I was pleasantly surprised when I saw this on TV just the other day. The US Army showcasing it’s heritage and actively trying to recruit officers... who woulda thunk it?
Video
Printable View
I was pleasantly surprised when I saw this on TV just the other day. The US Army showcasing it’s heritage and actively trying to recruit officers... who woulda thunk it?
Video
The Army, proving once again, that it doesn't understand how to recruit, retain and develop junior Officers.
I'm not really sure what specific demographic they had in mind as this method seems to be aimed at people who don't have USMA, OCS, or ROTC available as an option to them (as each have their own robust recruiting for their target demographic). I’ve heard the theory that this aimed at getting individuals who already have a degree and are not satisfied with civilian employment (unemployment?) to enlist under 9D or get a direct commission if applicable.
I’ve always been skeptical of the argument that the Officer Corps is in direct competition with Corporate America for college graduates – they’re in direct competition with college admissions and enlisted recruitment as the choice to use ROTC or USMA is made back in high school. The notion that there is the untapped pool of people who passed up multiple chances to serve their country, but since earning a degree are just waiting for someone to ask if they want to be an Officer, is flat out silly.
Its going to be interesting to see if this program works. It will be even more interesting to see how the Army spins the results.
Honestly, when I read about this campaign earlier in the week, I was a little skeptical. That video was better than I expected though. Was much better than previous, "Hey, you'll get job training and teamwork experience that you can use later in another job." That said, I don't think it will solve the shortage of officers (some on this board state we are already overstrength in officers, and maybe we are, but the 2 Battalions I served in were always short and fighting for people).
For years the Army denied or explained away that there were not enough LTs or CPTs staying in. Now not enough CPTs, MAJs, and even LTCs are staying for duration. The Army claims it is because of the expansion of BCTs, not retention. Maybe, but some of the best and brightest I went thru OBC with are now working on the outside or in grad school. Many in my recent CCC course are planning to do another deployment, finish out that bonus contract, and then move on. The problems keeping those already in are greater than attracting people already out of school and working/or not.
None of the officers I've served with joined bc of a commercial. It's nice that the Army is recognizing that officers do more than drink coffee and do paperwork, but I don't know if this campaign will achieve the desired goals. Maybe more Officers working as recruiters that can actually explain to students what is involved in ROTC/OCS/USMA and what life as an officer is like (more than the current Gold Bar LT recruiter and a CPT or MAJ per ROTC BN or temporary Home Town Recruiter). I did a Yahoo search for Worcester, MA and Army ROTC and emailed the address I found. The ROTC recruiter, a CPT, gave me an honest, but patriotic speech, and asked me if it sounded good, and it did. You need more than commercials to get students to give up their college routine and be a Soldier and Student. Most don't think the sacrifice is worth it. That's a problem deeper than advertising.
It would also help if the Army didn't do everything possible to culturally exclude people from the coasts from coming in.
Just a cover (hat, beret, etc.) tip to the Army from a retired Marine - I liked the video and in retrospect - is heads and tails above earlier efforts dating back to, well, forever.
I'm not sure what that means either...
I too wonder what you mean...
But since you make quite clear "exclusion" and "coasts" it seems quite likely your alluding to Lifestyle Choices. Do I get a cookie:wry:Quote:
It would also help if the Army didn't do everything possible to culturally exclude people from the coasts from coming in.
I'm referring to the Army commissioned officer culture (especially at the company grade level) being primarily southern/midwestern. NASCAR, fishing, pickups and dip v. hybrids and theater. Binge drinking (or teetotalling) v. wine with dinner. The assumption that everyone is married. The assumption that non-SM spouses are either homemakers or have careers that can be plied even in the most remote locations. Etc. And then an unspoken (and sometimes spoken) assumption that people on the coasts aren't really Americans and that cosmopolitan officers are weird.
The other branches don't seem to have this problem...it's Army specific.
In 2004 over 40% of new Army officers were from the south. 18% from the midwest. 18% from the northwest. 18% from the west. the number from the northeast is too small to measure. even on the West Coast there were something like three ROTC grads out of the U Cal system last year. 34 out of NYC total in 2006 in comparison to 200 from Alabama.
http://columbiamilitary.blogspot.com...ics-urban.html
http://www.military.com/NewsContent/...126186,00.html
one interesting take:
http://handle.dtic.mil/100.2/ADA493829
Is that culture you refer to an Army imposed culture or is it the culture of your 40% South plus 18% Midwest and perhaps a few of the others preferring those cultural icons to the alternatives you cite? I think there's a correlation versus a causation problem there...
On the wives and such, again what is the national, not the culturally elite, norm? On that topic, recall that military forces are by nature conservative and slow to change. The wife and wife / career issues have been around since the early 70s -- that they are still a problem is an indicator of the often glacial pace of military social change. I doubt that will ever go away -- and, FWIW, the other services have that problem as well.
You might also consider that the South has been over represented in the Army only since the Draft ended. I think that says something about the presence of a willingness to serve that is more in evidence in some parts of the nation than in others.
