CPT Private RallyPoint Member 33758 <div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>Don't get me wrong, spending 20 years in a Support, Service-Support, or Combat Role without deploying one may still be vital to the overall success of the military, and an integral part in the Military machine. But should we continue with this 20-year requirement for retirement when so many soldiers carry more of the physical workload than others?<div><br></div><div>My suggestion is to look at the drawdown during World War II as a model - based on service each soldier received points and could go home, or would be re-assigned to another unit, most of which went to the Pacific.</div><div><br></div><div>In today's Military I would suggest similar criteria to the promotion points system, rewarding soldiers who perform exceptionally in their given field, and having equivalent points for soldiers who don't see combat, but are still vital to the mission. A Sergeant Major with 20 years who hasn't deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan at this point should be evaluated differently than a Command Sergeant Major with 20 years, 6 deployments, a Purple Heart, and the emotional scars that come with that life.</div><div><br></div><div>I think the true benefit of such a system would be the impact it could have on the Federal Government as a whole!</div><div><br></div><div>Imagine if Congressmen had to rack up a certain amount of points based on their performance in said role? Abstained from voting? 0 points for you! </div><div><br></div><div>Thoughts? (Please keep it semi-professional) </div> 2014-01-06T14:49:37-05:00 CPT Private RallyPoint Member 33758

<div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>Don't get me wrong, spending 20 years in a Support, Service-Support, or Combat Role without deploying one may still be vital to the overall success of the military, and an integral part in the Military machine. But should we continue with this 20-year requirement for retirement when so many soldiers carry more of the physical workload than others?<div><br></div><div>My suggestion is to look at the drawdown during World War II as a model - based on service each soldier received points and could go home, or would be re-assigned to another unit, most of which went to the Pacific.</div><div><br></div><div>In today's Military I would suggest similar criteria to the promotion points system, rewarding soldiers who perform exceptionally in their given field, and having equivalent points for soldiers who don't see combat, but are still vital to the mission. A Sergeant Major with 20 years who hasn't deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan at this point should be evaluated differently than a Command Sergeant Major with 20 years, 6 deployments, a Purple Heart, and the emotional scars that come with that life.</div><div><br></div><div>I think the true benefit of such a system would be the impact it could have on the Federal Government as a whole!</div><div><br></div><div>Imagine if Congressmen had to rack up a certain amount of points based on their performance in said role? Abstained from voting? 0 points for you! </div><div><br></div><div>Thoughts? (Please keep it semi-professional) </div>

2014-01-06T14:49:37-05:00 2014-01-06T14:49:37-05:00 1SG Steven Stankovich 33761

<div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>Interesting idea sir.  I especially like the idea of applying it to elected officials...

2014-01-06T15:01:03-05:00 2014-01-06T15:01:03-05:00 SFC Michael Hasbun 33764

<div class="images-v2-count-0"></div>Great idea... How about something as simple as an additional 2% in retirement for each Combat stripe? Or blanket percentages for CIB/CAB/CAR's/Purple Hearts?

2014-01-06T15:11:05-05:00 2014-01-06T15:11:05-05:00 2014-01-06T14:49:37-05:00