Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 46

Thread: Troops in Iraq allowed to drink beer on Super Bowl Sunday!

  1. #21
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Windsor, near London.
    Posts
    64

    Default Where you lead, we blindly follow!

    Don't worry. We're stoopid too. After happily conquering 2/3 of the globe (especially you...sorry about the White House again by the way) whilst blind drunk, we operate an all dry policy in both theatres, rather than the perfectly manageable 2-can rule which sufficed during the dark days of Northern Ireland and indeed the Balkans. God forbid we should treat the boys like adults. Countless Yes Men Lemmings will bleat that there are now no G1 discipline issues whatsoever on operations (2 legs baaad...4 legs good...). Of course they're wrong. I seem to recall 2 cleansing weak beers helped keep the demons at bay after a day of exhuming mass graves in Bosnia and Kosovo. Never mind! At least the Grown Ups get to swill the odd bottle of Red while 'entertaining VIPs'

  2. #22
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Megalopolis
    Posts
    83

    Default

    I approve of the 2 beer policy as in keeping with the best traditions of Our Army.

    Washington I know approved rum; essentially as a weather effects remedy and now I've read he also allowed beer. All from a man who forbade profanity.

    I perceive that, even though GEN Odierno's policy has been extended beer will still be missing our base camp.

    I'll let you know if it happens. I'm actually cool with the Bitburger etc. that we now enjoy from the NA Lager markets of the world.

  3. #23
    Council Member BayonetBrant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Posts
    260

    Default

    I guess my question about the no alcohol policy and 'breaking' it for the Super Bowl is this:

    Do you have to drink to have a good time? I mean, really, are you not going to enjoy the Super Bowl because there's no alcohol present?

    I'm not saying adults shouldn't be able to drink, as long as they can drink responsibly. But to say they should have to have a beer, or that alcohol prohibitions are inherently evil under all circumstances certainly sounds like someone with a borderline addiction problem.
    Brant
    Wargaming and Strategy Gaming at GrogHeads
    Military news and views at GrogNews

    “their citizens (all of them counted as such) glorified their mythology of ‘rights’… and lost track of their duties. No nation, so constituted, can endure.” Robert Heinlein, Starship Troopers 1959

    Play more wargames!

  4. #24
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    1,457

    Default

    Interesting post on the logistics of Superbowl beer:

    Here is how it works: The people at the top said beer would be permitted only at Commanders’ discretion. Once Odierno said it was good then each MND Commander had to decide. Once they decided it trickled down to the Provincial level and finally reached us, about three days before I have to go and pick up 2000+ beers. It gets better. If, by chance, someone on my FOB doesn’t want one or both of their beverages the excess all has to be accounted for and then turned back in no later than three days after the Superbowl. To make the whole thing really convenient beers can only be consumed in the DFAC during the showing of the Superbowl which, I believe, is about 1am to 5am.

  5. #25
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Iraq
    Posts
    2

    Default Update:

    For those who haven't heard, GEN Odierno extended the beer policy to everyone else in Iraq. All the Division commanders outside Baghdad weren't going to allow it, but he overrode them. As to how it will affect readiness? They're reshowing the game later in the day, to allow most others a chance to drink their 2 beers.

  6. #26
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Lillington
    Posts
    55

    Default What amazing log leadership we have.

    If getting joe some beer is really this big of a hassle, perhaps the problem is with those responsible for getting joe beer, not the policy of getting joe beer.

    This truly is the bike helmet generation. I sincerely hope that officers at the lowest levels who have been degraded by such policies as no beer will pull their collective heads out and do something about it when they have the authority.

    Those against this idea remind me of the major I worked for who would meekly allow some SF gaurd (that's Air Force, not green beanie) to inspect all our pax for ID cards instead of taking his word that his convoy was secure.

    When I brought up that the gaurd has basically just insulted the hell out of his command and compentence, he became incensed with the policy and fired off a few hate mails. Probably to no effect. At least he is saved.

    The point is that no man would allow another man to treat him this way, certainly without a great deal of bitching and kvetching. Our society has all but done away with men though, so the ranks are fairly quiet and accepting.

    Hope I can remember this rant when I come into my "majority."
    The society that separates its scholars from its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting by fools.

    ---A wise old Greek
    Leadership is motivating hostile subordinates to execute a superior's wish you don't agree with given inadequate resources and insufficient time while your peers interfere.

  7. #27
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Lillington
    Posts
    55

    Default And Schmedlap

    That unit's situation is due directly to our policy of not having doctrine defenses regarding pro-wire and claymores, something I ran into over and again in that country. Beer or no (in the case of that OP, no) we are always going to be prone to massive wave assualts. And I would take a drunk E1 with a good spread of claymores over a sober one without a single protective mine any day. Not that we have to choose, I just don't care for the red herring.
    The society that separates its scholars from its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting by fools.