On the ROTC issue, is that not in part due to the fact that belonging to ROTC -- more particularly Army ROTC -- on many campuses is not at all politically correct on both a faculty and peer basis? Recall that many Ivy league schools opted out of hosting Army ROTC in the late 1960s and now do not want to let it back in -- ostensibly due to objections to Don't Ask, Don't Tell.
The paper by COL Wendel which you linked is, I think accurate and I agree with his recommendations. He, I think is missing one critical point which I address below. He makes a few statement that allude to it around the edges, this one, for example:That sentence is notable for its understatement...Quote:
"Mutual distrust between the nation's political elites and military leaders could ultimately undercut American foreign policy, making it more difficult to use force effectively."
You correctly point out that the same social conduct attributes do not apply to other services; that is a residual of the New England born and widely disseminated idea that the Army was the refuge of thieves and scoundrels whereas the Navy and to a lesser extent, the Marines were somewhat socially acceptable (too many seafarers in New England to reject the Navy totally :wry:). The Navy is presumed by most in this country to be a socially acceptable profession -- barely so in a few circles but still acceptable. The Air Force is slightly less acceptable, then the Marines and the poor old Army is at the bottom, the social sewer as it were. That has far more impact on persons from the coasts (and from tertiarily educated families nationwide) entering the services than do any of the things you cite.
That attitude in part reflects the historical opposition to a standing Army in this country and it partly reflects the strong anti military / antiwar bias present in Academia which has been imparted to many students over the past 30 plus years.
However, it is far more a reflection of social change in this country. As recently as fifty years ago, kids pretty well left home for good at 18 or thereabouts and Dad broke their plate to remind them it was tough world and they had to be able to take care of themselves. Since then this nation has been effectively 'Momized.' Moms do not break plates, on the contrary they welcome their offspring back even unto the 30th or 40th year; encourage it, even -- and the Moms of America do not want their Sons and Daughters in a socially questionable organization and absolutely do not want them in a position to engage in close combat with unsavory people.
I’d argue that this commercial is a step in the right direction, at least marketing wise. Actual recruitment/applicant processing/ candidate mentorship is a different story.Quote:
The Army, proving once again, that it doesn't understand how to recruit, retain and develop junior Officers.
It’s aimed at everybody: high schoolers, college students and grads since the commercial made a point of showing soldiers in OCS, ROTC and WP gear.Quote:
I'm not really sure what specific demographic they had in mind as this method seems to be aimed at people who don't have USMA, OCS, or ROTC available as an option to them
I disagree with you here. The Army doesn’t do nearly enough to recruit for OCS at least it didn’t about a year ago when I was researching the subject. A majority of teens and 20 or 30 year olds don’t know the difference between enlisted and officer, much less the different officer accession routes, especially OCS. Even if they knew, they are likely to encounter an enlisted recruiter who will try to tell them they have to enlist and serve first in order to become an officer.Quote:
(as each have their own robust recruiting for their target demographic).
The choice to apply for the USMA is made back in high school. Cadets decide to join the ROTC at different times; some before college, other during their freshman, sophomore or even later years.Quote:
I’ve always been skeptical of the argument that the Officer Corps is in direct competition with Corporate America for college graduates – they’re in direct competition with college admissions and enlisted recruitment as the choice to use ROTC or USMA is made back in high school.
How is it silly? I can’t find the PDF at the moment and the Marine Officer site has been changed but there was a breakdown of all the USMC commissioning sources and I’d say about 20% were OCC graduates (people who already have degree in hand).Quote:
The notion that there is the untapped pool of people who passed up multiple chances to serve their country, but since earning a degree are just waiting for someone to ask if they want to be an Officer, is flat out silly.
"Is that culture you refer to an Army imposed culture or is it the culture of your 40% South plus 18% Midwest and perhaps a few of the others preferring those cultural icons to the alternatives you cite? I think there's a correlation versus a causation problem there..."
Neither. it's the result of self-selection. And the Army keeps going back to the same wells digging deeper and deeper.
As for the South being more willing...I'd say that's primarily a result of that being where the bases are. It's a heck of a lot less of a culture shock for a young LT from Alabama to end up at Polk than one from Manhattan. I'm an American who grew up overseas and in NYC. Quite frankly, I feel a lot more comfortable and at home (and have more friends and family) in Rome or Paris or London or Cairo than I do in Texas. There are millions of Americans like me. Where the posts are is going to be a harder sell than to a southerner who is assured of mostly staying at home (when not deployed). So the Army becomes a much easier sell to southerners than to the coasts (who by the way aren't just composed of "liberal elites" but also millions of first generation immigrants...a traditional military favorable category that the other branches manage to recruit quite well).
And why is it that the Army advertises during NASCAR races (or so I'm told) but not during golf? Isn't that self-fulfilling?
