Yes, despite all that, I'd rather still be in. I sometimes tell people I'd rather stayed in and died in Iraq or Afghanistan than gotten out. But oh well.

When I first joined up, the Hollow Army was rebuilding after the Vietnam War. We made such strides in getting rid of the druggies, rebuilding the leadership, pride, discipline. By the time I made NCO, the service was something to be proud of. By the time of Desert Storm, we had overcome the Hollow Army.

Then came the Peace Dividend, Don't Ask Don't Tell, the exodus of the combat leaders and the advent of the corporate bullshit. The Army has lost its way yet again. We may have first-class equipment, and excellent material in the form of our enlisted personnel, but there are too many "leaders" who are just there to punch the ole time card and then get themselves a nice position with ole Chase or IBM....they could care less about their responsibilities.

That was part of the problem before too with many officers in all services were in it just to do their time. That included going to airborne, Ranger, and Special Operation schools because it looked good on their records.

Yup, too bad they forgot the "LEADERSHIP" part of the course.

Yeah I know. It just boggles my mind that they have 20 year old E-5s and E-6s running around who have one or two tours under their belt. I remember even to be become an NCO you had to BNCO and then on to work your way up. Most of these kids as E-5 and E-6 barely had time to learn their field craft of their MOS let alone take the classes, train properly with their units before deployments and what not.... Maybe it just me.

Granted if a guy is promoted due leadership they have showed out in the field that is fine, but one thing I do remember is that you were usually one type of soldier. You were great garrison troop, or great with field craft aspect. It took time to become competent in both....

Leadership course? What's this of which you speak? Back in 07 you didn't have to take any till you was a E5 promotable.

How come that doesn't surprise me. I know it was one of the reasons why I was in, at least with the 82nd Airborne there were no Corporals, if you E-4 you were Specialist even if you were Fire Team Leader you still were a Spec-4. I remember when I was in the 82nd Replacement Detachment an Corporal who was transferring in from Korea was told by the Detachment E-6 that there were no Corporals in the Division...

Of course, now I don't know if they have change that or not. I always felt if you were E-4 and Fire Team Leader then you should be able to wear the stripes. Otherwise, to someone outside of your chain of command would assume you were just another lazy pogue....

I suppose they are allowing E-4 or lower to join Special Forces now.

As well as probably there is drop in the demand of having Airborne Wings, Air Assault Wings, and the Ranger Tab. That so many NCOs and Junior Officers seem to get, most of the time to make them look more impressive to themselves than any real desire to do those jobs...

Thats one way to put it...

Back in 06-07 when I was consigned to recruiting hell, you could actually enlist, while still in high school, Special Forces. A little harder granted. You did basic, did jump, did Q, and then language school if you didn't already have one, and once done, insta-sgt and off you go.

Yeah, I understand why Special Forces are doing that, because other services Special Operation Command allow new recruits. At one time when they were basically went into country side to train and advise then yeah a team of E-5s on up would come in handy. Yet, for many of the operations they carry out today, I don't see where having everyone at least E-5. Maybe E-4 until they prove themselves and what not, but not give them sergeant stripes because they have finish 2 years or so of courses.

i know i guy always standing in front of somebodies desk while in garrison. but once he's down range people beg to have this young FO assigned to them.

Yep it the same in every MOS. The ones who do best in the field don't always make the best garrison soldiers...

Lee,

I would have to agree about the negative effects of "Don't Ask Don't Tell" (DADT) on the US military, especially in light of the real costs involved. The Government Accountability Office determined that between 2004 and 2009 alone, DADT cost the US military $193 million dollars to carry out in just five of the seventeen years of its existence.

