison environment is very similar to a tiger in a cage. Just pacing and pacing, thinking about eating the little kids with the balloons. ;)

As far as "the Army is no place for warriors" being a blanket statement, I've met as many, if not more "accountants at heart" in the combat organizations I've been a part of, as in CS and CSS units. Certain organizations are better homes for warriors than others, but the Army is a large bureaucratic organization, and large bureacratic organizations are antithetical to "warriors."

The bottom line is we really don't want an Army of warriors. First, I suggest they are rarer than one might think. Second, they tend to fight, whether you want them to or not. Soldiers, with discipline and a fundamental understanding of mission are much more useful, especially in the "Small Wars" venue.

The internet is a very bad place for your typical "warrior". They tend to wander from place to place, picking fights, sometimes without even knowing it.:D

BTW - I am Army, but I think the Marine Corps rocks. If they were less picky about back injuries, I woulda been one!

Ahhhhh, OK, I figured we were closer on this than I was led to believe by that blanket statement. You know, maybe Nichols is onto something when he talks about, "Buzzwords," and their inhernet uselessness. "Warriors" does conjure up images of undisciplined louts with bad tattoos, and maybe a Metallica ticket stub in their wallets.

Howabout this, the Army should be a good place for motivated, intelligent, highly proficient, and disciplined young men that are part of a family (green, standard-issue type) to which they are fiercely loyal, whether that family be a team, a squad, a platoon, a crew, or whatever, and put family and mission above all else, including their less than desirable "warrior" impluses at times...

In the perfect world, that wouldn't be a bad start. Make them tri-lingual, with the wordly experience of a well traveled 50 year old in a 19 year old body, and we can take the world. But I'm willing to tweak it. So how does one fix the Big Green Machine to promote those qualities at the expense of the, "accountants"? How do we buy more smart teeth and less tail? How do you recruit and train intelligent, tenacious, fighters -- to include small war fighters where listening, communicating, and thinking takes precedence over trigger pulling at times? And I hear what you're saying, or I think I do, you're saying the "corporation" doesn't want them.

That's not a bottom up problem, that's a top down problem. Let's have some fun, how would you rebuild it so you could make it work?

I hate it when I ask questions I can't answer. I bet a lot of guys here would have an idea or two though. What's the mission? What do you need to do it?

Rifleman
06-01-2007, 08:51 PM
Tom- couldn't agree with you more. Everytime I see the "Soldier Show" come to a post, I keep thinking there's about a platoon of troops not in the fight. Same goes with alot of the other "morale" building tools out there like the rifle team, silent order drill team, etc.

Overall I think you bring out some good points but I respectfully disagree about rifle teams.

Some of the best combat riflemen this country has ever produced have been forged on the anvil of competitive shooting. Competitive shooting is an invaluable discipline even if the training and competition are not combat specific. The training reinforces the basics of marksmanship and the competition requires disciplined shooting under stress. These are always good things.

Gunnery Sergeant Hathcock is perhaps the best known example of a competitive rifleman who was a stunning success in combat. Here are examples of some others:

http://www.worldwar1.com/dbc/woodfill.htm

http://hometown.aol.com/lds1952/index.html

May rifle teams flourish long after dog and pony shows are a dim memory!

Charlie 14
06-01-2007, 09:40 PM
Overall I think you bring out some good points but I respectfully disagree about rifle teams.

Some of the best combat riflemen this country has ever produced have been forged on the anvil of competitive shooting. Competitive shooting is an invaluable discipline even if the training and competition are not combat specific. The training reinforces the basics of marksmanship and the competition requires disciplined shooting under stress. These are always good things.

Gunnery Sergeant Hathcock is perhaps the best known example of a competitive rifleman who was a stunning success in combat. Here are examples of some others:

http://www.worldwar1.com/dbc/woodfill.htm

http://hometown.aol.com/lds1952/index.html

May rifle teams flourish long after dog and pony shows are a dim memory!

And on that note, DoD ought to buy the mailing lists of every department of natural resources in this nation and target junior hunters when they reach 17...Show me a kid who is comfortable in the woods and can hit a squirrel in the head with a .22 at 75 yards with open sights and I'll show you a newly minted E-1 with potential...Any marksmanship matters. How in the world can the Army promote themselves as the pre-emminent ground force in this nation and not field a team?