Many of my peers back in NY are multilingual, uber-well-traveled, educated and in excellent physical fitness. Many of them are willing to do something of public service for much less than private-sector money. They often end up in the foreign service or at Langley. But being unmarried, usually not Christian and a heavy traveler (the DOD pass/leave policies are obviously archaic and asinine) does not fit into Army culture, not well at all. The Army doesn't consider them and they don't consider the Army.
Not all for the best, but change is inevitable. Ken, JT and some of the others can remember officers' clubs, "calls" on commanding officers, "mandatory" officers' wives' clubs, etc. Social life was much more focused on the base, the unit, etc., than is apparent today. Most of our families were exposed to diverse foreign cultures. But that was then and this is now.
As for ROTC, I think that the detractors have a serious cart and horse problem. We close programs, not to exclude part of the population, but as a business matter. Look at it this way -- if I can produce 34 widgets for x amount of money, or over 200 for the same amount, which operation am I going to keep open? Having worked the famous MIT magnet program (5 schools), I'm just not buying the "build it and they will come" model. I do think that the effort to recruit highspeed folks who didn't or couldn't participate in ROTC is a worthy effort and I look forward to seeing how this all pans out.
OBTW -- been slogging through rice paddies in the far East and hanging at the opera in Vienna (hardship tour), and there are a bunch of us around who don't fit your preferred stereotype.
I get the economics behind ROTC. But that also assumes that all ROTC candidates are equal. That 200 cadets from Podunk State are equivalent to 200 cadets from NYU (who come from across the country in reality). In our current operational environment, where COIN and cultural sensitivity are key, that's a false assumption I think.
My "stereotype" was specifically of company grades...there's a reason for that. And I stand by it. And when we still have CPTs discussing "haji" and "man-dresses"....I'd suggest that young officers from more diverse backgrounds might turn out to be force multipliers over that (very low) bar.
Yes, but is that self selection or going to a well that provides bodies when other wells do not?Certainly true -- recall they are there for three reasons, good weather (relatively, thus more training time per year); unoccupied rural real estate when they were built; not nearly as many environmental hangups and worries as the equally numerous posts that were in the north and west before the enviro / anti -war types congealed to shut them down.Quote:
As for the South being more willing...I'd say that's primarily a result of that being where the bases are.
Totally understandable. Reaffirms my point, to an extent. The problem is that there's no way, short of en existential war that there will be post in the norht or far west.Quote:
I'm an American who grew up overseas and in NYC. Quite frankly, I feel a lot more comfortable and at home (and have more friends and family) in Rome or Paris or London or Cairo than I do in Texas.
Certainly, to an extent -- but again, dry wells aren't of much value. You're focusing on officer accessions but the NASCAR ads are focused on Joe.Quote:
And why is it that the Army advertises during NASCAR races (or so I'm told) but not during golf? Isn't that self-fulfilling?
True and what neither of us can answer is the Chicken - Egg aspect of that. My guess is the Army tends to concentrate on what it thinks it can get and your friends are not likely candidates for accession so it doesn't, as an institution, waste much effort on trying to gather in people who are likely to be concerned about socialization and the caliber of people they may associate with. State and Langley are too of the most 'liberal' agencies in the government, the Army is perceived as being among the most 'conservative' and is therefor unattractive to many, IT is conservative but the people in it are not, they pretty well reflect the nation ideologically; the Army knows this but can see little point in trying to convince many to get very few.Quote:
The Army doesn't consider them and they don't consider the Army.
There is also the fact that many of your peers likely consider the Army to be stodgy, not conducive to innovative though and stifling to young go-getters. It is and isn't but the perception that it is rules. I don't think the Army is deliberately eschewing attracting urban elites to the organization -- I think it just realizes that few will come, so why waste time and effort...
Back in the days of ROTC most everywhere, of it being an only mildly derided (as opposed to today's fairly heavy derisory efforts) and a lottery based Draft, there were many more folks from the north and west. Now it's voluntary and they don't seem disposed to volunteer...
So where would PoDunk State be located? Considering the Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, state of Michigan, university "U" of lake Michigan represent the FIVE largest engineering and sciences state sponsored concentration of schools on the PLANET.
Of course cultural sensitivity is important and care and stewardship of the environment are also important.
I unfortunately want that dirty, nasty, cursing, blood thirsty army that smiles after the kill. While helping little old ladies across the street, working in the most technically advanced army on the planet, and discussing the philosophy of Kant and Jung while doing civil affairs.
That's what we do here in fly over country that forgotten by coastal elitist metropolitan wasteland of hard working, hard playing, folk.
You know, right there next to PoDunk University. Heck I work at one of those PoDunk U's. What do we have to say for it? Oh, the most astro-nuts launched out of the atmosphere, Ameila Earhardt, Sully don't wanna swim to New York, a variety of captains of industry, many soldiers and sailors (captains of the Wabash), and lots of corn. Of course my campus is so far out in the sticks the nearest burg is that tiny little town called Chicago. You know that place where first run theater often beats Broadway?
No culture, but lots of corn here on the shores of Lake Michigan.
