Army. Marine Corps to Grow

[tequila]

In our society in general when was the last time serving in the military was an honorable profession in the publics opinion?

I think our society views the military as an honorable profession. However, it is not viewed by the middle and upper classes as an economically sensible career choice. Stigma is too strong a word for it, insofar as most middle- and upper-class civilians venerate the military (from afar). But a polite disconnection is certainly evident. Iraq has certainly accentuated this trend.

[ODB]

Perhaps honorable is the wrong word.....was thinking along lines of the perception many have that those in the military could do nothing else with their lives and that is why they are there. Wish I was a better wordsmith...sorry but trying. Thank you for commenting that my question was coming across that way.

[Ken White]

"I think our society views the military as an honorable profession."

to society as a whole but I do believe it applies to the the majority of people. The 'eceonomically' viable is part of it but a generic aversion to anything military is also present in many.

"Just wish I knew what the thought process is behind some of these types of policies."

Basically it's the same old story; 'today is what I'll get judged on, someone else can worry about tomorrow.' Short sighted and I agree with you on that. it ain't smart...

"I have wondered many times if this is due more to society than anything else? "

As Tequila said, the economy is a big factor. A dozen or more other factors also impinge to one degree or another. The Army Chief of staff from 1979-83 tried to change the Army's image but TraDoc and the then MilPerCen fought it to a standstill. We're still paying for that intransigence.

On the societal aspect, it is perhaps noteworthy that prior to 9/11, most of a progressive bent were resoundingly anti-military and there was much clamor for reducing the defense budget even lower than it than was. After that date, it became uncool to most to denigrate the Armed Forces.

[tequila]

On the societal aspect, it is perhaps noteworthy that prior to 9/11, most of a progressive bent were resoundingly anti-military and there was much clamor for reducing the defense budget even lower than it than was. After that date, it became uncool to most to denigrate the Armed Forces.

I'd predate that to 1992, post-Gulf War. The unabashed triumph of Desert Storm rehabilitated the military in the eyes of all across the political spectrum - there is where you will see political faith in the military as an institution rise to its greatest heights. The military still ranks as the most trusted American institution in public life.

I'll remind you that slashing military spending was widely popular on all fronts in the wake of the Cold War - see SecDef Dick Cheney's record, pre-Desert Storm.

[ODB]

I'd predate that to 1992, post-Gulf War. The unabashed triumph of Desert Storm rehabilitated the military in the eyes of all across the political spectrum - there is where you will see political faith in the military as an institution rise to its greatest heights. The military still ranks as the most trusted American institution in public life.

I'll remind you that slashing military spending was widely popular on all fronts in the wake of the Cold War - see SecDef Dick Cheney's record, pre-Desert Storm.

It seems based off the poll numbers they directly corelate to the news media's coverage of the military. 02-03 was probably some of the most pro military news coverage in decades. We all know this is most peoples only source of information. Would be interesting to see how much affect media coverage has on the populations view of the military.

[Eden]

I know there is a lot of angst among active-duty posters about the declining quality of recruits, but keep some perspective. The quality of recruits would have to drop a lot to get as bad as it was in the late 70's and early 80's...and we managed. There may have to be adjustments to get the most out of a lower quality pool, but it can be done. ODB mentioned guys stuck at E-6...I remember an Army that still had 'career corporals' and they were valuable members of the team, if you knew how to handle and motivate them. For further research see "She Wore a Yellow Ribbon".

Anyway, I would like to see the extra strength - or at least some of it - siphoned off to the institutional Army. I know that is not very sexy, but I believe a rot has been eroding our training base and our intellectual base for more than a decade. My four years in TRADOC (99-03) were a real eye-opener, and unless things have changed combat units will continue to get half-trained recruits for some time. Instructor-to-student ratios declined, drill sergeant quality declined, courses had to be cancelled, etc. Training could not be properly updated or resourced because we lacked training developers; doctrine fell behind because we didn't have enough writers. As an example, when I was working on the development and integration of the Stryker, I was supposed to have 20 officers working for me. I had 3. Yes, we hired contractors to do some of these things, but they are not the panacea some claim. And they didn't mow grass, sit CQ, do funeral details, or raise the flag every morning. Thus, the remaining green-suiters were even more stretched.

