Quote Originally Posted by Ken White View Post
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
My post from 17 May 2010

"Most of you on this site advocate a new (or at least a redefined) type of war (This includes Gentile). "

My post from 23 May 2010.

"Quote:
Originally Posted by Schmedlap View Post
Reminds me of people claiming that our small unit leaders "don't get COIN" or "need to learn COIN" when, in fact, it was the person making the assertion who just finally came around to understanding what COIN is.
You just described the turn-a-round of leadership for Gen. Odierno and the re-writting of history of Col. Gentile"

I understand that Col and Gen. need to be held accountable. I am not sure this site does.

Quote Originally Posted by Ken White View Post
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.
I agree and that is why the reward system (and Awards count for promotion points) should be revised.

Quote Originally Posted by Ken White View Post
There's an adequate reward system in place today -- if it's not being used properly, that, too, is a lick on the Army.
Funny, I was walking in Crystal City underground today and two friends of mine spotted me and asked why I had a stern look on my face. I did not even realize that I did it or the reason.

I looked back and I saw an E8 that did not have a combat patch. In 9years of a nation at war we still promote to the senior ranks those that do not have combat experience. ( NOTE: HRC may add Promotion Points for combat experience in June 2011)