But hey, in other news this fall we are opening an ROTC on our campus.
I think we're probably in general agreement.
1. My concern is that there are severe second-order consequences to the Army and the nation as a result (you have alluded to this as well I think).
2. Considering the conflicts that we are currently in; four LTs with the wrong mentality may well do more harm and less good than one LT with the right mentality.
I did some of my schooling in the midwest actually. I'm not quite sure where Podunk State is located; I just know that it exists. It's the place that apparently has a huge ROTC program which keeps producing young officers who can't spell or write, who refer to "haji" and "man-dresses", wear sunglasses when talking to the local populace and who wonder why Jews don't celebrate Christmas.
"I unfortunately want that dirty, nasty, cursing, blood thirsty army that smiles after the kill."
I don't. I want the Army that actually wins wars. That Army would have been great for fighting the Soviet hordes when they came across the Fulda Gap but that Army almost lost us two wars this decade and did lose a war in Southeast Asia. Don't get me wrong, we need the good old boys who grew up coon hunting and we certainly need to preserve plenty of HIC capacity. But right now, the kinetic stuff is secondary (and indeed depends upon the stuff that the kid who grew up in Jackson Heights knowing four languages might just happen to be better at).
Correct. But who's to say that a group of over-educated urban elites would be any more capable of producing the "right mentality" than their social and cultural opposites? How can you be sure they won't end up looking down their collective noses at folks who don't think the same way they do or aren't as open-minded as they are? I've met plenty of the "elites" who are just as close-minded and opinionated as their more "rural" counterparts...they just use bigger words to convey their disdain. And some of those same folks contributed to the policies and execution that lost that war in Southeast Asia you allude to.
What we need is a mix, and there is no silver bullet to get that. Not even on the more elevated coasts....
of a commander not doing his or her job, pure and simple -- not of the accession system or pool.No, it's a function of economics (it pays more to be married), lust and --in this case, the Army is the culprit -- tacit encouragement of marriage, Officer AND Enlisted because the married people cause less trouble. No matter that they ultimately cost more and are arguably less risk averse than those who are not married and in fact impose a long term burden on the Army. The Army takes a long view on cultural change but is into short termism when it comes to the hassle level on Commanders. :DQuote:
As for the marriage thing: Army officers used to get married later in life than equivalent civilians. Not so anymore. I'd suggest that's a result of where officers are from.
That doesn't merit a response but I will note that even the podunks get students from many nations as well as from all over the country. I lived in Manhattan for a couple of years, heard about the same number of racial and ethnic slurs there as I did in San Francisco or Atlanta or hear now on the Redneck Riviera in Florida-- NYC and Boston may even have a slight edge. :wry:Quote:
...That 200 cadets from Podunk State are equivalent to 200 cadets from NYU...
No, that isn't an education problem, that's a command failure.Previous comment applies -- that's a command failure. You cannot legislate morality or decent behavior -- but you can darn sure dictate it... ;)Quote:
My "stereotype" was specifically of company grades...there's a reason for that. And I stand by it. And when we still have CPTs discussing "haji" and "man-dresses"....I'd suggest that young officers from more diverse backgrounds might turn out to be force multipliers over that (very low) bar.
Not to mention that your next conflict may be a major high intensity model and that cultural factor will be totally irrelevant... :cool:
true on your conclusion. but kids from the coasts tend to be either a. from first-generation immigrant families or b. are the elites you speak of. in which case they've probably traveled extensively in Asia, the ME or Africa and know other languages (besides Spanish)...which does, in and of itself, lend itself to dealing with other cultural environments. My concern here is with young officers, not the folks who actually get us into wars (that's a separate discussion). I'm not saying that we should get rid of southerners, I'm saying that it might be advantageous for a variety of reasons for the number of young officers from the coasts to be more than the current number, which is infinitesimal. I'm also suggesting that the dominant cultural environment of the Army is hostile to people from the coasts. And I'm tired of hearing that we're not real "Americans." And, yes, the northeastern "elites" do hold all sorts of (mostly but not always wrong) stereotypes about the Army (and the rest of America for that matter). And that hurts recruiting too. But the Army does itself no favors when it acts in ways that reinforces those stereotypes.
The issue isn't geographic origin or commissioning source. It's training, and more specifically post-commissioning training. Assuming that 200 cadets from NYU, or any east-coast urban university, are somehow "shovel-ready" for operations requiring cultural sensitivity doesn't make that much sense to me.
Agreed on the Army encouragement and incentivization of marriage...but that's part and parcel of Army culture too. And like I said, it discourages us single folks from entering. (Never mind that Forscom posts are always placed in areas where the local younger female inhabitants are chain-smoking obese single mothers.)
Considering that over 40% of young officers are from the South and considering where the posts are, I don't see the resistance here to the idea that the Army is culturally dominated by southerners. That's simply inevitable.
I also am unclear on what the opposition is to the logical point that 200 cadets at a relatively low-ranking school are likely to have more mediocrities and turds among them than 200 cadets at a high-ranking school, whether it be Carleton, Emory, the University of Chicago or Columbia. That's just a function of math.
