Quote Originally Posted by Entropy View Post
Bob's World,

Good comment on the Reserve/Guard. I wonder though, how things will be different now that the Guard and especially Reserve is increasingly considered an operational reserve force.

Excellent point. As has been oft debated on this forum and others, how does the Army in particular and the services in general respond to this concept of "Irregular Warfare."

While there is talk of changing structures, changing training, etc, there is very little talk of taking a major top down review of what capability needs to be trained and ready on short notice for day to day use in the active force(arguably should be weighted toward IW mission set), and where we can assume some degree of risk and create other capabilities for important periodic events within the reserves (arguably more heavily weighted toward major theater conflicts with near peer competitors).

To me the answer is pretty clear. The active force we have is not the active force we need, and we are abusing the hell out of the reserve force today because of it. Often Big Army gets shot down in flames by the most powerful lobby in America (National Guard Association of the United States) when it trys to selfishly pad itself at the expense of the Guard, so really bad deals usually fall to the USAR. In this case, however, I don't believe that the Guard would push back on a plan that gave them more warfighter capability and lowered their mobilization OPTEMPO. West Pointers just don't see the road to glory being at the head of a LOGPAC convoy, I guess.

I've spent a good deal of time and have commanded on both sides of this debate...I watch with intererst to see how it all plays out.