America's Military: A Force Adrift

I think the underpaid part may be a generational deal. When I was starting out (1975), we weren't making much money as a Private or even a Sergeant, but we weren't focused on that, we did what it took to get by. Since I married in 1976, that meant that my wife went to work immediately, to help with our finances.

I remember that as a PFC, I made around $400 a month (that's total -- base pay, BAH and BAS). Our rent in a trailer (cheapest place we could find to live) was $100. And the troops who came before me talked of earning less than $100 a month, back in their day.

Nowadays, it seems everybody wants to be rich, and quickly. And I'm not saying military personnel shouldn't get paid more, I'm commenting on what I see as a generational phenomenon.

Here's what I base that on: My 19-year-old daughter is attending community college. She intended to continue with school and had plans to pursue an advanced degree in psychology. Now that she's close to finishing two years of school, she wants to quit school and go out and make a lot of money. Doing what? Doesn't matter, she will probably be disappointed because she wants to be rich, and right now.

I'll bet seeing the worship of wealth for all of her 19 years on television and in our society has something to do with that mentality, that outlook on life. She's had just about nothing to do with the military, yet she feels underpaid and unsatisfied because she's not rich.

Several very interesting links here. I experienced one seldom mentioned "hollow force" (USAREUR during and after the Viet-Nam peak) and watched another one both personally (RVN in late 1970 until transfer to Reserve in April 1971) and later from a safe distance. Just before my DEROS, there were so few NCOs left in my unit that people in my grade were pulling CQ or SG at least once per week. Deciding not to re-up was not a big challenge.

I will note that the second worst incident during my brief military career that would have left me dead was in Germany, when I was pulling CQ in the Kaserne. To feed the MACV machine the whole theatre appeared to me to have been looted and plundered, to some extent of decent equipment, but mostly of experienced officers and NCOs.

Looking at the interesting linked items I see that, although "hollowing" is periodic, each episode is unique in its root causes and challenges. (Have a look at the history of pre-WWII US armed forces.)

I can only answer this question based on opinion. I have been out of the Marines for nearly thirty years so things are quite different now.

In my experience, bad attitudes had a greater impact on morale. Usually the bad attitudes were owned by the individual. Nothing was going to please them. Today, it seems like the attitudes are caused from the top down more than just a few disgruntled service members at the bottom.

I think this report gives an accurate depiction of a trend that should be a cause of concern for those in the Pentagon. The Pentagon is under pressure from the White House to make an impossible budget possible. We had a saying in the Marines, "Shit rolls down hill."

Everything happening in the military today has rolled down from Washington. Missing in action from Washington is the sense they care about the military. I believe this in itself is what causes so much uncertainty. Many understand that life happens, money gets tight and there has to be cuts at some point.

I did an essay several years ago about our government not supporting the troops. One of the huge morale killers in the military is the feeling that you are nothing more than a number on a balance sheet. Congress and this president, for political reasons, have been trying to gut the military for a long time.

Congress and the POTUS have made every attempt to inform the American public that cutting the military is the right thing to do, and it will not compromise national security. In all the rhetoric, I think they failed to convince those in the military.

I think the pay and benefits play a smaller role for morale than feeling like one matters. I think leaders at the lower end of the chain of command (Battalion and lower) are the military's best hope for our forces. The article mentioned a Marine captain in the reserves who used some initiatives to help booster morale. These initiatives can also help foster a spirit of unity that in itself can bring back a sense of belonging and give the service member a feeling that they matter.

The drifting in the military comes from the top down (Shit rolls down hill). This puts more responsibility on unit commanders to keep morale up and bad attitudes in check. That is a tall order considering the commanders have first keep their attitudes in check before they can successfully motivate the men and women in their commands.

It is not all bad. It is sad that our government has put the men and women in the armed forces in this position, but in the final analysis, commanders will be better, and those that overcome and adapt to the new ways will be stronger and more resilient.