A commander can't change hicks into diplomats overnight.
Until the economy changed everything (very temporarily), look at what happened with enlisted recruiting. They were mining ever deeper and deeper into the same zip codes, having to issue more and more waivers.
Why wouldn't cadets who grew up speaking Arabic or Mandarin or Russian be more ready? Why wouldn't cadets who spent two years in Israel in high school be more ready? Why wouldn't cadets who spent the summer of their jr. year traveling in the ME or Africa be more ready?
There are millions of Americans who fit that description. The Army ignores them at its own (and the nation's) peril. How many lives were lost because of some retarded prison guards?
Power-point slides and a few actors at an NTC are no substitute for prolonged, formative exposure to other cultures.
Since, there is absolutely NO reasonable reliable current method of ranking schools in any form or fashion. Since, in many cases the best academic schools and the best ROTC programs are joined sets. Since, most of the Ivy Leagues are liberal arts programs, and the military has always decreed that they are interested in engineering talent (oh since Thomas Jefferson and the Morrill Acts of 1862 and 1890).
I wonder why you have such an unfathomable derision for people from the south, midwest and inter-mountain region of the United States. I've never run into this kind of egregious cultural centrism in Bozeman, Durango, Kalamazoo, or Champlain. You continue to refer to people from anywhere but the coasts as turds and mediocrities among other unflattering derisive terms.
1. I of course said nothing of the kind. (Ok, I don't have much good to say about Killeen or Lawton or Fayettville. Have you been to any of those three?) Better reading comprehension please. For example, you clearly misread the "turds and mediocrities" reference. Try again.
2. yes, the Army has concentrated on engineering and ignored languages, cultural studies, communications and all sorts of other fields that might actually have won some wars for us.
Technology is nice but pictures are often far more important. And we are still very amateurish when it comes to that sort of thing.
to try and refocus this so it doesn't become a free-for-all my point is this:
1. The Army is racially diverse but culturally homogenous.
2. Although the causes of this homogenity are multiple, one of its effects is that it is self-perpetuating.
3. Although this homogenity is cost-effective for the Army in raw dollars, it has been quite costly in the long run due to 2nd order effects...such as a chasm between policy makers and the Army and...well....sucking at COIN.
From my limited experience, the Mandarin and Russian wouldn't have helped that much in Iraq, but the Arabic is useful. That said, my friends who attended NYU didn't speak any of those languages. Russian is probably helpful in Afghanistan. That said, a multi-lingual background doesn’t automatically free an individual from the prejudices of their culture and family, nor does it mean they are more receptive to other cultures.
Certainly, but I am not convinced that students at East coast universities commonly have such experiences. Again, in my experience, study abroad programs focused on Europe and Latin America. Three months of cultural tourism may be broadening, but I wouldn't say it prepares someone for anything like troop leading in stability operations.Quote:
Why wouldn't cadets who spent two years in Israel in high school be more ready? Why wouldn't cadets who spent the summer of their jr. year traveling in the ME or Africa be more ready?
For the record, I am a graduate of east coast prep schools and an East Coast University. I don’t feel that helped me corner any markets in cultural awareness or immersion. I married a fellow student who was a first generation American from a Korean family, who grew up speaking Hangul and practicing her family’s cultural traditions, and traveling back to Asia periodically. As far as I can tell after 18 years together, these experiences didn’t make her (or her family) any more or less open minded than anyone else I know. We are all subject to biases and human frailty.
But I don’t see the correlation that officer recruiting in Northeastern schools really gets after this demographic.Quote:
There are millions of Americans who fit that description. The Army ignores them at its own (and the nation's) peril.
How was that not a leadership and training failure? An East Coast degree doesn't change that. For that matter, BG Karpinski is a graduate of Kean College of NJ, and COL Pappas graduated from Rutgers. East coast educational backgrounds among leaders did not prevent this problem. Of course, they weren’t Tier One graduates, so maybe that accounts for the less than stellar outcome.Quote:
How many lives were lost because of some retarded prison guards?
Amen brother. The crappy job we make of cultural immersion training is something we can discuss at length.Quote:
Power-point slides and a few actors at an NTC are no substitute for prolonged, formative exposure to other cultures.
All -
Also a new Army Strong/Warrior Ethos commercial.
And for those who are lazy, an embed of the original video being discussed.
I dunno, I like them, especially the officer one. Best the Army's done in awhile.
