How do we rebuild the mental toughness of new troops while keeping with the military's new direction?

That's inability to adapt? Psychiatric? Refresh my memory on that reg poor favor.

The CH 5-17 is [Other Mental Illness - Not Specified], I believe the Chapter 11...is the [inability to adapt] which is used quite often in training environments...the only thing I don't like about the 11...is that its temporary...if I remember correctly an SM can come back after 6 months...and we seen this on Jackson...technically the 5-17 is temporary as well...but an SM must prove they have been assymptomatic for 2 years.

Back in the Day....(1983) for me...I remember the Senior Drill Sergeant getting in front of our Company and asking us to raise our hands if we wanted a "TDP Discharge" that was the Chapter 11...it was favored because the Chain of Command can move relatively quickly to discharge an SM.

Though I agree with the Navy's idea of inclusion, I still firmly believe we need to set and enforce a standard. Not only that, but the standard that we set and enforce should be QUALITY focused; never quantity focused.

Yes indeed. If we start with quality recruits, give them quality trainers, and follow up with quality leaders enforcing standards all the way, we are in good shape when things go south and they have to go do some hairy stuff.

You are both right on the mark, although not easily achievable. Exigencies of wartime, and pressures brought about by a growing economy on recruiting will vary with the needs of the service. Not to mention the occasional social engineering that takes place during Democrat regimes.

MCPO Roger Collins - I was told once by a very wise man nothing good is easily achievable. I had good leaders mostly when I was Active Duty. Even the poor ones taught be by reversing how they conducted themselves. I hope we still have the energy and the will to execute well on this front.

*recruits

While I would have used a bit different terminology, I agree with the point being made.

I shoot from the hip when I get on my soapbox

You can't put the toothpaste back in the tube, SGT. We still remain a super power, despite the attempts to pacify us in many ways, including UCMJ.

Are we adapting the wrong way?

LTJG (Join to see) - I see constant complaining about how recruits come from the "everybody gets a trophy" environment, and that they are unprepared for military life. What I think that everybody forgets is that the military is a reflection of the society it protects. Perhaps it is time to adapt our training to better prepare this generation of recruits to the requirements of the military's mission. I would be interested in seeing the attrition rates of this generation in comparison to other generations.

Perhaps we need to remind the recruits currently Active Duty that we appreciate service, but not everyone gets a trophy. Remind them, if they stay smart, learn their job, and the jobs of their peers, their trophy is getting to come home after they go traveling in the world. It's not even being on a combat deployment that is dangerous. I lost friends in a training accident 21 years ago yesterday. Standards were not adhered to, people got sloppy, and 16 men got killed as a result. I think that would be my approach to the current generation given the chance.

If you cannot contemplate treating people well and with dignity even if you dont respect them.. that says the same about your sir

LT James Jones - I could be mistaken, but perhaps you are misconstruing what exactly is being stated. Respect should never be freely given, but rather it should always be earned. It tends to mean more that way. The difference between an E-1 and an O-10 is dramatic as far as opportunity to earn respect in the military. To state that respect is earned does not imply that those who have not earned respect are treated as subhuman. As SGT Dike stated, you can treat people well and with dignity even without respecting them. Also, let's not mistake that respect is given to someone solely because they outrank you. I had NCO's and officers above me that I obeyed...but it was not due to respect for them, only respect for the rank that was producing the order.

Perhaps you are confusing the notion of "treating someone with respect" with actually respecting them. If I were still in I would salute you and answer with "sir" upon first meeting you. Merely passing you on a sidewalk I would not know whether I respected you, because you may be a horrible person (not saying that you are, but the possibility exists); but I have "treated you with respect" in this instance. However, if I worked with you, and then compiled enough information to make an assessment of you, I may in fact grow to actually respect you.

This goes back to how many of us were raised. "respect is earned", "a man is only as good as his word", "never ask someone to do something you yourself are not willing to do", etc. It was a code instilled within us by our fathers and grandfathers. It was the yardstick that we used to measure a man's integrity (and thereby his worth).

SPC Shaun Eaves - you'll find that each of my comments does, in fact, deal with treating others with respect, not necessarily being blown away by their character or ability on first glance.

LT James Jones - Respectfully, I was speaking to the following "SGT Alan Dike - Every person deserves respect." This statement does not imply that you are referring to dealing respectfully as individuals, but rather bestowing respect upon all individuals. I know of many individuals who do not deserve respect. Now, I understand that perhaps I am getting too involved in semantics, but when you say "everyone deserves respect" that would imply that child predators, rapist, murderers, and politicians deserve respect...that is untenable. I have worked as a prison guard, and while I treated all of the inmates as humans, I did not respect them.