|
herfacechair -> RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer your questions if you have any... (6/24/2010 6:01:16 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: thompsonx
quote:
ORIGINAL: herfacechair
quote:
ORIGINAL: thompsonx
I hope your return flight was uneventful.
I still have a couple of questions that you would be in a position to answer.
Currently what is the desertion rate for those in country in general and also specific to your unit?
Second question:
What is the quality of the new recruits being sent to you?
Our brigade is currently in country, and we've had zero desertion/AWOL. Re-enlistment motivation is high... even those that were adamant about getting out ended up re-enlisting. I've got no major complaints about the quality of new privates coming to our unit. But again, we're infantry. Perhaps a POG could give you a different answer.
Lt general hurtling says you are full of shit.
http://undertheradar.military.com/2010/03/army-thinks-video-games-made-recruits-soft/
Did you bother reading your sources with the intention of understanding what they were getting across?
Let's look at what he ACTUALLY said:
"NPR quotes Lt. Gen. Mark Hertling as saying that recruits are "advanced in terms of their use of technology, and maybe not as advanced in their physical capabilities or ability to go into a fight."
Let's apply some reading comprehension skills. Here's what that's communicating:
A: They are advanced when it comes to technology use
B: They are not as advanced when it comes to physical capabilities or ability to go into a fight
Now? What, exactly, is being compared here?
Their ability to fight compared to their ability to be technology wizards. This statement DOES NOT compare them to soldiers of the past, it compares one of their skills against another.
Nowhere in that article, or the article that it links to, does it indicate that our recruits have gotten worse when it comes to doing missions. I've done missions with them. They pulled like pros, they did their job the way we expected them to do their job. More importantly, nothing in your articles contradicts what I said.
"New recruits will receive more extensive training in hand-to-hand skills like kicking, punching and holds to prepare recruits for that kind of close combat that Hertling expects our soldiers to "be in for a very long time."
This describes a plan to adjust training to the mission at hand, as seen by a flag officer. That's not an indication of the quality of anybody, reporting to their first permanent unit, as a soldier. If you've served like you claimed, you'd notice that this issue plays out throughout the years.
"The U.S. Army is overhauling its basic training program for the first time in 30 years. The military says the change is necessary to keep pace with the new realities of war in Iraq and Afghanistan, but that's not the only reason. Part of the shift is intended to train a new generation of soldiers whose experience with fighting is usually limited to video games."
Overhauling is a major change, not some minor change here and there. What kind of war were we preparing for 30 years ago? Hmmm, let's see, 30 years ago, it was 1980. That year, we were preparing for what? Cold War maybe?
So what we have is BCT that predominantly trains soldiers to fight the Cold War. They do have urban warfare, depending on BCT location, you could touch on mountaineering. But most the training is Cold War oriented. What it needs are major adjustments to prepare soldiers to fight in urban areas and mountains in Afghanistan.
The first part, keeping pace with the new realities of war, is properly credited to the military. That's precisely why the changes are being added. For example, the PT program throughout the Army is being looked at for change... to something close to what we'd encounter out in sector... these kinds of changes are applicable to everybody.
The second part is a New People's Radio spin.
The purpose of basic training is to train people to fight who've never fought before... that's why it's called BASIC COMBAT TRAINING! If anything, your article talks about how it's going to whip a minimum exercise generation into shape.
Once they get to the real Army, they're ready to do the basic functions that we expect them to do. We provide the advanced training. Like I said in my previous response, I'm Infantry. We're PT nuts... Our young soldiers would do things like pump iron while doing flutter kicks... and they'd play video games later on in the day. The majority of our young guys do cross-fit training in the gym in addition to the standard PT. So not only are they doing the morning PT, they're going to the gym later on to do cross fit training.
Those articles don't apply to the new privates that we get at our unit. My statement still stands.
"Lt. Gen. Mark Hertling tells NPR's Scott Simon the military is learning how to mold recruits from the millennial generation. They're "advanced in terms of their use of technology, and maybe not as advanced in their physical capabilities or ability to go into a fight. So we're taking that into consideration as well in doing this holistic review."
First, this is the military doing something that marketing departments do.... Adjust to new demographics. That's why you're seeing the coke commercials that you see today, and not the coke commercials from the late 70s, early 80s, where people sing, "Coke is it..."
People change, demographics change, you have to adjust accordingly if you want to get new prospects, or effectively train new privates.
This article doesn't support what you're insinuating.
BUT WAIT! THERE'S MORE!
"We are seeing a decline across the board in America," he says. "This isn't a decline in our recruits; this is a decline in our American society in terms of their physical capacity. It's just a softer generation."