    ---A wise old Greek
    Leadership is motivating hostile subordinates to execute a superior's wish you don't agree with given inadequate resources and insufficient time while your peers interfere.

  8. #28
    Council Member Ken White's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8,060

    Thumbs up And I thought I was alone in the world...

    Quote Originally Posted by sapperfitz82 View Post
    This truly is the bike helmet generation.
    It's always nice to know there are others out there...

  9. #29
    Council Member reed11b's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Olympia WA
    Posts
    531

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sapperfitz82 View Post
    This truly is the bike helmet generation.
    I just found my new signature, thank you sir!
    Reed
    Quote Originally Posted by sapperfitz82 View Post
    This truly is the bike helmet generation.

  10. #30
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    1,457

    Default Your major is wrong..

    Those against this idea remind me of the major I worked for who would meekly allow some SF gaurd (that's Air Force, not green beanie) to inspect all our pax for ID cards instead of taking his word that his convoy was secure.

    When I brought up that the gaurd has basically just insulted the hell out of his command and compentence, he became incensed with the policy and fired off a few hate mails. Probably to no effect. At least he is saved.
    That security guard doesn't make up ID-checking requirements on his own. Security (to include when and how ID's are checked) come from the installation/base/whatever commander or his/her designated representative. The SF guy was just doing his job by enforcing the current security posture and he insulted no one. If anything, the major insulted the installation Commander by complaining about his/her security measures. The reason there was no reply was probably because the guy was doing his J-O-B.

    I've done basically the same thing. If there's some person I don't know in one of my classified briefings, I have every right, and indeed it is my duty, to ask for proof of the proper clearance, and I will ask. That's not an insult either. That's my job, and my authority to protect classified information does not get thrown away simply because someone happens to be a higher rank than me. This is often called "positional authority" and is separate from authority based on rank.

    Obviously, in such cases, proper customs and courtesies must be observed and such positional authority should not be abused.

  11. #31
    Council Member RTK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Wherever my stuff is
    Posts
    823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sapperfitz82 View Post
    This truly is the bike helmet generation.
    AKA the Similic generation: in memory of the enzymes that made kids tough back in the day, kept them from whining, breaking bones, and being general pansies; enzymes that are present in breast milk but were left out of the chemical makeup of manufactured formula.
    Example is better than precept.

  12. #32
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,444

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sapperfitz82 View Post
    That unit's situation is due directly to our policy of not having doctrine defenses regarding pro-wire and claymores, something I ran into over and again in that country.
    Not sure if that's a policy or not. Granted this was Iraq, rather than Afghanistan, but we had claymores in OIF III. Lots of 'em. I remember it vividly because 3 months after we emplaced them, we were informed that we were not permitted to do so unless the - get this - the DIVISION COMMANDER personally improved their emplacement. No kidding, I had to draw detailed sector sketches (using Microsoft Paint) of every OP, strongpoint, and our patrol base, showing the detailed position of about 40 claymores (12-digit grids to each), orientation (in degrees), where the trigger mechanism(s) would be, and give detailed orders regarding when it would be detonated, and then email this up the chain to Division. Of course, I had nothing better to do, right? We were running a 24/7 graphic design and Kinko's office in that lovely, dust-covered patrol base. This small task was nothing in comparison to submitting individual award packets for each Soldier, for each CIB and service award, in triplicate (4 or 5 times because Bde and Div kept changing the standards).

    Thankfully, two months later, the Division Commander graciously gave his warmest blessings for the emplacements (we never recovered them while awaiting his approval). Given the detailed information that he requested about the emplacements, I expected lots of changes to be dictated. But, apparently, our judgment was flawless. He did not direct us to change a single thing - not even turning a claymore one degree to the north or shifting it 2 meters to the east - nothing. This was very encouraging and reassuring to those of us who were insecure about our tactical competence. Had we detonated them prior to receiving his approval, I'm not sure how that would have been received. Thank goodness the General did not slough off a decision of such far-reaching strategic importance onto his subordinates.

    Nobody ever questioned our use of concertina or pickets. I guess they were just assuming some risk in allowing us to figure it out for ourselves.

  13. #33
    Council Member Ken White's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8,060

    Default We're not alone. As long ago as 1962 or thereabouts

    the British Forces in the Borneo Confrontation had to go to London to get specific permission to fire SS-11 Missiles form RAF Helicopters...

    Too much peace time is bad for Armies...

    Beats the alternative, tho'

    Well, maybe.

  14. #34
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    FDNY
    Posts
    27

    Default

    Every 45 days rated me two beers while afloat the USS Bataan in 2001. Say what you will about addictions, but those two drinks tasted like God himself sealed the can.

    Baghdad, 2006: One of our units decided to mount claymores to the front of their Humvees. I think that fell in the good initiative, bad judgement category.

