Courageous Restraint "Hold fire, earn a medal"

[Schmedlap]

It's been over a month, so maybe I need to refresh my memory, but I'm not sure I understand what you are arguing. As I understand it, you assert that we're fighting a "redefined type of combat," whatever that is, and this, I guess, justifies some kind of award?

After that, you completely lost me with the random comments about sideburns, Robin Sage, vague assertion about "senior leaders are training one way and asking soldiers to perform another way," some apparent gulf in skills required by COIN and other ops, and combat patches in Crystal City.

[Ranger94]

you assert that we're fighting a "redefined type of combat," whatever that is, and this, I guess, justifies some kind of award?

Let me use this analogy, while in a combat zone, as an NCO, I tell a PFC that he has to man a Browning .50cal.

We all know this is not a new weapon system. It has been in the US Army inventory for almost 90yrs. But to the new PFC it is a new weapon.

If, as an NCO, I toss the FM at the PFC and say "learn it, oh and tell me what you learned" then the PFC deserves a reward.

There is a major flaw in my argument. With COIN, prior to 3-24 the PFC did not even have an FM.

[Ken White]

There is a major flaw in my argument. With COIN, prior to 3-24 the PFC did not even have an FM.

Check this LINK and this LINK plus this LINK. The latter two are References in FM 3-24 which effectively supersedes the first one...

[Ranger94]

Check this LINK and this LINK plus this LINK. The latter two are References in FM 3-24 which effectively supersedes the first one...

You guys are smart, that is why I and others come here. But how many 11B2P or 3V read FM90-8 in 1998? 1999? Yet, how many of them "fought" on the "Island" of "Cortina"? The FTX's of the '90 never went enough towards the clean up of some missions.

Going back to my analogy, the PFC went to OSUT and the .50 cal manual existed but the military school did not put it as a priority for training. Does it matter that the manual was available?

[Ken White]

You guys are smart, that is why I and others come here. But how many 11B2P or 3V read FM90-8 in 1998? 1999? Yet, how many of them "fought" on the "Island" of "Cortina"? The FTX's of the '90 never went enough towards the clean up of some missions.

The 11Bush - 2s that is, most of those guys shouldn't have been expected to read them. An exceptionally sharp kid might have, good for him...

However, the 11B/19D3-whatevers should have been at least aware of their existence and every 11B4-whatever and every combat arms LT and CPT should have read them. For their Bn Staff Officers and Senior NCOs to not have read them is, IMO, inexcusable.*

It's not Joe's job to read that stuff; it is Joe's job to screw off as much as he can. It IS the job of those other guys to take care of Joe and lead him to do what's necessary. That means making sure he can do what he has to do. That's done by his Honchos using the knowledge they have gained through training and experience -- and reading unassigned but relevant material -- to get him trained. But you know that...

The chain of command was given a job it had not trained for. The Doctrine was available but training wise, it was ignored for 25 years. So you've got a very valid complaint on the fact that 1990s era (and personally, I'd go for 1975-2002...) training Army wide was broadly inadequate -- and the responsibility for that lies at the then COL and above level.

Yeah, the guys in Vernon Parish blew it. So did those around Bicycle Lake. So too did the BCTP guys who trained the Cdrs and Staffs here and there. When victory was declared, they turned off the computers and the lights and no one gave a thought to what came next. Simply put, the Army screwed up, big time...

We do not train entering officers or enlisted people as well as we should. We never have and while I keep hearing noise about improvements in NCO and Officer training and education, I sure don't see many indications of greater tactical competence in open sources.

* Though in fairness, given all the furor over FM 3-24, it is obvious a number of the senior people involved in the production committee of that Great American Novel were not as familiar with the older manuals as one had a right to expect. One almost senses in some cases they started writing their 'new' bible, stumbled across the old one and grudgingly said "I guess we oughta put that in there..."