What does that entire statement say? Go ahead, read it loud if you have to. Here, let me point something out to you:
"This isn't a decline in our recruits;"
Need me to repeat that for you?
What' he's basically saying is that he's adjusting training to match what AMERICA is providing the Army. The end goal? To provide someone that's qualified, after AIT, to operate in a real Army unit.
"But we can't afford to accept that," Hertling says. "We've got to train soldiers to climb the peaks of Afghanistan."
Hence my mountaineering comments earlier. You might get that depending on BCT location, but it's not something that's guaranteed. Privates have to report to units in places like Fort Hood, Fort Carson, or Fort Lewis to get that kind of training. What this general is saying is that we should get basic mountaineering training into BCT. This makes sense, as Afghanistan is about to become our sole main military effort.
It's not just a fitness issue, either. "We certainly have a generation that is not as disciplined when they enter the military."
Now, read that statement. When you enter the military, where do you end up at? Basic Combat Training, or "boot camp." Nowhere in my posts did I claim to be a drill sergeant. I'm not one, I don't get people just coming into the military, I get people from other units, or from AIT.
Your question asked me about the quality of recruits that I'm getting. I gave you a factual answer. And there's a reason to why I had to mention the fact that we're infantry.
The combat arms MOSs are "more brutal" when weeding lack of discipline out... we do it by forcing the weakness out of a private's body when they screw up. We can still smoke our soldiers... have them do push-ups, flutter kicks, iron mikes, mountain climbers, etc to instill discipline, we could go "drill sergeant mode" on them... call it corrective training.
My favorites? "Tripwire! Machinegun fire! Tripwire! Machine gun fire! ..." Or "Low crawl go..." Or, "Alligator crawl go..." "Bear crawl go..." Mostly battle focused. [:D] You'd have to really "screw the pooch" before I make you do low crawls though. [:D]
In most instances, we get a quality performer, hence my statement that I've got no major complaints.
"Whereas they might have what they believe is a form of courage or discipline, it's not what we expect of a soldier in very tense and difficult situations," Hertling says.
This happens with every new generation that enters the military. If you've served before, you'd know this as something similar to a "Rambo Complex," where they come in thinking that they'll single handedly defeat the enemy.
In some ways, that means basic training needs to get -- well, more basic. The new regimen spends even more time on how to fight.
"It's including things like the use of weapons, knives, bayonets, sticks -- even the rifle can be used as a weapon without shooting it," Hertling says. Hand-to-hand skills like kicking, punching and holds are preparing recruits for close combat, which, he notes, are the kinds of situations the military is expecting to "be in for a very long time."
Again, this goes back to adjusting training to meet a changing reality... not because someone came up with the same misguided notions you have about the quality of our new privates. The above skills take prominence in an environment where you have to climb mountains with allot of rocks and vegetation, or root people out of caves. This is bringing some concepts, applicable to jungle warfare, back.
They may need to spend more time toughening up, but Hertling says, today's recruits also bring skills and an attitude that the military's not seen before.
Which happens in BCT, but when they get to us, they could do the basic functions that's expected from them, just as generations of soldiers have when they reported from AIT.
"They're different. They have a technology edge. I think they're smarter than any generation we've ever had before," he says. "They certainly ask a lot more difficult questions."
They have loyalty, Hertling says, but he thinks the most important thing about this generation is that they want to change the world. "They want to contribute to something that's bigger than themselves."
Again, most of what's said here is said about every generation that comes in. People in your generation wanted to change the world, so did those in the next generation, as well as in my generation. "Smarter and ask more questions than before?" They've been describing new service members like that for years. Heck, Van Steuben (sp) mentioned something about new soldiers asking questions, and how you have to explain the reasons behind your orders, in order to make them comply.
This is nothing new, this is nothing out of the ordinary.
"I think they're magnificent."
WHERE, in those articles, does it talk about desertion?
WHERE, in those articles, does it emphasize privates currently reporting to their units?
And WHERE, in those articles, does the general say that I'm "full of shit"?
Let me jog your memory a bit:
"Currently what is the desertion rate for those in country in general and also specific to your unit?" -thompsonx
"What is the quality of the new recruits being sent to you?" -thompsonx
If you read the article, it talks about new privates reporting for BASIC, NOT reporting to their units!
HENCE, my statement still stands. I've got no major complaints about the quality of our new privates.
The source of your articles incase you try to backtrack:
http://undertheradar.military.com/2010/03/army-thinks-video-games-made-recruits-soft/
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=124923602&ft=1&f=1049
|
|
|
|