  15. #35
    Council Member Uboat509's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    CO
    Posts
    681

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dusty View Post

    Baghdad, 2006: One of our units decided to mount claymores to the front of their Humvees. I think that fell in the good initiative, bad judgement category.
    Please tell me that you are kidding. Nobody could be that stupid.

    SFC W

  16. #36
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    FDNY
    Posts
    27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Uboat509 View Post
    Please tell me that you are kidding. Nobody could be that stupid.

    SFC W

    They seriously did it. I believe there were some individuals relieved over it, but it happened before I joined the unit, so my knowledge of the whole deal is extremely limited.

  17. #37
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3,098

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Uboat509 View Post
    Please tell me that you are kidding. Nobody could be that stupid.

    SFC W
    ...I seem to recall a do not do this-type safety bulletin that went out actually earlier than '06 that had photos of the vehicles with claymores mounted......

  18. #38
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,444

    Default

    I don't get it. Did the gunner have wire leading up to his turret, clacker in hand, waiting for the driver to run down enemy combatants and blast shrapnel at them? Were they going to throw a lighted rag over the hood and ram something? How does one attempt (successfully or otherwise) to employ a claymore mounted on the front of a vehicle? Were they trying to turn a HMMWV into a VBIED?

  19. #39
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Megalopolis
    Posts
    83

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Schmedlap View Post
    I don't get it. Did the gunner have wire leading up to his turret, clacker in hand, waiting for the driver to run down enemy combatants and blast shrapnel at them? Were they going to throw a lighted rag over the hood and ram something? How does one attempt (successfully or otherwise) to employ a claymore mounted on the front of a vehicle? Were they trying to turn a HMMWV into a VBIED?
    I too am stupefied by this action. However my mind immediately leapt to a similar experience. I personally do not discuss such things as might indicate friendly TTPs. End of that discussion.

    FYI: look up M113 in wikipedia and look at the photo next to the paragraph headed: "Modifications for Iraq"

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M113

    It also refers thusly to my school of thought on the issue:
    "Most of the M113s which are still in service have been upgraded. However, they are still lightly protected compared to modern APCs or IFVs such as the M2 Bradley or IDF Achzarit. Those larger vehicles cannot be transported in a C-130 plane so it may be argued that their capability to be air-deployed provides an advantage over more heavily armored vehicles. A fervent pro-M113 community has developed due to the versatility of the platform".

    Quite agreed.

    Coming back to the subject at hand; In my circle of acquintance here in OIF this "beer issue" is really taking off. GEN Odierno, who shares a hometown with my own unit, could have just won election to the presidency.

    In any event he's now the most loved General of our time, based solely on my observations here.

  20. #40
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Rome
    Posts
    14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Schmedlap View Post
    I don't think this would have been possible on any of my deployments, simply due to the logistics, unless beer is palletized like bottled water and there were a super special LOGPAC run on Super Sunday. It seems foolish to even ponder it - a special beer shipment to the FOB/LSA at least one day before Super Sunday. I am sure this requires guards and accountability procedures almost akin to arms room SOPs. Bn support platoon makes a special trip to receive it, unless it happens to fall on the day that they normally go to the FOB/LSA, then they bring it to the Bn. Unless there is a scheduled LOGPAC for that day from Bn to Co/Plt (generally not the case), then it sits at Bn and probably requires someone to guard it. When it finally does get sent to company/platoon, I suppose the guys on "red" cycle consume their 2 beers as they rotate off of guard duty. And the guys out in sector (strongpoints/ambushes/sniper recon/etc) - I guess we call them in early (beer first, mission second) or just let them drink it on the following day and don't tell anyone (especially not the General)?

    Talk to someone currently serving in a staff billet in theater and I guarantee many units have tasked some Captain or Major to honcho this effort - to coordinate the special trip to pick it up, to figure out the distribution time/place/quantity, accountability procedures - this is a good solid 20 PowerPoint slides with lots of potential for flashy images, probably including 2 or 3 slides that have animations and at least 1 with sound.

    This sounds like one of those ideas that some folks on the FOB cheer for, but the guys in the patrol bases and outposts react to in the same way that they react to "TGIF!" Seems like a morale booster for people who really shouldn't need one.
    In Baghdad, the Brit soldiers don't seem to have any trouble finding beer. The troops in the remote areas will figure it out if they are allowed to. Is there a western military besides the US that has such a restrictive no-alcohol policy?

Similar Threads

  1. US Senator's Iraq Trip Comments: WSJ 15 June 07
    By TROUFION in forum US Policy, Interest, and Endgame
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-18-2007, 04:26 PM
  2. The New Plan for Iraq
    By SWJED in forum US Policy, Interest, and Endgame
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 03-19-2007, 03:00 AM
  3. Victory in Iraq
    By SWJED in forum US Policy, Interest, and Endgame
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 01-03-2007, 01:50 AM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-20-2006, 07:14 PM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-08-2006, 09:01 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •