Let's get off the dime on this threat and express your opinions. Please post a brief explanation for your vote. OK to just agree with a previous post on this thread or another in this section.
Yes -- let our enemies beware!
No -- too little education or knowledge of foreign cultures
No -- modern commo moves authority up, not down.
No -- strategy has become too complex for NCOs to understand, let alone execute.
No -- some other reason, explained below.
Let's get off the dime on this threat and express your opinions. Please post a brief explanation for your vote. OK to just agree with a previous post on this thread or another in this section.
There seems to be an overwhelming opinion that the strategic corporal is the answer to our woes in Iraq, but achieving this is as likely as making our Infantry soldiers as capable as the famed Science Fiction Starship Troopers within the next decade.
1. Educated and aware citizens do not volunteer for the Army in droves. While pay is one issue, I would argue it is a minor one. The main reason is the human material that could become the strategic corporal doesn't want to work the 1st SGT, SGM, CSM or CPT whose focus is on conforming to mindless uniformity and regulations. We have to develop senior leaders in the Officer and NCO ranks first that can groom strategic corporals. This requires a significant cultural change within our ranks, and perhaps a purging of our ranks of those who confuse discipline with uniformity. While some degree of uniformity does instill a sense of discipline, the point is we have to many so called leaders that take the mindless to the extreme and drives smart kids out of the Army, or into Special Operations. Our system actually dumbs kids down, because they are taught success is simply conforming and mouthing off with hoo’a giving the illusion of motivation. If you want thinkers, you have to create a culture that accepts them.
2. Our education system that our kids endure does not produce strategic corporals. One could argue that our kids have been dumbed down by computers and computer games. There is very little incentive or cultural emphasis on really thinking.
I agree that if the strategic corporal concept could be initiated, it would be very helpful, but I want to see the plan for implementing it. Maybe a special cohort unit with hand picked leaders?
Bill raises an important point.
Of course we can produce a small number of Strategic Corporals. But the context here is Strategic Corporals in large forces, at least like Marines with 200k. Otherewise we're playing with miniatures, in a strategic sense.
Agreed.Originally Posted by Bill Moore
You may want to have a look at The Creating Brain, by Nancy Andreasen.
Martin
If an ice cream shop in Iraq or a pizza resturant in Israel can be a strategic target, I suppose a corporal who has to defend these locations has some strategic decisions to make, but he is still reacting within the framework of the overall strategy set by the commanders.
One can question whether these are really strategic targets, or just a reflection of an enemy too weak to target those who oppose him. It cannot be said that an ice cream shop or a pizza resturant is the same as the trains carrying troops and supplies that Lawrence taught his followers to stop with booby traps. I would argue that targeting them reflects a poverty of both moral and military demisions. It is a reflection of the cultural cowardice of the enemy.
SSG is the peak of an NCOs career; the survival of the fit. Progressing further past this rank, they get senile and it becomes survival of the stubborn. By CSM, they get alzimers and become crazy.The main reason is the human material that could become the strategic corporal doesn't want to work the 1st SGT, SGM, CSM or CPT whose focus is on conforming to mindless uniformity and regulations. We have to develop senior leaders in the Officer and NCO ranks first that can groom strategic corporals.
This also goes for CPTs. Upon making Maj. a frontal labotomy is performed. They may recover at a later rank but are never the same.
"Leaders" get jealous and resentful when a young stud takes the initiative on the battlefield without permission. Peers will also do anything to undercut the competition. Retrobution is exacted indirectly through administrative errors(ie losing awards/promotion paperwork, filing paperwork late, lying about it, ect) Peers can undermine the reputation of a leader by subverting their subordinates.
Last edited by GorTex6; 03-06-2006 at 08:34 PM.
Why not try keeping pay grades seperate from the rank structure. That way highly skilled people would not seek promotion just to get more money. Some police departments have done this with great success. They are called master patrolman and they stay on the street where their hard earned skills have the most use. But the pay keeps going up regardless of the actual rank they have on their sleeve.
Many generalizations here GT-6, and while some of us have seen examples in our careers of "ROADS" scholars, I believe that such a sweeping statement concerning senior SNCO's and field grade officers is unwarranted.Originally Posted by GorTex6
Not much time to respond here, just want to state for the record that in many military communities the senior SNCO and "Iron Major" are the backbone of successful operations. While that may not be true in every MOS, I would offer that infantry and other combat arms S-3's, XO's and CO's do not fit your one-size fits all generalization. Same, same for SNCO billets in infantry and other combat arms battalions. I also believe that holds true for SOF.
Yes, success ultimately depends on the junior leadership on the ground - the strategic corporals and lieutenants - but to just release them into a battle space without training, fire support, combat service support, operation plans, etal, would be foolish at best.
Are there exceptions? Of course, but to stereotype by rank does not do justice to the "good ones" who stuck it through...
Again, just a quick thought on your post.
Last edited by DDilegge; 03-06-2006 at 08:44 PM.
Root out and exterminate the resentful and retrobutive egos, extinguish the intercliquish politics, reward enginuity....Originally Posted by Bill Moore
Surgically, a baseball bat could fix our problems.
The strategic corporal is only possible when the Commanders lead by Commander's Intent rather than conduct battle management by detail.
The trends I have observed in C2 by JFCOM and the Army seem to emphasize concentration of power and initiative at the higher levels taking away the initiative from the lower levels. The Marine Corps with it's emphasis on leadership and initiative at the lowest level maybe able to achieve this, but only time will tell.
Couple of points:
1) I think that there is alot of underestimation of the quality of folks in the junior enlisted ranks. There are many, especially in the cohorts that enlisted after 9/11, who have an ability to understand other cultures, and the interaction of politics and foreign policy. Gone are the days, if they ever existed, where the military was made up of individuals with no other prospects in society.
2) The strategic corporal is not a pipe dream, it is a necessity. It is not a cliche to say that this war and future wars are fought heavily in the media. With instantaneous communication, the corporal must understand the broader consequences of his actions, or we will lose the media war.
Bookmarks