Think about it... this was money that did not go towards funding a single weapon, buying a single round of ammunition up-armour a single Humvee or buy a single set of body armour. It was a policy that by design did not save one American life (other than perhaps the soldiers that were forced to quit and return home). Not a single dollar went directly or indirectly towards making the United States or the rest of the world any safer. It did not kill a single Irqqi insurgent, Saddam Fedayeen, Taliban, al Qaeda member. Crucial technicians, translators and intelligence officers (among others) were removed from their positions, the funding to train them going completely to waste. Indeed, most of the cost of DADT was towards training replacements, but by the same token it would seem more valuable for those funds to go towards adding thousands of additional trained personnel.

Tony

I always thought Don't Ask, Don't Tell was one of the dumber moments in US military history. What somebody does to another consenting adult, off-base, is no one else's business. But I guess it was just a means of taking attention from the hijinks that the brass was pulling...a base commander taking advantage of his position to get the wives of his subordinate officers to have sex with him? Another general flying his mistress on military aircraft? A officer responsible for nuclear weapons disobeying orders so that she can have an affair with an enlisted airwoman's husband? Perhaps the service needs to add more saltpeter to the rations!

I assume you mean in the same manner as the Bromide myth?
http://www.abc.net.au/science/articl...29/2611115.htm

Gee glad to hear the zero-tolerance only applies to those serving in the ranks...lol

What I enjoyed was a Captain, a company commander in the same armored battalion, hitting on my wife at a battalion BBQ. When my wife told him that she was married to a NCO, his response was to let her know that he could have me assigned to CQ when ever he liked, just to make it easier for her.

Her response was to let him know that we kept a 12-gauge in our quarters and anytime he felt like dropping by, the MPs would be picking his dead body up the next morning.

He pulled this stunt one too many times and a SP4's wife nailed him in the gonad's with a load of birdshot...and since it was off-post, the local police got involved and he was charged with breaking and entering and attempted assault...

When the story hit the local paper, a lot of wives called in, turns out that over thirty (that is 30+) IG complimants had been made, with no action.

A lot of officers got relieved over that one...

I know that rank has its privileages...but all too many people forget that rank has its responsabilities as well.

Captain Dick got it...in the 'nads, with a .410...in the bedroom!

LOL

I also look as the ban on gays from a National Security standpoint -- at a time when we need more fresh troops, and there are probably as many patriotic gay Americans as straight Americans willing and able to do military service, we are depriving ourselves of a vast pool of manpower, while we damage the mental health and home life of thousands of American servicemen and servicewomen by continually sending them off to year-to 15-month combat assignments.

Yeah like I said I am so glad they abide by the same zero-tolerance rules they wish the enlisted men to abide by...

I agree why deny them the chance to serve their country.

Don't get me started on constant rotation rate that both the Regular Army, National Guard/Reserve and the Marice Corps has to keep up with since 2003. The reorganization of the Army and her National Guard/Reserve has only compounded the problem when they should of expanded the military and not move troop around to make it appear bigger....

*hehs*

Now that I am no longer distracted, I can return to this concept. At any rate yes, mission and all does play a role, but a large focus should be on the conditions where they will be used. In essence away from the normal supply chain as they will be spending a lot of time away from the established lines. To me, that means minimal complexity. The fewest possible different makes and models of everything. Right now, in a normal Heavy ACR's average squadron, just the ammo supply situation is a clear example of that, 155 how, 120 Gun, 120 Mortar, Jav, TOW, AT4, Stinger, 40mm HV, 40mm GL, 25mm, .50, 7.62, 5.56, 9mm, 12G. And that's not counting aviation and the fact that all of that save the Stinger and 155 can be found in a single troop.

And then of course parts supply has to be a PITA.

If I had to equip and man a cavalry unit, that would be the first thing I would address. Yes, I can see why having a totaly different weapons mix than the regular army would be a issue, but in the context, it would be worth the hassle at the corps and divisional level.

The first thing I would address would be the small arms. I would standardize on two: A pistol round, and a rifle round. Just for S&G's it would be the .45 for the pistol, and for reasons other than the argument over the 5.56, the 6.8spc. Why the 6.8? Because it makes a better machine gun round than the 5.56, and finding a reliable compact light 7.62N weapon is non-trivial. Now the exact weapon is a little up in the air. I would prefer a design that can be used as a ultra short carbine, a reasonable AR, and a machine gun. I can get all that, well, most of all that with the AUG. And with the bonus that the weapons would be much more compact. The LMG version would also make for a decent DMR, so bonus there. MG wise, have to use something else. The M249 MInimi comes to mind, and it can be used for commanders weapons and coaxial mounts as well. With the Minimi being designed to fire a 7.62 round in the first place, upping it from 5.56 to 6.8 shouldn't be a problem. For vehicles I would do the same winnowing, even when it comes to unarmoured vehicles in all the flavours they come in. In this case, I'd base all trucks, wreckers, van bodies, anything larger than a HMMWV on the MAN series of trucks. Be it 3 tonnes, or 10, there is a size for that, and they are all based on the same parts, be it tyres, engines, whathave you. In the light vehicle category, yes, I'll stick with the humvee family. I have a soft spot for the things. Combat vehicles would follow the same format. A base chassis from which Gun, scout, mortar, air defense, command, apc, and recovery can be based off of. All cannons, be they scout or air defense would be the same size, and the gun would be probably be a 105. Anything less just wouldn't cut it in an anti tank role. My personal preference would be the CV90 series, in 40mm. With a small 4 man scout section, plenty of room to stow equipment. I would go tracks over wheels for durability, but note that there is no arty. This is the once place where having organic artillery is nice, but not essential, especially since I would (Using the ACR as a model) double the mortar section in each troop to four vehicles, all mounting the Patria doublebarreled automort. This way, we have fewer types of ammo to supply, fewer types of parts to supply, and can keep things simple. But, if wheels was needed, whatever wheeled vehicle I would have, would be either based off of the MAN trucks for parts commonality, or vice versa.

Yes, I would wish the US would finally figure out what the rest of NATO has know for years. The 5.56N round is almost useless, then again they did the same thing with 9mmP round to us in return.

Beats the butler in the library with the candlestick.....
:p

Never said it would be easy. Trying to get the Army to get rid of a weapons system is sort of like pulling teeth...with a pair of pliers...and no pain-killer.

There are basically two styles of "cavalry"; the divisional cavalry squadron is not going to be in a postion where it is cut off from established LOC, their mission is primarily short range in other words. So the ammo/parts mix is not going to be quite as bad a problem.

The second style is that of the ACRs...Desert Storm perhaps shows the intended role of an ACR in the best light. 2ACR screened the advance of VII Corps often ranging as much as 75 miles in front. While technically on its own, it controlled the ground to such an extent that fuel/ammo convoys were sent forward with minimal escort, so again, not cut off from established LOC.

In an ideal military, everyone would be in battlesuits and equipped with 5MW pulse cannons...but I do agree with you, if nothing else Iraq and Afghanistan simply confirm what was known since the Vietnam War...the 5.56mm round sucks. The 6.8mm looks like the best mix between the punch of a 7.62 and the light weight of the ole 5.56. I would like to see a AR/SAW/GPMG using this caliber...will I live to see that, doubtful, too many careers are tied up with 5.56mm.

105mm for an air defense cannon....hmmmmmm it would take out the attacker with one shot, but the rate of fire is going to suck! I think an autocannon in the 25-40mm range would be the best bet, but you are still going to need something to knock tanks out with, so thats a cannon in the 90mm-120mm range. I don't think that the various calibers are going to be culled down as far as you want to go....

Urm, I meant the automatic cannon would be the same, the large calibre cannon would be 105. :)

I agree that it is unlikely to say the least to see significant changes, but one can hope. I mean for crying out loud, for the price of 1, maybe 2, F35's, we could rearm all the branches, active, reserve, and guard. And I also agree, that the units shouldn't have to be out of the LOC, but there has to be the ability to run with minimal to none for short times, remember, the enemy is the enemy because he does things you don't want him to. :)

Basically though the point of the exercise is to figure out a "sandbox" formation and equipment schedule if you was king and could do as you will. :)

(Can just see it... "Today, I just signed Executive Order 42276, ordering the procurement department to pull their collective heads out of....")

I know, I was just picturing a former Warthog pilot in the office next door rolling in hot with his 30mm and an evil tanker grinning back, setting his 105mm to "HIGH RATE"....he tells me about all of the tanks he destroyed in Desert Storm and I remind him that the Air Force considers hitting the ground to be an accomplishment.

But you have to have the spirit, not to mention the courage, to make that kind of decision. And that's something that I see lacking in the DoD. Yup the Air Force could do without a couple of F-35s and does the Navy really need another Aegis Destroyer? Face it, the Army is the least "sexy" of all the branches...that's why we always get hind tit when it comes time to dish out money for the various programs. Its been known that we need decent ADA ever since the Sergeant York disaster (and that one was the fault of certain congressmen and their corporate buddys), still soldering on with the M-741 ehhh! OH WAIT! We get the Avenger...a hummer with a turret that breaks down moreoften than not with a four pack of stingers and a ma deuce...:mad:

We need better body armor and helmets...and it takes retired officers and NCOs to badger Congress and DoD into doing something...I still chuckle remembering when they started sending helmets to GIs in Iraq....DEAR GAWD!!!! DON'T CNN OR FOX FIND OUT!!!!!

We had a good platform with the M-8 MGS...till it was killed off so that the navy could but a couple of Burke-class destroyers....considering that the US Navy is now capable of taking on all the next ten largest navies at the same time? Guess we had to worry about ole number eleven!

Don't know what the requirement for an ACR is nowdays (is there even an ACR left?) But the 2ACR was always loaded with enough supplies for 72-hours of independent operations...when we had our truck company. Beyond that, then the trucks start to outnumber the tanks/CFVs, just how much operating time is needed?

WHAT!!!!!! Our current President ordering the Pentagon to just drop 60 years of bad habits!!!!!!!!!!!! ;)

You know very few units ever had their 'Full Load Out' even when they could claim this it was general short. Unless you were in ACR in Germany or in Korea that is.

Yeah one thing that I always wonder when I was in was about the body armor. I had play twilight 2000 before going in, and the armor I ever seen while in was the helmet. So did they replace the 'Fritz' helmet with improve version? Yeah I always wonder where the body armor was.

What made me shake my head during Operation Desert Storm/Shield was that video of troops in the US 1st Mechanized Division that had been deployed late to the Middle East. They were wearing vest that had regular green camo cover. Even many would still be in the old woodland uniforms. Which proves they never really had enough of the Desert cammys on hand for large scale operations. Granted at the time who would of thought of having the units from the III Corps and Germany being sent to Middle East or for that matter anywhere but Germany. It one of the things especially the Army, where they have mind set that only certain units would ever be sent to this place or that place. When the last 20 years have shown once the units that are suppose to head there are already committed, you should have plans and option to move other units as needed.

The ole fritz was replaced with one with improved webbing suspension...then updated with padding. The new advanced combat helmet has a different mix of plastic and kevlar, the improved suspension and padding and adds the bolt on plate to attach a NVD.

As for the VII Corps and its use of woodland BDUs in Desert Storm...it worked out in the end, the PSYOP people were dropping leaflets telling the Iraqis that the Allies had even pulled the troops from Germany to fight them, you know, the ones that had spent 20+ years training to kill Russians! And the Iraqis could tell these Soviet-killers apart becuase they would wear green and brown camouflage. It always comes down to the delivery, doesn't it?

And it was also a sad testiment that the Army was simply not equipped to conduct large scale desert operations.

Even being Army I have to admit the ones who really get hind tit are the Marines. They have the oldest gear, and get the good stuff last.

In general they do tend to get the best gear last, but they have been able to claim some gems at that others have passed up on, ie LAV-25 for their.