Why do the Thunderbirds and Blue Angels exist? They have young kids watching and they light a dream, they evoke pride...Last time I checked this was an all volunteer force...You need volunteers, talented volunteers are even better.

Rifleman
06-01-2007, 11:40 PM
Good point, and as an Appalachian boy I can relate.

Perhaps it would be more accurate to say that some of the best combat riflemen this country has ever produced have been forged on the anvil of squirrel hunting, then refined and polished by formal practice and competition shooting. ;)

RTK
06-02-2007, 03:14 AM
I'll buy that, but while we're getting back to basics, what's with all the simulators? I'm amazed watching Holder Complex in motion these days with nice clean simulators training armor crewmen to presumably do armor crewmen tasks in an environment that looks, well, remarkably nice...

What happened to diesel fuel, ammo, and field time? Do they have a tank recovery simulator too? Maybe they could make a close order drill simulator...

Train like you're going to fight...

Edited to add: Please forgive my geezing...

Charlie 14,

Sounds like you're at Knox. Stop by CP37 off HWY 60 when we have the LTs in Gauntlet. Especially if it's raining. It dirty as hell, just the way Army training should be. EPA evens stops out to fine us every once in a while. It's awesome. :D

Any given week we have a Troop's worth of LTs learning their trade. Out of about 90 days in BOLC III they spend about a third of it in the field. On real equipment. They get 5 days in CCTT.

Charlie 14
06-02-2007, 11:56 AM
Charlie 14,

Sounds like you're at Knox. Stop by CP37 off HWY 60 when we have the LTs in Gauntlet. Especially if it's raining. It dirty as hell, just the way Army training should be. EPA evens stops out to fine us every once in a while. It's awesome. :D

Any given week we have a Troop's worth of LTs learning their trade. Out of about 90 days in BOLC III they spend about a third of it in the field. On real equipment. They get 5 days in CCTT.

Things like this help me sleep better at night...I would love to stop by but the last time I saw Knox up close and personal was in 1983. I was a TC in C-1-1, I got diverted on my way to the 2/6th Cav, but that's another story, they had some new tank everybody was jazzed about, XM something or another...I have a good friend that retired down there, Dennis Arnold, one outstanding NCO, I should go down and see him.

This is a heck of a board, the knowledge and the backgrounds that people bring to the table are impressive. I think I'll talk less and learn more, I just had to chime in on that Army-warrior deal, no matter where you're coming from it seems like today's troopers are doing a heck of a job.

Sargent
06-03-2007, 02:28 AM
I'm all in favor of professional competence, of training that is useful to the mission at hand, and especially of not wasting people's time.

That being said, I would argue in favor of traditions and rituals. There probably needs to be a proper balance achieved in their use, but that is the case with anything.

In a defense establishment run amok with technology as the answer to everything in war, these intangibles are a brake. As long as we remember that wars are not won by the most advanced gadgets and widgets, by he who throws the most money at the problem, we stand half a chance of succeeding at the endeavor that is war. Such things as tradition and ritual remind us that there is more to war than technology, that there is an art to the craft.

How many of you have attended the funeral of a service member killed in the line of duty recently? Do I need to say more?

At the end of the day, human beings are not robots. They do not perform well simply because they practice, or they are competent. They do not willingly sacrifice their lives because they are good professionals.

Perhaps I am biased from more than a decade of close observation of the Marine Corps and Marines. That being said, I believe I am not far off the mark in positing that it is an organization that succeeds based on more than mere competence.

Today my husband had to do something, had to see something that nobody ever should. The sort of thing that can break a person's spirit, that can make a person doubt everything he is doing. When he got back to his room, when he needed something to reassure himself of what he was doing, he popped in the dvd of the recent PBS program, "The Marines," that I had sent to him.* This is what he wrote:

"After today I had to watch the Marines video again. I know that the particularities and gritty details of it suck, but I still do really believe in the organization. I couldn't keep going everyday if I didn't."

You don't get to that point on training alone. It requires something more, something akin to faith. Faith itself is an intangible. And it is built on a foundation of other intangibles, like rituals and traditions.

Let us have enough training, _and_ enough parading.


=============
*Aside from the entertainment value for him and his team, I thought it might come in handy in their training mission. This use had never occurred to me.

Ski
06-03-2007, 12:09 PM
Well said, Sergeant, well said indeed.