Best way to avoid that in my observation is to avoid name calling on places and people who do not meet your standards. ;)Essentially correct -- what's your recommendation for change?Quote:
1. The Army is racially diverse but culturally homogenous.
True, see my question 1.Quote:
2. Although the causes of this homogenity are multiple, one of its effects is that it is self-perpetuating.
Again, correlation is not causation -- the Army doesn't do COIN well simply because it eschewed it doctrinally and trainingwise for almost 30 years at the direction of a number of very senior, not company grade and generally not from the South persons (Specifically and in turn: from / College : MA/USMA; CA/UCB; KS/USMA/Rhodes Scholar; PA/USMA; NY/USMA/Dual MAs Harvard; PA/USMA; MA/Norwich/MA UNH; OK/USMA; HI USMA/MA Duke). In fairness, one of the PA guys and the Hawaiian tried to reverse that neglect but the system just outwaited the first mentioned and went back to what it does best, little change. The second became OBE. One of the worst at killing and burying COIN was the Rhodes scholar. Notice the thread -- no common state other than the two from PA... :wry:Quote:
3. Although this homogenity is cost-effective for the Army in raw dollars, it has been quite costly in the long run due to 2nd order effects...such as a chasm between policy makers and the Army and...well....sucking at COIN.
Do recall that COIN is only one Army mission; cultural sensitivity is not a requirement in warfighting (trust me on that) -- really not even in COIN because, as I noted earlier, the lapses you cite are command problems, not individual cultural error attributed to people whose greatest flaw seems to be that they do not think the way you do.I spent 45 years in and working for it; my observation was not that, it was that the dominant cultural environment was hostile to people from the coast (or anywhere) who expressed an obvious sense of superiority and disdain for those not so anointed... ;)Quote:
I'm also suggesting that the dominant cultural environment of the Army is hostile to people from the coasts.
That, I believe is due to the coastal 'gentlemen' not demonstrating some of that cultural sensitivity that you mention they intrinsically possess and you seem to prize. Hicks are like that in responding to pseudo elitism. It's a Scotch Irish thing...
P.S.
Been to Fayetteville, avoided the others; full of Earthlings, no place for an old airborne sweat -- the trick if you get back to Bragg is to go west, to Troy and points west, get out in the small towns away from post. Or you can just go to DC and meet kindred spirits...:cool:
Or it could be that there is a tradition of military service in the South and the Midwest that goes back many generations. Or maybe it's the fact that the South and Midwest are more politically conservative and therefore don't tend to look down on military service as being for the uneducated or sociopathic. I'm no scientist but I suspect that it is not a coincidence that red states provide tend to provide more recruits than blue states.
Hard to say. Maybe the Army hired an ad agency who then did research to determine the best place to spend the Army's advertising dollars. Maybe they discovered that you can find more people at a NASCAR event who are willing to enlist than at a golf tournament. I don't know.
First of all, what civilian job have you had, or even heard of, that gives you thirty days of paid leave a year plus obscene amounts of three and four day weekends? I'm getting close to retirement and I want to find that job.
Second, there is a world of difference between foreign service or service at Langley and military service. I was born in New Jersey and raised in Suburban Pennsylvania. I went to a private high school with exactly the people that you are describing. My parents still belong to a country club in Jersey where they play golf with those kinds of people. If you are honestly trying to tell me that the only thing keeping them out of the Army is the Army is too Christian and too pro-marriage and doesn't give enough time off, I'm just not going to buy it.
SFC W
So what you are saying is that we need more culturally sensitive officers. I can see that. We certainly don't want officers who don't refer to Arabs as "Hajjis" or their clothing as "man dresses." And we would certainly want them to be culturally sensitive enough to characterize anyone not from the coasts as a dumb hick and to refer to criminals as "retarded." We should definitely be doing more to keep the "hicks" out. So what if Southerners and Midwesterners have been the backbone of the military for decades? They're not our sort. As soon as we cut back on them then the highly educated, well-traveled, multi-lingual elite will come pouring in.
SFC W
But one irritation - They lead from island to island - with American Caesar Douglas MacArthur in the footage - well - I would beg to say that Chester Nimitz would be that leader.
And a little known fact concerning George Washington crossing the Delaware River (They lead across frozen rivers):
Quote:
Washington's crossing of the Delaware, occurring on December 25, 1776 during the American Revolutionary War, was the first move in a surprise attack against the Hessian forces in Trenton, New Jersey at the Battle of Trenton. Final preparation for the attack was begun on December 23. On December 24 Washington ordered that each man be provided with three days rations and that they keep their blankets handy. He also ordered that security be tightened at each river crossing. The Durham boats used to bring the army across the Delaware from New Jersey were brought down from Malta Island near New Hope and hidden behind Taylor Island at McKonkey's Ferry. A final planning meeting took place on December 24, with all of the General Officers present. General Orders were issued by Washington on December 25 outlining plans for the march and attack. Just prior to the commencement of H-hour, an advance / lead party consisting of 7 Continental Marines pushed off and aided the advance of the main party, to include General Washington's boat, through the utilization of aft-facing black out candles mounted on their Trimountaine Whalers - a boat considered by many at the time as “unsinkable". Legend has it that 4 of the 7 Marines were deemed “liberty risks” by Continental Army military constable officials within an hour of landing in the vicinity of Trenton.
Yeah, I caught that too. We HAVE crossed frozen rivers, just not the Delaware in the painting, which has significant errors.
