User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 10/9/2004 3:44:14 PM EDT
[#1]
With the draw-downs in the 90s, it was decided to keep as many trigger-pullers on active duty as possible. As a consequence, jobs such as civil affairs were moved to the reserves and National Guard. What is needed in Iraq right now is alot of those "non-combatant" jobs, such as civil affairs.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2004 3:45:02 PM EDT
[#2]
Clinton cut back the military too much, and bush started 2 wars when the military wasn't prepared.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2004 3:50:07 PM EDT
[#3]
So out of the 1.5 mil, we don't have many trigger pullers?
I would think a at least 15% would be Combative type troops. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2004 3:55:00 PM EDT
[#4]
I read once that it took like 7-10 people just to field one trigger puller. It's the logistics needed to support the trigger pullers.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2004 3:58:28 PM EDT
[#5]
You have not considered the fact that the units need to be rotated in and out of theater. There are also many other global commitments that are not HOT zones. Simple fact is that when the Soviet Union collapsed in 91, the politicians decided we needed a peace dividend so they made HUGE cuts in DoD and CIA manpower levels with the understanding that the Reserves and NG would HAVE to become major contributors in any future conflicts. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2004 3:59:19 PM EDT
[#6]
I didn't say that. There are plenty of active duty troops over there too. The reason for the large number of reservists is their specialties are needed over there. And those specialties were assigned to the reserves to keep more combat troops on active duty during the 90s draw-downs. Does that make sense? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2004 4:00:14 PM EDT
[#7]
Makes perfect sense to me. So the reason why there's so many reservists is because alot of the jobs where downsized in the 90's to the reservists. When the Iraq war unfolded, alot of these positions that are in demand are held by the reservists, forcing them into the war. So why are so many rigger pullers reservists then? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2004 4:05:36 PM EDT
[#8]
Because that's where the war is.
And you would be surprised at how many reservist REQUESTED to go over there. Sgatr15 |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2004 4:07:59 PM EDT
[#9]
Yes. So is W making the correct changes to get the balance back? Or is the reservists and NG's part in all of this going to stay the same. I would think if it stayed the same, there wouldn't be much incentive to be a reservists or NG. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2004 4:09:10 PM EDT
[#10]
I would love to use that as ammo, but it just isn't going to happen. I liked the study that found 3 out of 4 soldiers prefer Bush over Kerry, that one hits home. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2004 4:15:42 PM EDT
[#11]
The high number of reserves being deployed is exactly what is called for in the war fighting doctrine since the fall of the Soviet Union. The term "reserve" is a bit of a misnomer, the way the modern is designed to work is that you have a fairly small full time Army that can be deployed ready to fight in a short time, then you have a very large part time force who are only activated when really needed. This doctine may not be perfect but it works well, and saves gobs of cash, if you look at a single guard or reserve division, how much would it cost to feed that division per month in times of peace?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2004 4:20:05 PM EDT
[#12]
That explains alot, thank you. I wish Bush was clearer whne this was asked in the debates, but he did good all-around last time out. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2004 4:26:41 PM EDT
[#13]
Part of Sec Def Rumsfields concept of transformation is to rebalance the forces to include more MPs and Civil Affair Groups in the active component. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2004 4:29:06 PM EDT
[#14]
Good deal, it needs to go the back the other way now. The Dems can cut funding in our armed forces until their faces are blue, that isn't going to change the fact that we have some wars ahead of us, and in the grand scheme of things, war is upon us about every 10 years and it will continue to be that way. Downsizing our military and believing in world peace isn't going to change that fact. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2004 4:29:11 PM EDT
[#15]
I can confirm this quote as spot on. My wife is in the Army Guard and there are a bunch of folks who when told last year that there was going to be acall up voluntered to go. I can also tell you that this summer for her summer camp they had a cook out at the end of their training I was very surprised at the conversations I was hearing. Most of these guys are what you would consider in NM to be leaning democrats as they are latino/mexican and not a single one said anything bad about Bush and not a single one complained about the fact that they might get called up. My wife was pointing out serveral guys who had recently voluntered to go and were waiting for the call. It is my personal belief that when you see guardsman complaining on TV or in the press, the press had to search these guys out and they do not represent the true feelings of the part time soldier. I think you should point out that guardsman were being called up to Kuwait & SW Asia long before the war ever started. We have had guardsman in Kuwait for many years, my wife voluntered to go several times but did not make it over their. This was if memory serves me correct two full years before the Iraq war started. The Air Guard has was also providing support of the no fly zones for a very long time. This is a little off your starter topic but something I think is worth sharing. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2004 4:32:52 PM EDT
