I nominate * patmc * for Quote of the Week
Quote:
Originally Posted by
patmc
...
The Army has a very heavy tail.
Priceless!
I also agree with his Post. Good one...
It is unlikely to change until all the services
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Entropy
...The services simply can't continue like this - something has got to give.
realize that their personnel system (DOPMA !!!) forces them to rotate unqualified or poorly qualified people into positions they should not have on a two to three year cycle in a fruitless attempt to be 'equitable' and create an Officer Corps of generalists. How has that worked out for us, all things considered?
Each change at the Action O, Branch and division Chief and Project Manager level introduces a cascading series of 'desirable and necessary changes.' While aiming for state of the art -- a moving train -- is desirable it is costly and in many cases totally counterproductive.
When you add the changes desired by senior leaders -- who also rotate entirely too rapidly -- above the Project Managers, you get a never ending series of ECPs that the contractors absolutely love. They bid in low, knowing that will occur and that they can thus realize a healthy profit.
Add to all that micromanagement by Congroids and their staffers (not at all influenced by Lobbyists ...) and you have a recipe for a mess.
That's where we are. So. How to fix it?
All we gotta do is clean out Congress, reduce their staff by 60% and make it functional, discard DOPMA, select people who are competent in the field for jobs, quit rotating people to 'manage personnel' every 18-48 months and stop trying to prove everyone can do anything.
No problem... :mad:
Ted Stevens holds onto his Senate seat...for now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Tom Odom
And in a related matter, the idea that Senator Stevens will continue to run for office after his conviction and pending appeals makes the likelihood of a sudden rush to reform from within Congress doubtful
Next week will tell many tales
Tom
Tom, I don't know if you have seen the Alaskan election returns or not. But it looks like a victory for (drumroll, please)...Senator Ted Stevens of Alaska, of all people.
I believe that makes him the first person in the history of our republic to be re-elected to the U.S. Senate after having been found guilty of a felony. Any Senate historians out there who can come up with another, correct me if I am wrong. I thnk it takes 2/3 of the vote in the Senate to expel a Senator. Stay tuned for more on this one.
Same Bat-Time, same Bat-Channel.
Good exchange. A couple of minor thoughts for consideration
First, on this:
Quote:
Agree on the living conditions for most, but Vietnam was one year and out.
Living conditions for most in Viet Nam were, to the extent possible, as close to todays as was possible at the time. That was also true in Korea, again relatively. In both those as in Afghanistan -- though not so much in Iraq -- time in the boonies was long and without creature comforts but that goes with the job.
As for Viet Nam being one year and out; true for the single enlistment folks and for those drafted. For those on a second or later hitch the rule was a year in the States and a year in Viet Nam, MOS dependent -- didn't need or use too many tankers, though a lot of them, did get sent as Grunts or Advisers. People with four or five tour in Viet Nam aren't all that rare. I know one guy with seven Purple Hearts, all entailing Hospital time, over four tours...
Point of all that is there aren't as many differences between then and now as many seem to think.
Quote:
Poole argues in his books for US small units that live off the land and patrol for weeks on end. I don't see Roger's Rangers returning any time soon, though.
I'm not a Poole fan and I think any Westerner who tries to 'live off the land' in Afghanistan is gonna be an advertisement for 'Weight Watchers ®' but I do think the only thing precluding smaller units out on their own is senior leader excessive caution. We are still risk averse to too great a degree. That said, I know some units in Afghanistan were / are prone to kick out Squad (and smaller) sized patrols while others will not.
Quote:
...unless we or the Afghans "surge" reconstruction, the Army will just be there forever.
Doesn't that depend on what ones desired end state actually happens to be? I suggest there's a happy and realistic medium between dropping a copy of the Federalist Papers and leaving versus the alternative of 'forever.' While pondering where that 'medium' should fall, recall two things; be realistic and aim for something achievable. Best is the enemy of good enough.
Quote:
We had a SEVERAL time DWI make the E7 list. Same with officers, near 100% promotions to fill slots. A lot of the guys we are retaining are motivated, but not necessarily the ones you want.
At the risk of drawing fire, I'll just say that I've known a slew of highly competent drunks, Officer and NCO. it's a tough job and it drives to a vice of some sort... :D
IOW, don't write those SFCs off. Nor the Officers who were just there. I'll also suggest that I'd rather have five guys who are motivated and drink than ten who are 'superbly qualified' but are not motivated -- whether they drink or not is really irrelevant...:wry:
Quote:
...but many do consider time away from their families as a sacrifice. The Army won't survive without people willing to pay the price. Lack of mission and too much down time is bad leadership at the top. COLs and CSMs can surely find better missions, though I remain doubtful.
True on the first, each person has his or her own level on that. Some will wave the Family goodbye for the job, some will not. Too much down time is bad, always has been -- penalty of a large bureaucracy. So is mission allocation and, believe me on this, COLs and CSMs have been known to fight bad ones quite strenuously and lose. It's not usually their call. That too goes with the territory and if the territory is not conducive to an adequate comfort level, people will -- and should -- find something else to do. The Green machine is better than it ever was, it isn't perfect but it is trying to improve -- and it will all work out.