We are eating our own children, and have been for years.

[ODB]

I remember an Army that still had 'career corporals' and they were valuable members of the team, if you knew how to handle and motivate them.

Would a solution to this be going back to the Spec 5, Spec 6....etc ranks? I have come across many soldiers through the years that would have loved to stay on a machine gun team, team leader etc...their entire career. This would be a way for these soldiers to continue to get pay increases and to do what they love. Imagine the proficiency of these troops. This would be an administrative nightmare, unfortunately. I can already see some these guys 10 years into their careers wanting to do something else. Ultimately as sad as it sounds many soldiers do not want the added responsibilities of leading troops.

Anyway, I would like to see the extra strength - or at least some of it - siphoned off to the institutional Army. I know that is not very sexy, but I believe a rot has been eroding our training base and our intellectual base for more than a decade. My four years in TRADOC (99-03) were a real eye-opener, and unless things have changed combat units will continue to get half-trained recruits for some time. Instructor-to-student ratios declined, drill sergeant quality declined, courses had to be cancelled, etc. Training could not be properly updated or resourced because we lacked training developers; doctrine fell behind because we didn't have enough writers. As an example, when I was working on the development and integration of the Stryker, I was supposed to have 20 officers working for me. I had 3. Yes, we hired contractors to do some of these things, but they are not the panacea some claim. And they didn't mow grass, sit CQ, do funeral details, or raise the flag every morning. Thus, the remaining green-suiters were even more stretched.

I have mixed thoughts and emotions on this subject. I myself have managed to stay out of TRADOC assignments and have stayed in operational units my career thus far (probably just jinxed myself). Every NCOES school I have attended the school house has taught me the job I was already doing, not preparing me for the future, and in many cases was years behind what was actually being used in units. This has been a problem that has plaqued the institutions for decades. Unfortunately to get POI/MOIs changed takes so long that by the time they are approved they are outdated. Talking with peers who have had to do time in TRADOC they couldn't wait to get out. Most of this is due to their hands being tied by the school house. Unfortunately the types of individuals we need in TRADOC stay away from TRADOC due to the bureaucracy. Additionally for many this is a career enhancer but many I work with want to stay operational and view individuals who volunteer for these assignments as those who are checking the block. A soldier who does go to these TRADOC assignments today come back three years behind on how things are being done operationally, instead of coming back with the latest and greatest. I have tried to figure the solution to this for years and don't know what the answer is and if there is a solution.

Honestly I find it disheartening that many of you have had these same issues many decades ago. IMHO I think technology has made this worse in many cases as our leaders are tied to email. The proverbial ass chewing for not answering an email because they were where they should have been observing training. The worse is whe your boss works next to you and as he's leaving for the day asks if you have checked your email because he forwarded everything to you instead of turning to you and telling you what was going. This in many instances has developed a new breed of leaders in the Army.

[Ken White]

I'd predate that to 1992, post-Gulf War. The unabashed triumph of Desert Storm rehabilitated the military in the eyes of all across the political spectrum - there is where you will see political faith in the military as an institution rise to its greatest heights. The military still ranks as the most trusted American institution in public life.

I'll remind you that slashing military spending was widely popular on all fronts in the wake of the Cold War - see SecDef Dick Cheney's record, pre-Desert Storm.

extent of who wanted what in regard to reduction of spending. Not to mention broader support -- and entry...

Cheney was one of the poorer SecDefs ever IMO, so you get no points for citing him. The man's a menace and he got to be VP due to the big donors insistence in return for supporting Bush 43, much as Al Gore was the price for the democratic donors support of Clinton.

You know what you read, I know what I experienced while working for DoD during the 90s and thus paying pretty close attention to the political and budget vibes. I'll stick with my post 9/11 for the progressives change of heart and 'support the troops' mantra.

The Armed Forces have always ranked higher in the trust category on polls than most institutions, no big change in that. Nor much solace, the public is fickle...