Traditions and ritual are the base of military service. They are there for a reason.

I am the last person in the world who enjoys any type of drill and ceremony, but it's vital, especially in the first stages of recruit training. I despise parades, but understand their worth as a matter of espirit de corps. They should be extremely limited in their scope however.

One thing I think needs to be focused on in the military of the 21st Century for all service is the development of self disclipline, rather than what I call "pressured discipline." I need to expand my thoughts on this before posting any further...

nichols
06-04-2007, 04:19 AM
I'll buy that, but while we're getting back to basics, what's with all the simulators?

What happened to diesel fuel, ammo, and field time? Do they have a tank recovery simulator too? Maybe they could make a close order drill simulator...

Train like you're going to fight...

Charlie,

Sorry about the delay in giving my 2 cents on the above.

Simulations can not replace field time. From a training perspective they can make field time much better. Usually towards the end of training the unit is finally working like a well oiled machine. Analytical and intuitive decision-making is at it's best because they have had the past couple of days in the field to learn the tactical problem that is being presented. Up until now Infantry Simulations have been dealing with intuitive/recognitional type decision-making training.

Current simulations that are being fielded beginning in August give the end user the ability to import geo-specific terrain. The models are being accurately created in the sim; you will run out of gas, ammo, and SDZ will have an effect in regards to direct and indirect fires. A day or so of sim work before you take your unit into the field will give you the opportunity to work out C2 issues within your unit and work the tactical problem.

Near term, should be about 12-18 months from now you will be able to pull in geo-specific culture & language. The goal is to do mission rehearsal.

The services are starting to put a lot of funding, effort, and thought into Ground Combat Arms type simulations.

Just throwing this out there hoping that you'll keep an open mind until you've seen the results of the simulation training. :)

120mm
06-04-2007, 06:36 AM
I'll chime in on the value of simulators. Things like safety, training distractors associated with running a life fire range and ammo forecasting/ordering/cost make "range day" a pretty intense event. Simulators like the EST 2000, where you can put a squad online and shoot a large variety of scenarios using virtual ammunition can really steepen the learning curve in combat shooting.

In an earlier thread, http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/showthread.php?t=2687 I remarked how much I learned by spending an afternoon shooting in the EST 2000 simulator, and for things like shooting aerial moving targets, or moving targets at all, there is really no replacement for a good simulation.

I build and shoot AR15s as a hobby; I can think of no place where I can shoot my AR at an aerial target. I mean, the bullet has to go somewhere, and not having to worry about where your "misses" go allows you to press the envelope on how to get "hits."

OBTW, I also coach 3P smallbore, and I don't think it's a coincidence that our best shooters make good soldiers. The discipline-thing is key to both.

sullygoarmy
06-05-2007, 01:41 PM
Charlie 14, I'll echo what RTK said. As an armor company commander in Germany, we spent more time in the field than we ever did in simulators. Granted, UCOFT (unit conduct of fire trainer) is the essential gunnery trainer for gunner/TC combinations. CCTT is a fantastic training tool as well for company teams. Where else in Germany could I run my tank company through desert scenarios (this was back in 00-01, pre OIF) so they are familiar with fighting in desert terrain, and not just German woodlands. We had the capability to really hone technical skills in these simulators...but they are just that simulators.

I'd guess we spent a day in the field for every hour of sim time we went through. That was one of the big advantages being stationed in Vilseck vice a Baumholder or Schweinfurt. Grafenwoehr was right out the back gate so we had access to maneuver areas any time we rolled the tanks. Hohenfels, although small and the "Minor league" of CTCs still provided us with some of the best maneuver training possibe. We also went to some old Russian training areas in Czech which were great training, but ecological disaster areas.

I think striking a balance between field and sim training is a vital combat multiplier. There are just some experiences you can't physically or fiscally do without a simulator (or a court martial) but then you cannot replace the essential lessons of field time.

As for the rifle team comment, I have yet to have a single one of my infantry or armor soldiers benefit from the existance of rifle teams. Doesn't mean they aren't worthwhile in some PA manor...I just think there are better places for these competitive shooter to be...like training our units prior to going into combat. Do these rifle teams step away from their competitions and high speed gear to train joe in 3-505 PIR? If you want to prove their worth to me, don't bother showing me links to two or three historical great shooters. Show me a link where members of the Army Rifle Team are going TDY to units and teaching our young soldiers how to be better shooters, especially in combat environments not to olympic try outs, and shooting match trips.

nichols
06-05-2007, 02:15 PM
Czech which were great training, but ecological disaster areas. .