[#16]
Thank you for this, this personally makes me feel really good. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2004 4:39:52 PM EDT
[#17]
As it's said in the military, one awww shit kills 1,000 atta boy's.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2004 4:44:01 PM EDT
[#18]
I agree many have been in the guard for a long while without getting much action, and now want there shot. They are getting it in a big way now by volunteering and my hat is off to them. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2004 4:56:43 PM EDT
[#19]
MillerSHO, You can use that Reserve and NG members have volunteered to go over to Iraq as ammo. I know many from my old NG unit that has and is over there. Most that had to come back from being over there a year want to go back again but they can't yet. My brother's Infantry unit, my old one, hasn't been called up but a couple did in WI and thay asked for volenteers and filled most the ranks. He did not volanteer but they needed good NCOs so him being sent is mandatory. He didn't want to go but he didn't fight it either because he knows it is his duty. When they show soldiers complaining it is usually support units that thought they would never see the other end of the barrel. Pussys (not all of them) Thats what the differance in infanrty units they know where thier duty is. We trained as if we were going to get called up the next day. We had are share of fun too hug.gif
Its funny how Dems blames Bush for having reserve and NG units spread out thin. Thats what they're for since Clinton killed the funding to the military as much as he could. Its a crazy world we live in, RnR |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2004 5:11:01 PM EDT
[#20]
I think there is too much seperation between NG/reserve units and the regular units. For christ sake, they swore the same oath! Sure they dont get the exact same training but they train never the less. Those people volunteered to serve, whatever the call of duty required. I think sending these units is the right thing and shows the ability to use many resources to achieve a given goal. I dont think its about not being prepared. If we were not then all of our units would be deployed. These units are PART OF THE ARMED FORCES! Using them shows only that we can, not theat we are not ready.
IMHO, CH |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2004 5:12:20 PM EDT
[#21]
BTW, given were we live, thats no surprise!  CH |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2004 5:13:54 PM EDT
[#22]
Thanks for the info. I can now see how this can be so easily spun. 
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2004 5:18:32 PM EDT
[#23]
This was the only argument I had at the time, which I REALLY feel bad saying, considering I've never served, and I only absorb all the work and blood has and will be put forth. Her parents are pretty cool. I have noticed them become less bleeding liberal since I've been in their lives, and they ALWAYS listen to what I have to say, and never get pissed off. They are democrats that truly believe in tolerance. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2004 5:21:37 PM EDT
[#24]
I can't speak for all of thier training, but when I went to basic, AIT and jumpschool there were both NG and Reserve guys there, my entire AIT call was active duty rectuits, but we had other classes on the day shift who had plenty of part timers. I imagine that during the year the reserve component units don't get the training that we did on the 50th, but they didn't stay as burnt out as us either, we lived in the field, probably spent 25 days a month sleeping in the dirt. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2004 5:45:50 PM EDT
[#25]
Because we want part of the action too by god!  Dg84 |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2004 5:53:08 PM EDT
[#26]
 Thank you for your service. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2004 6:06:37 PM EDT
[#27]
That is no kidding. There is no difficulty fielding 110% guard and reserve units to go to Iraq. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2004 6:08:03 PM EDT
[#28]
I got the answer for your liberal friends…
When the Democrats in Congress reorganized the US Military structure after Vietnam they did so with the intent to cripple the US’s ability to fight future foreign wars. They made the National Guard a primary part of the standing US Military giving the NG primary and support duties the Army cannot fight large scale actions without. The intent was to disrupt any future presidents ability to make war... John Kerry helped in this. It is that simple. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2004 6:12:03 PM EDT
[#29]
When I went it was the same, mixed regular and res/ng units. The simple truth is, that is what the reserve units are for, to use when needed. If right now they are, then so be it. Miller, the next time its brought up, ask her why they shouldnt be sent? CH |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2004 6:21:29 PM EDT
[#30]
I'm a reservist now I asked to go 18 months ago and just got an IRR call up. No veteran or active duty service member wants a president that might turn on them like he turned on the goverment/military after coming back from Vietnam. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2004 6:23:26 PM EDT
[#31]
Nother thing that Bush has started that will really help us out is bringing back most of the troops from Europe.
