Back to my original question...
OK, so how many cooks and other CSS folks you want to replace w/non-contractors does it take to sustain a force of 160k? Oh, and another 30k in OEF?
Now where do they come from?
1. Additional duty for each deployed unit. Just keep x% of your folks out of the fight to do sustainment activities. Been there, done that, and it hurt last time.
2. Find that number of folks lounging around the States on "dwell time" and send them over. Make sure you plan for a rotation cycle.
3. Replace the new BCTs coming into the force structure with CSS units. If we have held up under this PERSTEMPO so far, I'm sure we can do it for another decade or so.
4. Bring back the draft and plus up the armed forces to VN levels. Get back on a 3:1 rotation schedule.
I think you're missing a point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Sargent
Anybody who threatens to quit a job -- even the most heroic of jobs -- if they are asked to anything that exceeds their comfort zone is vulnerable to a degree criticism.
That may be your opinion and you're certainly entitled to it. Others may not agree but that's really irrelevant in both cases. What's possibly relevant is that the issue isn't a comfort level on the part of those who want to do a particular thing, it's whether you can attract the numbers to do some things. As several stated above, we aren't doing too well at that in part because civilian industry pays better for the good stuff and not many really want to do the bad stuff.
Quote:
If you think that is insulting, well I can't do anything about it. Go back and read the descriptions of the soldiers offered up as evidence for why such an idea as I presented would not work -- none of them are particularly flattering. Perhaps you could share the joy and direct some of your ire at those who wrote the unflattering comments to begin with. They were, after all, the sine qua non of my conclusions.
Unflattering? Unappealing to you perhaps but not necessarily unflattering, it's simply reality. Personally, I see nothing wrong in a person wanting to hew to a particular line of work -- because that's what's at issue. You see it as being a Marine -- he may see it as being a Grunt, period. I don't think either of you are wrong but you do have different perspectives and unlike you, he has to live with his.
Quote:
Bottom line, "PFC Schmuckatelli will quit because he didn't sign up for that" is a bad argument against the idea, for a variety of reasons, not least of which is that it does not reflect well upon PFC Schmuckatelli -- and I think this last part is important (hint -- that ought to suggest that I am not altogether keen to insult the good PFC to begin with).
Schmuckatelli will not quit -- he signed a contract and will do what he's told until his enlistment is up. The issue is not that, it's whether he will reenlist or not if you do that to him. You say he should or it will not reflect well on him. Frankly, I don't think he gives a hoot what others think. He's got to live with himself and by the time he comes up for reenlistment, he's old enough to have figured out that the opinions of others merit some consideration but cannot -- should not -- be a determinant for what he does.
There are a lot of combat arms NCOs in both the Marines and the Army who are perfectly capable of getting a commission -- and they opt not to do so simply because they know they'd have to 'generalists' and do desk things (and social things, for some... :D ) -- and they'd really rather not. As mentioned above, many CSS guys get reclassified to the combat arms when numbers get tight, most adapt pretty well to that switch but that is not true in reverse. My guess is that a healthy majority of combat arms guys would not reenlist if they were to be reclassified or had to serve in CSS positions. I would not have and as a Navy junior, I got a reasonably good grounding in responsibilities and duties. People are different...
None of which addresses the real issues -- raw numbers of persons available and the number who will enlist to do the CS/CSS jobs.
I have to love CavGuy's summation:
Quote:
Shifting a general to oversee what were really leadership (not supply) issues is far different than taking an infantryman and making him pump gas.
I think that's what several of us tried to say albeit less eloquently.
Interesting that you mention Nathaniel Greene who was indeed one of Washington's better Generals. I could say that his most successful battle at Guilford Court House was that simply because he copied another of Washington's best generals, Daniel Morgan's (arguably an even better General...) earlier and even more successful tactic at Cowpens. The interesting fact about both battles is that the Generals knew and understood the strengths and weaknesses of their various troops. I think there's a strong message in that...
I'm not a Historian but I am a student of war and an avid reader. History can teach us much, no question but one must be careful of the message one absorbs. One thing stands out over the millenia IMO. It's notable that all the good Generals understood the strengths and weaknesses of their troops and planned accordingly. They also were willing to adapt to the mores and technology of the time.
While there will always be occasional aberrations like the picture below, essentially, the use of the horse in warfare is sorta passé.
http://www.geocities.com/futuretanks/sfhorsesoldier.jpg
I'd be willing to bet big bucks that the guy shown would rebel at being told he had to go turn wrenches in the motor pool.