Hey, only good comments about Czech Republic allowed, there are no disasters, just good beer.:D

I have fond memories of 7th CATC.


As for the rifle team comment, I have yet to have a single one of my infantry or armor soldiers benefit from the existance of rifle teams.

You have to look at it from a Marine perspective (cheap). I used to have our sniper platoon participate in the Far East Competition on an annual basis. A lot of 5.56mm & 9mm ammo down range without taking out of our annual ammo allotment.:wry:

sullygoarmy
06-05-2007, 07:38 PM
Nichols,
Amen!! Nothing but great things to say about Czech and Prague. The training area was just dilapidated by the Russians but we ended up pouring money into the place. It was great training, especially after you've done 9 or 10 rotations through Hohenfels...you kind of get a feel for the place and need some new ground to stomp on.

I think your idea with using the sniper platoon for competitions. If we could merge the rifle/pistol team experts with the tactical experts, I think it would be a win win. The rifle team gets constant experience and some real world two way live fire range time and the troops get the benefits of experienced "technical" shooters.

Rifleman
06-07-2007, 09:30 PM
If you want to prove their worth to me, don't bother showing me links to two or three historical great shooters. Show me a link where members of the Army Rifle Team are going TDY to units and teaching our young soldiers how to be better shooters, especially in combat environments not to olympic try outs, and shooting match trips.

Well, that's fair. I don't know how common it is but I do know that it's been done with great results.

9th Infantry Division commander MG Julian J. Ewell did just that in 1968. He brought AMTU instructors from Ft. Benning to Vietnam to train 9th Division snipers. Major Willis J. Powell commanded the instructor staff.

From Inside the Crosshairs by Michael Lee Lanning:

"Powell, a native of Guthrie, Oklahoma, had more than twenty years in the army and had advanced to the rank of master sergeant before attending officer candidate school. Along with the experience of years of competitive shooting at the national and international level, Powell had served a previous tour in Vietnam in 1963 and 1964 as an adviser to the ARVN."

I reiterate that I don't know how common this has been.

Rifleman
06-08-2007, 01:24 AM
Rifle teams and ceremonies aside, here's a better question. ;)

Is it necessary or benificial for West Point to have a football team? :eek: I mean all that time spent practicing for that BS Army/Navy game could be better spent shooting, couldn't it? :D

Honest, I was not the young paratrooper who once yelled "Beat Army!" from a second floor window of the Charlie Company barracks in Vicenza when a zealous Hudson High graduate was walking.....:p

120mm
06-08-2007, 04:29 AM
Actually, dropping football at West Point is overdue, imo. And not because it is an expensive distraction from training, either. It is the shabby way they treat the football players.

Joe Lineman is recruited and encouraged to be 300 pounds. Then, he is persecuted for being overweight. Sometimes, even in the same breath. This kind of institutional two-faced, dishonest "crap" then becomes an object lesson for ALL West Pointers. Basically, it teaches them that if you want to get ahead, cheat, and then discard the people who got you there.

My personal opinion is that ALL golf courses on Army bases should be converted to rifle ranges, and competitive shooting should take the place of golf. There is no bigger time and money waster (as well as places to kiss ass and make under the table deals) than the golf course. At least on the rifle range, when you are giving your boss a blow job and/or working a deal to avoid deployment, you can both be improving a "warfighter skill" in the process.

RTK
06-08-2007, 11:13 AM
Is it necessary or benificial for West Point to have a football team? :eek: I mean all that time spent practicing for that BS Army/Navy game could be better spent shooting, couldn't it? :D



Good question. It's not like they're competing for the national championship year after year....

tequila
06-08-2007, 11:31 AM
That kind of thinking could lead to all sorts of questions. For instance, why is there still a Marine Corps music program? Why does the Army sponsor cooking competitions (http://www.militarycity.com/gallery/index.php?count=0&id=culinaryarts)?

Tom Odom
06-08-2007, 01:03 PM
Actually, dropping football at West Point is overdue, imo. And not because it is an expensive distraction from training, either. It is the shabby way they treat the football players.