There is no longer a credible threat in Europe and no need for the large field formations we have there. It costs oodles of money to keep them and their families there. It amounts to a dole for the towns they are stationed in, we pay for the land the bases are on, we pay for food, we pay for the training areas, we pay for gas, and American soldiers are a massive increase to the economy. We need to bring these guys back, Bush has started it. Kerry complained about it (to keep his friends in Europe I guess). Instead he "wants to add 2 active divisions." Talk about fiscal and military irresponsibility. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2004 6:26:09 PM EDT
[#32]
Oh, Bush started the war on terror??? (which is just one war, btw). |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2004 6:29:31 PM EDT
[#33]
Before BushI/Clinton we had 18 real Army divisions (more than 75% proper TO manning)
After BushI/Clinton we had 10 fake Army divisions (more like 8 if called on to fill out a real divisional TO) BushII and his favorite old and stupid defense secretary absolutely refuse to increase the size of the military, going so far as to force out and disgrace any general officer who recommends otherwise. As icing on that cake they like to start fights all around the world. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2004 6:30:14 PM EDT
[#34]
First it's not two wars, it's two fronts to the same war second WE did not start it, it's been going on since the 60's now we are on the way to winning it |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2004 6:40:31 PM EDT
[#35]
1) We only have about 1.5 million troops period. The active duty force is about 700,000. The force in Iraq is somewhere between 100,000 and 200,000, the force in Afganhistan is probably around 50,000. 2) The reason for having reserves is to reduce the cost of maintaining them in peacetime. By semi-deactivating over half the military (2 weekends a month, etc) you reduce the cost of maintaining a large force, but have them trained & ready for action in case they are needed. The way the system is designed, any prolonged operation WILL draw reserve troops as needed. 3) There are alot more specialties needed in Iraq besides trigger pullers. Alot of these specialties do not exist in the active duty force, as they are only needed for specialized missions. This way the military can pay them when they are needed, and not pay them when they would be sitting around playing poker... In the Air Force, most of the tanker & transport pilots are reservists, in the Army you will find alot of civil affairs & 'support' specialties in the reserves as well... They aren't needed for peacetime & 'small' operations, but if you invade a country they will be... 4) Prior to the 70's, we didn't rely so much on the reserves because we had a draft. So instead of calling up volunteer reservists, we drafted people & made them into whatever kind of troops we needed. Then, when the war was over, the military was reduced to a skeleton force, ready to be 'filled out' by draftees if needed... With the abolition of the draft, the 'skeleton force' is the active military, and the reservists replace draftees. The difference is that everyone in the Reserves ASKED to join the reserves... The PROBLEM is that some of them forgot WHY we have Reserves, and joined for 'extra money' thinking they'd 'never have to fight', ergo, whiners... P.S. According to the Army, the current highest rate of re-enlistment by location (eg the place where soldiers are stationed that has the largest number volunteering to stay in, and stay there) is... IN IRAQ The current lowest rate of re-enlistment by location is STATESIDE |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2004 6:45:46 PM EDT
[#36]
We've never been a mass-numbers military... That's what the Soviets were... It's too expensive, too inefficient, and our 'folks back home' can't stomach the casualties that win-by-numbers would entail... So instead, we have less troops with better weapons, armor, and training... In a perfect world, we could pay for more troops and keep or improve the present level of weapons, technology & training. But if the choice is between a SMALLER, BETTER military, and a HUGE, INEPT military, smaller & better wins every time... MORE TROOPS will not help anything, anywhere we are right now... Afghanistan is a light infantry war, we are winning because we have a small, professional force in place... More troops would just make a mess of the place.... And in Iraq, we have planty of troops as well, we're chasing insurgents out of one city at a time... Once again, what would you do with the extra troops? We allready outnumber the enemy several times over... Wars take time & blood to win, the problem is that alot of people have forgotten this.... Kerry is talking out his ass about '40,000 more troops & doubling the size of special forces'... Thanks to Clinton & Kerry's senate buddies, we had to play catch-up WRT equipment for the troops we have... Immagine equipping 40,000 more under an administration who's members have voted against every single weapons system of any significance... And 'Double the size of Special Forces'??? Hello... We can't fill all the slots we have today because, well, the nature of SF means that 'plenty of volunteers' does not equate to 'plenty of qualified candidates'... We have LOTS of people who want to be SF, but only a few are good enough to pull it off... That's why they're called 'Special' forces, Kerry, and you can't just turn them out like shoes from a Chinese prison factory.... |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2004 6:57:35 PM EDT
[#37]
I am pretty sure that is the size of the active component, since the army is around 400,000, the Marines 170,000 and the other 2 around 400,000-500,000 each. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2004 9:44:40 PM EDT
[#38]
These are the facts I wanted to know about, I can always trust this board for that.
Thanks everyone. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2004 10:10:20 PM EDT
[#39]
Hey, their just giving all Americans an opportunity to go & kill some raghead terrorists.