[Ranger94]

However, the 11B/19D3-whatevers should have been at least aware of their existence and every 11B4-whatever and every combat arms LT and CPT should have read them. For their Bn Staff Officers and Senior NCOs to not have read them is, IMO, inexcusable.*

The 11B/19D3-whatevers in the 2000's were the E4s and E5s of the '90s. Outside of Robin Sage graduates, how many Arty, MP or INF soldiers had "Master of FM90-8" as a bullet comment on a DA 4856 or NCOER? If they did not receive recognition for mastering a manual outside (way outside) their MOS then why would the new senior leaders reward new, lower enlisted?

The tactics have been refined but the reward system has not.

In case some missed this.

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?...in;cbsCarousel

"You talk about restraint. What do you mean by that?" Pelley asked.

"As I told the Marines before we deployed, it's about a three second decision, especially with his personal weapon. The first second is 'Can I?' The next two are 'Should I?' 'What is going to be the effect of my action? Is it going to move the Afghan closer to the government or further away?'" he explained.

Rewarding Soldiers/Marines for making a 3 second strategic decision? (and it is strategic http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/...c_corporal.htm

I vote 'Yes'

And what is the cost?

"It's frustrating," Quiceno said. "I don't know if anybody really understands the amount of stress that the guys are already starting to feel because of that. You know? Simply just having their hands tied behind your back, if you will."

[Ken White]

...If they did not receive recognition for mastering a manual outside (way outside) their MOS then why would the new senior leaders reward new, lower enlisted?

The problem is it's not outside their MOS. Not one bit. You're focusing on the wrong level, as I said earlier: "and the responsibility for that lies at the then COL and above level." The fact they were not given training that was 100% applicable to their MOS is borderline criminal but it is not the fault of those then CPTs and below. It was the then COLs and Generals -- it was the Army...

The tactics have been refined but the reward system has not.

I'm not sure the tactics have been refined, I see a lot of stuff that'll get people killed, not least guys moving tactically 5 to 20 feet apart when they should be more than that many meters apart.

In any event, the training doctrine and material existed in the 1975-2002 period, it was just not used. That's a lick on the Army as an institution. There's an adequate reward system in place today -- if it's not being used properly, that, too, is a lick on the Army.

...I vote 'Yes'

And what is the cost?

"It's frustrating," Quiceno said. "I don't know if anybody really understands the amount of stress that the guys are already starting to feel because of that. You know? Simply just having their hands tied behind your back, if you will."

So do I. It is harder, no question. Been there and done that -- so I know it can be done and I know that if you put it to the Troops properly, most (less the always with us 10%... ) will understand and do well. However, if the Troops, Army or Marine, feel as if their hands are tied today, then someone, somewhere in the chain of command is not doing their job. I hate to fall back on the annoying and old "It's a leadership problem" bit -- but it is. That, too is not a problem attributable to those now CPTs and below...

Though they're the ones, as always, that have to fix it. Shouldn't be that way but it generally is.

All that's why I said in the other comment above that our training does not really seem to have improved...

[Schmedlap]

Let me use this analogy, while in a combat zone, as an NCO, I tell a PFC that he has to man a Browning .50cal.

We all know this is not a new weapon system. It has been in the US Army inventory for almost 90yrs. But to the new PFC it is a new weapon.

If, as an NCO, I toss the FM at the PFC and say "learn it, oh and tell me what you learned" then the PFC deserves a reward.

There is a major flaw in my argument. With COIN, prior to 3-24 the PFC did not even have an FM.

Okay, so I guess if someone learns something on their own, then they deserve a reward. I further infer that you believe Soldiers are learning things on their own without significant assistance or training from their superiors. Apparently one of those things is COIN, a collective endeavor performed by units, which I guess we're to believe is spontaneously performed without guidance or direction from leaders, or something. And then, this justifies a reward for restraint, or something?

Forgive me if I stop responding.

[Ranger94]

Okay, so I guess if someone learns something on their own, then they deserve a reward. I further infer that you believe Soldiers are learning things on their own without significant assistance or training from their superiors. Apparently one of those things is COIN, a collective endeavor performed by units, which I guess we're to believe is spontaneously performed without guidance or direction from leaders, or something. And then, this justifies a reward for restraint, or something?

Yep

Forgive me if I stop responding.

When doing an AAR check ego at the door. very respectfully, I am pointing out my perspective based on my training and deployments