I will defend the island hopping, MacArthur led a very tough series of amphibious invasions, his command was separate from Nimitz. Although the footage of him coming ashore on Leyte was staged. :eek:
If you want teach you have to have the PhD. Just sayin.
Basically as a systems engineer working in implementation I negotiated at my last employer an embarrassing salary and 6 weeks of paid vacation (plus all weekends home). That was with 15 years of experience in the industry though and a huge funnel of work coming in (none DOD type work). I left that job for a lot less money because I was on the road monday through friday most weeks with a family at home. Might not be an issue for a military guy, but then again I'm not military anymore. Those jobs are out there.
For me, I always wanted to go back into the military but never seemed to get it done. The commercials hit a soft spot. The same spot that had me enter academia versus taking a CSO position in any of the corporations that offered. As a prof I might still get to serve the community. Those commercials play on that egalitarian thread. That same thread that we respect and honor in the military officers and enlisted soldiers and sailors that currently serve.
Service with honor and a creed of respect for America as a nation is a big deal. The commercials speak to that quite convincingly. You know there are a lot of jobs out there that you can have but the military is a career you live. It is likely one of the largest mistakes of my life (right up there with the first wife) that after breaking my back in the Marine Corps, after healing up and walking again, I didn't petition to get back in. Then again woulda, shoulda, coulda, life is what we've done not what we wish for. So, I did pretty good in law enforcement, and really good in international telecom, and now I'm moving up the ladder in academia. I'm not much up on what it means to be an officer in the military I never was one.
The commercials speak to team work. I've ran telco implementations teams with a cast of thousands and filled them with veterans from different services. Those veterans become the fulcrum where talk becomes success. On world wide projects those veterans represented a huge resource for understanding culture and foreign societies. Just my two cents on the outside world. The commercials are important to serving soldiers because for those getting out, this is how employers are going to think about you. The Army of One running through the desert all alone was bad because it said they don't play well with others. The big world of non-DOD commercial interest is about relationships. These commercials are much better.
Geez, I love a hearty discussion as much as the next guy but when did this turn into Tom Ricks' the Ivy Leagues should save the Army from itself thread.
I agree that the Army should try to mend fences with the Coasters by revamping officer recruitment. It just doesn’t make sense to ask college students to drive 50+ miles from one campus to another in LA traffic for an ROTC class. However, I don’t think that someone would necessarily be a more effective operator in a COIN environment just because he/she went to an Ivy League and/or studied abroad (not everyone from such schools is a Fick or Exum ;)). Heck, look at what Ivy League grads did to our economy? The last thing they need is a weapon and minimal adult supervision. Furthermore I have found people who studied abroad to be a representative of the normal student body… meaning they are no more culturally nuanced, intelligent or resourceful. Some students grow because of their experience while others just return with an increased alcohol tolerance. And I say this as a multi-lingual west coaster.
In related news, I guess this ad is part of a whole series of spots about the marketability of leadership skills one would gain as an officer. Grrr, it took 48hrs for them to f- it up for me.
Lived in two, currently in one of them. Never had any issues; of course I'm one of those mid-western hicks you despise.
Although, in the 72 hours I spent in NYC, I was propositioned by two prostitutes, had my life threatened, had some Israeli guy try to hustle me in pool at a bar, and paid $13 for a can of Copenhagen.
I went to ROTC Camp with a kid from Cornell. I had to show him how to read a map...and take his M-16 apart...and use his MRE heater.
Folks from all walks of life contribute in their own way. No one type of person has the patent on how to be a successful Army officer.
I think Courtney has some valid points, but is diving too much into elite vs rest. The following is my Yankee odyssey from high school to the Army. I'm not a martyr or special, and I think many have the same or similar story.
I am from northern NJ, and went to a Catholic liberal arts school in Massachusetts. Not exactly bastions of conservatism, but not as extremely liberal as one would think. Mostly working/middle class practical. Only one or two guys from my high school went straight into the military. My best friend from home did Navy ROTC out of high school (his brother was 10+ years in Navy), and I almost did AF ROTC, but ended up just going to college. My parents both worked in mid-town NYC, and were in the city that morning in September. A month or two later, I joined Army ROTC, which was across town on a different campus. In the winter (most of the school year), the town had snow, so getting up for PT and ROTC included snow shoveling. Navy/Marine ROTC were on campus, and were rather popular, but AF and AR were across town.
Only 2 or 3 students per class out of 600+ were Army cadets. The college did not recognize ROTC for credit. The college only offered housing assistance if you did ROTC for all 4 years. The college cost well above the ROTC scholarship I received, which was priced more for state or technical schools, not Northeastern private schools. The admin were Jesuits, and mostly liberal and anti-war (despite the fact that a Jesuit from the school won Medal of Honor in WWII) though the student body was largely conservative. My buddies partied, stayed up, and slept late. I did my best to join them, but was up at o dark thirty every weekday. When I started wearing BDUs once a week, people would look and wonder. A friend asked me if I was in the AF or NAVY, despite my ARMY nametape. A couple people sought opportunities to debate war, Iraq, President Bush, etc... but I tried to avoid those discussions. My answer was usually "Unfortunately I'm not in charge yet." Most smiled or said thanks.