Wish I was young enough to go & get me some. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2004 11:07:32 PM EDT
[#40]
+1 I heard the same thing. It was Klintoon's decimation of the military on his watch that has caused a shortage of necessary skills neeeded in our standing armed forces of today. Just one more reason to despise that sorry bastard. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2004 11:36:09 PM EDT
[#41]
The 81st Bde (The crowd I'm with) is a full on combat arms brigade, and every man jack of us is here. As a tanker, I think I'm a trigger-puller...
I should also add that only one or two people in my company were particularly interested in coming here. Most of the rest intend to ETS as soon as possible, even those who would only have two years left to do their twenty. Admittedly, I think this is more a factor of the way they're being treated than the whole concept of deployment, though that's another issue. NTM |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/9/2004 11:41:12 PM EDT
[#42]
If someone has 18 years in and is going to get out because of the way they are "treated" then fuck them, they don't deserve any retirement benifits. More for the people who will do their time without being a whining cunt.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/10/2004 12:28:00 AM EDT
[#43]
I was a medic in 1/185 Cal Guard (THUNDERBOLTS!), and then became Medic in the 303rd Wa Guard ( all apart of the 81st Bde) I think the motivation was good in the Cal Guard but was Outstanding in the Wa Guard. I know they are both " Boots on the Ground" at this time and I will never judge the thinking of the troops at this point. I know of No Soldier that is 110% "Particularly interested" in leaving family and friends behind to go into a unknown situation, But I will guanrantee that when everyone gets home the feelings will settle down and those guys that you think are so willing to get out now, will rethink their personal position... At this point I will thank each and everyone of you for your service, I will pray for your safety each and every night and I will say a special prayor for each of my long time friends that are doing the job now both from Cali and Washington. Manic_Moran, I hope you feel better about your situation, and If you have been around the Cal Guard for any length of time you already have had a idea of how the troops were treated. ( Yes I have just as many stories to tell about how myself and my soldiers were treated as anyone else, but in the big picture it was no better or no worse than anyone else.) Hang in there and Good Speed to our Soldiers! |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/10/2004 8:52:26 AM EDT
[#44]
Many of our Civil Affaird and MP units are Guard/Reserve because we only need them when TSHTF. So it doesn't make sense to keep them active duty for a task which is only necessary every 20-30 years.
GunLvr |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/10/2004 12:16:19 PM EDT
[#45]
CA is the most actively deployed reserve job out there. They have been very active doing missions for the last 15 years that I am aware of and probably way back to its formation. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/10/2004 12:46:00 PM EDT
[#46]
They aren't supposed to be though right? In the 1990s there was a great deal of nation-building going on and so the CA units were in demand. But were they used so much in the 70s and 80s? It has got to be tough to keep a really qualified CA unit on active duty since they require lots of high-skill people like lawyers, engineers, bankers, etc. who have lots of private sector opportunities. GunLvr |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/10/2004 12:54:32 PM EDT
[#47]
A friend of mine who is a mechanic in the Michigan National Guard is going soon. I doubt he ever expected to go to Iraq. his unit still issues the m16A1 but he has been tood they are not deploying with their rifles, that there will be M16A2's waiting for them in iraq. (Hopefully good ranges to BZO and testfire too?)
They are epected to be wrench turners only, and provide for their own basic security. On post Guard Duty type stuff. No compat patrols, food convoys ect. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2004 7:01:22 AM EDT
[#48]
Well, the active duty CA units are a bit different from the reserve side. Active duty CAT-A Teams consist of a Team Leader, Team SGT, Engineer and Medic. The engineer, Team SGT and Team medic are 18C, 18Z or 18D or a similar MOS with advanced training at SWC to bring them near the level of their SF qualified counterparts. CA soldiers on the reserve side are one MOS, 38A, Civil Affairs Specialist. Here everyone has the same MOS but can play a different role due to their civilian background. CAT-A teams at the tactical level do not require as large a civilian skill set as those functional teams at the battalion, brigade and CACOM level. At those levels there are teams for economics, education, public works, public safety etc. The tactical teams support these higher level teams by doing the missions they need to complete an overall project. Then there are others who are in CA and do not do a single CA task and wont ever do a single CA task because they are doing jobs that arent on the MTOE. No spook, secret squirrel stuff, just jobs like PSD, Force Protection, and others who spend their days doing Busy work details and never get a chance to leave the wire. |
||
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2004 8:40:24 PM EDT
[#49]
Its not just support jobs being deployed, lots of trgger pullers on the ground over there are ARNG/USAR. 30th INF Brigade from NC is there now.
Look at the patches when you see picks.h |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/11/2004 9:07:06 PM EDT
[#50]
'Started' is a poor choice of word.
|
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