So, lacking a major war and a draft, is a heavy troop based CSS effort passé. All things considered, that's a good thing because the number of people who want to join the Armed Forces to do that is small and declining. Yes, some changes need to be made in the process -- and some are working; Armies change slowly -- but regression is not a good idea.
Nor is it beneficial. Getting elephants through the Alps today would arouse the Environmentalists... :D
Bofus can both agree and disagree...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
selil
...If the awareness and perceptions are changed by the media by sensationalizing largesse of the military in Iraq they will vote and actively pursue the replacement of decision makers. Unfortunately most of the patriotic drivel engaged in by the general public stops at their wallet.
For example, I agree with that statement except for active pursuit of replacement; I think the second clause negates that; that and the "Yes but he's my SOB" mentality...
Quote:
Regardless of the pandering of the current media the American way is to hold the do'er accountable and replace the decider.
Agree that's the principle but our caste of permanently elected and quite venal and corrupt Senators and Representatives (the great majority, not all) says actual practice is quite different. I'd also suggest that the current American way is to punish the innocent all too often by enacting stupid laws and regulations in a futile and misguided effort to preclude recurrent wrongdoing -- and too frequently to promote the guilty to insure the Peter Principle is applied...
Quote:
However, I am surprised to see anybody argue that reality and the media, let alone the American public, have ever let reality intrude on perception. I am especially surprised to see anybody arguing against, "in all things public", anything but perception drives politics.
Can't speak for others but that's not at all what I'm saying. Perception does drive the train -- but the wisdom of crowds keeps it from going too fast and frequently overrides the perceptions of some. Your wallet interest also intrudes though not totally, a lot of folks will vote against their economic interests to support a firm belief. As they should.
Quote:
Didn't say I liked it but it will have to be dealt with sooner or later.
Later. Much later. It's the American way... :D
Interesting thread, we can title it
'Dueling Opinons'
Because that's what it's degenerated to. On the one hand we have the Spartans, on the other the sybaritic Persians... :D
I guess I'm a Persian, I got Steak every now and then in a couple of wars; I thought it was a good idea even as I ached for the kids who later scuffled through our garbage for something edible.
For Jill: If you believe that the original intent was to remain in Iraq long term, you may want to delve into that in more depth.
For Ski: You enjoy the Spartan existence -- does every other soldier you know believe in the same standard? How would our enlistment rate look were your view to prevail?
Seems to me to be a lot of "If I were God..." and that valid points made by folks who were there are sort of overlooked. The most egregious overlooking being in the area of how (to include methods and times), even if you dispense with contractors and the troops do the CSS jobs, you are going to feed the guys outside the wire in the COPs the same meals you are able to feed in the base camps. That doesn't even get into how you're going to retain, in a volunteer force, those Fobbits and / or REMFs if you forced them to eat like the line guys.
No one has yet come up with a viable alternative that will meet the needs and goals of the nation, the army -- or of today's troops who are very emphatically not Spartans, Roman Legionaires, Revolutionary Continentals or even post Civil War troopies. I'll wait for that.
They don't want ice cream, they want hot coffee.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Sargent
...I do not, however, have much tolerance for a system that can leave some out in the cold when but a few miles away guys are eating ice cream -- all the while, the contractor is still paid. That's just ridiculous.
The guys out in the heat in OTOH may well want Ice Cream -- unlike you, they understand why they can't have it (as has been repeatedly explained by several others above) and they don't get too wrapped around the axle about luck of the draw REMFs eating better (as has also been repeatedly stated).
Quote:
Now it's your turn. Explain for me and Ski how the sort of quality of life efforts being made on behalf of the vast majority of Americans deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan is not harming our COIN effort...
Good try. Hard to prove a negative. :D
Quote:
...Can you justify generators being run non-stop to keep the lobsters and ice cream on ice while most Iraqis are still without a reliable electrical system?
Sure. Those generators are running lights, computers, defensive systems and hospitals -- and the vaccines, serum and blood the treatment facilities need. The lobsters and ice cream are only a microscopically small part of the mass of food it takes to feed the troops. Most of that food is cheap stringy contract beef, pork and chicken plus vegetables. Most of it also doesn't taste that great, the steak and lobster can be tough and stringy too but at least they make up for Chili Mac and Roasted Chicken.