Joe Lineman is recruited and encouraged to be 300 pounds. Then, he is persecuted for being overweight. Sometimes, even in the same breath. This kind of institutional two-faced, dishonest "crap" then becomes an object lesson for ALL West Pointers. Basically, it teaches them that if you want to get ahead, cheat, and then discard the people who got you there.

My personal opinion is that ALL golf courses on Army bases should be converted to rifle ranges, and competitive shooting should take the place of golf. There is no bigger time and money waster (as well as places to kiss ass and make under the table deals) than the golf course. At least on the rifle range, when you are giving your boss a blow job and/or working a deal to avoid deployment, you can both be improving a "warfighter skill" in the process.

Blow jobs as a warfighter skill?:D I knew I hated golf for a reason....

I am going to the range today---alone.:cool:

My 2 pet peeves in this arena are the "All Army Sports Teams" for whatever

And as a one-time hardcore skydiver and 82d guy, the Golden Knights Army Parachute Team--especially those team members like Cheryl Stearns in the 1970s who was recruited into the Army for the team--boosted to NCO--and never served in any real unit. The Knights still do this crap.

Tom

Old Eagle
06-08-2007, 01:16 PM
Gotta see "all Army" teams for what they are -- recruiting tools. Back in the 80s anyway, there were two major categories of kids with a "propensity" (technical term) to join the Army: student athletes and smart kids with no education resources. Recruiting themes and the way they were presented specifically targetted those groups.

New sport -- Tilting windmills?

Tom Odom
06-08-2007, 01:52 PM
New sport -- Tilting windmills?

I am in! Where is my armor?

Tom

tequila
06-08-2007, 02:14 PM
Is there a genuine recruiting value for today's generation in either the USMC band(s) or the all-Army bakeoff, though? A lot of these anachronisms need to go.

If we're going to have showpiece efforts wasting money and organizational efforts, at least sponsor an all-Army MMA team or something that today's youth finds somewhat appealing.

Tacitus
06-08-2007, 03:44 PM
Gentlemen,

This is in reply to no post in particular, just my recollections of standing in some formation. I never recall being the least bit inspired being told to move 1 centimeter to the left or right. The other soldiers also thought it a complete waste of time. Completion of a job well done or getting through an obstacle course? Yes, that boosted morale. It might be a source of satisfaction for whoever is moving around the privates, sort of like controlling my nephew's robotic racecar by remote control.

Now that I'm at it, I'll add spending hours buffing floors in a barracks to that list, too. That is a military tradition (if still in effect) that needs to be rexamined if we are talking about outdated military activites. I'm all for hygiene and clean conditions, but that was just plain harrassment, in my view.

goesh
06-08-2007, 05:53 PM
I always prefered COD and formations to doing knuckle pushups on hot pavement. I always liked mess duty better than low crawling in loose sand after a couple mile run with a full pack on. Of course in those days, we were in it for the pay.

jonSlack
06-09-2007, 01:42 PM
Why does the Army sponsor cooking competitions?

Because Soldiers like to compete to prove that they are the best at what they do. In my mind, cooking competitions are the "Best Ranger" competition for the 92G community and I think there is value in that. It drives and motivates Army cooks to better learn their trade and that in the end benefits everyone who eats their chow.

That being said, I'm no fan of golf either. The courses need to get turned into running trails and then turn the carts into remote control targets for Soldiers to practice EOF procedures on with live rounds.

While I'm ranting, why not do away with Change of Command ceremonies and speeches and replace them with Change of Command BBQs and Change of Command toasts? Families are invited, food is served, once everyone has eaten, you pull everyone into a horseshoe, outgoing commander says his farewell, the ceremonial passing of the guidon/unit colors happens, and the incoming commander says a few words. Is that so hard or unappealing to that many people?

Also, why not teach CLS, combatives, and other related military training during off-duty hours and on weekends? I think that this would benefit leaders who cannot always cut away for a full work week or more to go take a class as an individual as well as motivated Soldiers who are told "You don't need to know that" but still have a desire to learn.

BushrangerCZ
12-27-2010, 08:35 PM
We also went to some old Russian training areas in Czech which were great training, but ecological disaster areas.

What a BS... Actually, military training areas have the best protected and conserved nature in the country, comparable with national parks. For example, the best Czech red deer trophies are from VVP Libava (military training area Libava).