Senior year, my friends worried about jobs, I worried about branch and duty station. After graduation, everybody packed up and planned summer vacations or grad school, a couple went right into work. I packed up, went home to NJ for 3 days, saw friends and family, then packed out and left for Fort Knox and Fort Sill. I didn't make it back to NJ until Thanksgiving. Then again for Christmas. Then I went to Airborne and Bragg, and did not go home until summer exodus. Then the next time was pre-deployment leave. I was engaged when I left, not when I came home a year later. All 3 of my senior roommates are married to their college girlfriends (1 has a child). I now have an amazing girlfriend 2000 miles away, waiting for me to find out where I am heading next. I still can't tell my parents when I will be home to visit again. I've been back to NJ twice this year.
I think my experience in ROTC was pretty common, though the NE and West probably experience more of the extremes. The location of posts in the south is due to history, available land, and politics. There is plenty of not in my backyard up north, and land in most NE states is too "valuable" to use as an impact zone or training area. Fort Drum is Canada, not NE. That's like telling someone from Texas, "Hey, Fort Polk is close." People from the northeast are generally disconnected from the military bc of social, political, and geographic reasons. If Fort Dix was an active post, or Fort Devens reopened, you would get more volunteers from the area. It would not solve the problem, but it would help retention and exposure.
Being in the Army has forced me to see the rest of the country, which I am grafteful for, but has also forced me across the country from my family and friends. The Army is cut off from a large portion of the country bc of geography. I don't think the good vs better colleges is a winning debate, but growing up in the NE was a different experience than KY, OK, or NC. Not better, different. I grew up in a town with mixed Black, White, Spanish, and Asian populations, and nobody realized that "mattered" until high school when we "grew up." I initially couldn't do much good walking through the woods, and I itch if I smell Poison Ivy, but I could talk to different people and get along. Spending time in KY, OK, NC (and now AZ) showed me that my opinions and stereotypes of the rest of the country were also incorrect, but that there were/are differences. Family and religion are more public and prominent outside the NE, but I don't remember any David Allan Coe sing alongs back home.
The shortage of NE or Western Officers will take more than posts in those areas to help recruit. Colleges in general, and the cultural elite need to change. Society as a whole needs more exposure. Short of a draft, I honestly don't know how you would do it though. The current call to service is focused more on community work or Peace Corps than on military service. It falls on us to let people know what we actually do, and that we are regular people despite our awesome clothes and occasional involuntary overseas work. I do my best to give Yankees a good name (and Jeter and company are finally helping out), and I think its better for the Army to have a mix of the whole country. I never missed an opportunity to remind my Georgia born and raised Battery Commander that I was finally exposing him to "civilization." He never missed an opportunity to remind me that he was exposing me to "real Americans." We were joking, but too many people believe that to be true. My adventures and travels in the Army have made me a better person and better American, but still come at high price. I think the price has been worth it, but is getting tougher, and getting more people to pay that price is harder than new commercials (and yes, this new commercial is pretty good).
Wow, go home, come back the next day and there's three pages and somebody who has stolen my last name! AND he hates the midwest! :p
The Marine Corps is a very different animal in how they generate officers - there isn't "Marine ROTC" or "Marine Academy" (there's some kind of competitive program inside Naval commissioning iirc). I'm not really sure you can hold those numbers up to the other three services and make a fair comparison. There's a different process and a different pool that they are "making" Marine Officers from.
(insert Ain't Ready for the Marines Yet joke here)
Having served as an assistant to a very successful Officer Selection Officer, the most pervasive challenge is communicating to potential applicants what it means to serve as an officer. The difference between the enlisted and officer ranks are not well understood in any region of this nation.
If the US Army has a self interest in recruiting from U.S. News's top 20 schools in America, it will do so. Based on some of the things Courtney has posted, I predict that the US Army has not found that the performance matches the pretentiousness among these students. My view is that these are students who have always been successful among their peer group, and have always had good options (and resources) available to them. Therefore, to tell these students that: the branch they serve in, the continent they live on, and the people they spend time with will all be determined in a lottery process, conducted by a committee someplace else, is simply not going to work.
Lastly, if these students are the academic and cultural elites they think they are they should have no challenge finding worthwhile things to do wherever they go. If they are worn out by a lack of urbane attractions, do they possess the resilience to serve as a military officer?
I have served with Marine lieutenants from MIT, Harvard, Duke, Georgetown, and Cornell. Also, I have served lieutenants who had founded companies or launched satellites with major corporations. Once they hit the fleet, the playing field was very level. Only the MIT student stands out (small sample, like the awful study the colonel published on page 1).
Very good, in fact. BZ.
Interesting read here on the roots of American bellicosity:
http://www.the-american-interest.com....cfm?piece=620