The Iraqis have more electricity now than they had in 2002 and they know it. They are unlikely to ever have the relative luxury the US does and takes with it where ever it goes.That may offend some but it's a fact of life and has been true in every war we've been in during my lifetime. I doubt it will change. Even if we get a Spartan for CJCS... ;)
Quote:
How do you propose for the Iraqi Army to learn how to DIY their own logistics at the battalion level when they have no model from which to learn?
One should expect them to resurrect the previous logistic system they had, copied from the British and that worked for them through a pretty big war in the 1980-88. That's a fact of history. They'll take on a few US modifications but it will basically be an Iraqi log system as it should be.
We do BTW, have log systems at Bn level to include cooks. It's cheaper and easier to use the contract mess to cook huge quantities and the Bn picks up and distributes it to the Outposts (not the contractor, the Bn and the units in that Bn).
Doesn't have to be your way, Ski's way or my way to work...
And I'm still waiting for this:
"No one has yet come up with a viable alternative that will meet the needs and goals of the nation, the army -- or of today's troops who are very emphatically not Spartans, Roman Legionaires, Revolutionary Continentals or even post Civil War troopies. I'll wait for that."
I don't think that's what I said...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Sargent
...According to your logic, there is no need for the advisors, because the Iraqis had an army that could fight -- all they need to do is resurrect the previous operational capability they had, copied from [and often educated by] the British and that had worked for them through a pretty big war in 1980-88. That's a fact of history as well.
I'll just repeat this part:"...They'll take on a few US modifications but it will basically be an Iraqi log system as it should be."
Don't agree that building up a good fighting capability is all that much easier than building the Log capability -- but I certainly acknowledge that the Log piece is not easy. All of which has little to do with US practice and capabilities...
The logisitics capability of
the Italian Army fascinated me when I was a young soldier; red wine, real pasta, and naps for lunch out in the brush of the Po River Valley and cappuccino and pasticcini's for afternoon breaks in hills and mountains of the Veneto region (apparently there are mobile versions of the cappuccino machine). I would always mentally compare and contrast what I had read about the history of the Romans with what I observed in modern times.
In general my take on things is that 'lighter is righter'. That outlook helps to keep me mentally and physically sharper out in the field and it helps with building rapport with the local populace; they are in fact very aware of how we fight and live.
As an 'Economics' data-point the 2008 Pocket World in Figures published by the Economist notes that 49.1% of the US population is employed, 29.3% of the Syrian population is employed, and 33.5% of the Turkish population is employed. The percentages for Afghanistan, Jordan, Iraq & Iran are not given and the Cayman Islands is listed as number one with 68.9% of the populace employed. 'Global Competitiveness' rankings were built on 259 different criteria, with the US being listed as number one.
Tooth to tail ratios over the years and over various campaigns for different armies would be interesting. Does anybody have any insights?
Just started in on this Rand study on US Forces (OP 23 The Other End of the Spear: The Tooth to-Tail Ratio (T3R) in Modern Military Operations)...
Quote:
McGrath’s study finds that the tooth-to-tail ratio, among types of deployed US forces, has steadily declined since World War II, just as the nature of warfare itself has changed. At the same time, the percentage of deployed forces devoted to logistics functions and to base and life support functions have both increased, especially with the advent of the large-scale of use of civilian contractors.
Well, I’ve never really cared for lobster…
and the steaks were usually too overdone.
While the grunt/line doggie will always bitch and moan about the REMF, it is after all a prerogative of the position ;) , they also almost universally understand that without those folks in the rear with the gear and the beer there wouldn’t be somewhere to rotate back to for some decent hot chow, real showers, etc.
It isn’t that you cannot live on Cs/MREs for quite a long period of time; it is they just get a bit mundane. The REMFs just get to enjoy the American largess daily because they happen to work there, but if they are not there then no one gets any perks. As has been noted here, and elsewhere, if you do not have to live in misery then why do it?
Having quality small unit time during chow is important and in my experience that time is mostly when you are eating field rats in a remote area. Everyone huddles up to horse trade items and often we just combined all the meats into a hash so all could enjoy the repast (especially relevant when the early MREs had the nutritious and delicious dehydrated beef patty, mmmmm). Seems to me that chow halls, rather than bringing folks together, tend to facilitate folks splitting up.
As to Surferbeetle’s experience with the Italians I would also say the French Foreign Legion is not lacking in the mastery of field epicureanism. The 2 REP seemed to have some marvelous scroungers and the cook (not his MOS just an additional duty) was always in fine form when “la soupe” was served in the western reaches of Djibouti. :D