One thing that I try to bring up when this conversation comes up among soldiers, which lately seems to be very often is; The Army goes in cycles. Yes morale is low right now, there is a lot of things that don't make sense up above us, but it's not as bad as it could be, and has been many times. I'd rather be in THIS Army, than the one that existed in the 1970s. My FIL considering enlisting in the Army in '72. His brother who 12 years in the Navy at that time told him no way. Morale in all the services was so low, he said it simply wouldn't be worth it. I'd rather be in this Army than the one that my Grandpa was in immediately post Korea. He tells me of morning roll call, where guys would "stand in" for each other. Grandpop would call "Here" for 3 or 4 buddies who were laying in their racks. Then tomorrow, one of them would return the favor. He said it was an obvious sham. Everybody was doing it. Everyone was just waiting for their contract to be up and go home.
I can't speak for the Active Component, but I think the biggest thing that could be done to boost Guard Morale, while winding down the wars, with very diminished opportunities to deploy would be to increase funding for schools. Give soldiers who are there to be soldiers, not for the remuneration, some reward.

I saw this when it came out. It was sent to every commanding officer on the post. Some of this rings true, but my issue is the headline. Are we adrift? Was the Army of 1990 adrift after the wall came down or did it continue to train? Bloody hell, I'm tired of the sob-sob-my-war-went-away BS and now I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO!!! Yeah...got news for you...the Army that fought for the last 13 years was prepared through training for about oh...25 years. Was it totally prepared, no. Why? Because you can't be prepared for war. Doesn't happen. It's violent. It's chaotic. It's confusing. Sound like garrison life sometimes? It should. But because you aren't deploying in 12 months to actually get shot at, you pull out your hankie and blow snot bubbles into it complaining about life in general. If we were going to war in 12 months, we'd most likely be good to go. I have been doing this a while. I have never heard anyone say, "Damn, my life is predictable in the Army." We've been complaining about that since David was a private in the Army of the Lord. Also don't hear, "Damn, I get paid way too much and have too many benefits." I get it. Things are in decline. The problem is, ladies and gents that the complainers have only seen boom and bust. They haven't seen the boom afterwards. I came out of boom (first gulf), into bust (peace dividend), into boom (2001) and now into bust again (sequestration and reduction). Until you see a full cycle, you don't understand the broader picture and you're only worried about YOU...and the effects on you. Perhaps, just perhaps, we should worry about the institution first. Self sacrifice...selflessness...I've read that somewhere before. Nah...it'll come to me in a little while.

If the forces are adrift within a morale crisis, it falls directly on the leadership. Not necessarily the leaders within the military, but THE leaders. The three separate branches are doing nothing to help veterans. The ROE have been negatively altered so much, it breaks the will of those in the trenches.

They are firing good leaders and rewarding the enemy by removing, fining or imprisoning our men and women who did their jobs; while encouraging illegal immigrants to join the military with fast track citizenship. At the same time, they are releasing GTMO detainees back in to an active theater. The leaders have capitulated to terrorist demands. All you can do is step back and ask, what the f* is going on.

I don't really feel under paid as much as I feel un-appreciated. And that goes from the civilian populace to the government level.

I honestly feel that neither party represents us in Washington.

Sadly this is likely an accurate take. When we move from war to peace operations this is always the trend. Presidents have always slashed personnel and budgets after a drawdown and the outcome is always the same. This is just one consequence.

Sir, I actually saw this article as well about an hour ago and was planning on posting it for discussion. Glad to see we are on the same page on this one.

It is disappointing to see where the military is going, and I know that I had an argument on a news website about the decreasing benefits would eventually push out many of the good leaders from the military (as they can get a better deal elsewhere) and if this continues we will have a weak and depressing military.

The argument that came back was that many of the people serving do so due to a pride in their country (which ironically is why I initially joined). I have seen, with the changes in the country over the last few administrations, this is less the America that the founders envisioned and turning more towards a government run oligarchy every day. It is hard to take pride in such a system and even harder to have the pride to serve in the service for the country making these changes.

I hope that we can turn things around and bring about a strong pride in our country, and therefore a strong military again.

I also rather like the quotation, "The longest war in American History has officially come to a close, and many service members feel 'good riddance."

... though I wouldn't consider it the longest. I would consider that Vietnam (though yes, I know it was really a "conflict")