Is the Army headed for a collapse?

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 14 Feb 2015 00:19:20 -0500

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/06/how-to-fix-the-us-military-107337.html

Response by TSgt Joshua Copeland made Feb 14 at 2015 12:28 AM

TSgt Joshua Copeland — Sat, 14 Feb 2015 00:28:12 -0500

Collapse? No. Major change and shake up absolutely.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 14 at 2015 12:30 AM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 14 Feb 2015 00:30:06 -0500

That is pretty deep. However, I think if we were to go war that the nation needed we would have enough to fight and then quickly recruit to gain enough. If World War III, hello draft. I do agree that it is interesting that we have way more 4 stars around now, but back then we also did not station ourselves around the globe or have a "smaller world" feel. Only time will tell who is right.

Response by CSM Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 14 at 2015 2:16 AM

CSM Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 14 Feb 2015 02:16:56 -0500

Interesting article. I tend to agree that there are too many generals in the Army, I also think there are too many Sergeants Majors. Seems that every division level and above element needs a SGM or two in each G/J-section and of course every general needs a senior enlisted leader. I work in a division headquarters and there are like 20+ SGMs running around, it's ridiculous.

I have been in the Army for almost 30 years and about every 10 years the Army goes through a major shift/change. It usually has to do with money and war. It takes the Army all of those 10 years to unscrew itself from the change before it starts acting right. My opinion is that we are in that first year and have nine more to go before the ship rights itself.

I have seen it three times, I won't be around to see this one.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 14 at 2015 2:29 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 14 Feb 2015 02:29:39 -0500

I will say there are excellent points there. I will also point to a culture of corruption in the flag ranks. See the Navy bribery scandal.

Response by COL Vincent Stoneking made Feb 14 at 2015 3:04 AM

COL Vincent Stoneking — Sat, 14 Feb 2015 03:04:28 -0500

TL/DR: Not a fan.

Me thinks somebody is getting ready to release a new book!
The author of the article is a perennial gadfly on the Army. I have two of his books that he mentions in the article - "Breaking the Phalanx" and "Transformation Under Fire" - within arm's reach right now. Sounds like he wants me to have another...ah yes, here it is... "His newest book, Margin of Victory: Why Some Nations Win and Others Lose Wars, will be out next year."

There is nothing in this article that adds to the strength of his prior books' arguments. While I consider those arguments worth examination (hence owning the books), I see a lot of magical thinking in the books. Somehow his magical BDE+ Div Slice orgs are different in some wonderful way by putting a 1 star in command, making all the cross-coordination, etc. go..... down.... We have tried that, and found that formations that size are simply NOT capable of self-sustainment. But that's OK, the little generals will all just network together and make it all work out, as opposed to the current situation, in which I assume no commanders talk to each other or their higher.... We have tried his ideas. While being swell, they fail to work in organizations made of people.

Also, pointing to the JDF - an organization that is NOT expeditionary, doesn't have global policing responsibilities (whether we should or not is another discussion), and which has both a no-attack policy and no need to defend - because the US ensures that country's security - as an example of "what right looks like" seems odd.

Response by SGT Jim Z. made Feb 15 at 2015 10:40 AM

SGT Jim Z. — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 10:40:37 -0500

It is a very interesting article and from my 22 almost 23 years associated with the Army active duty and contractor I have to agree with CSM Private RallyPoint Member that there are too many GO and SGM and on the government civilian side too many SES. I work in a MACOM HQ and in one staff section alone there is a MG, SES-2, and BG and at least two SGM in that group. We need to trim the numbers of senior leaders and trim the unnecessary boon-doggle TDY trips and leverage technology. Most TDY trips these senior leaders take can be done via video teleconferences.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 15 at 2015 2:13 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 14:13:36 -0500

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member - Sir, I think the biggest issue facing the Army doesn't begin at the flagpole, but with the uniforms.

What do I mean by this? Contractors. GS. Outsourcing. This does ultimately lead back to GOs, because many of these contracts are awarded to former GOs or some nepotistic relationship to a friend. I served in a Medical Support Unit, so our METL was more specific to the Periodic Health Assessment (PHAs). What do we do for our PHAs? Contract to LHI. The effect on this is twofold. First, my Soldiers do not feel prepared when we are mobilized to perform Soldier Readiness Processing (SRP) missions because many of my enlisted are NOT medical on the civilian side. How's a hairdresser going to maintain her skills as a medic?? Second, the Army fails to capitalize on paying itself.

How about sick call? My providers aren't allowed to do their own sick call. Don't feel well? Go to the ER. Yes....the ER. At $1500 apiece, someone has been sent because they had an upper respiratory infection and felt that they could not complete the APFT. Instead, it could have been a stethoscope, an SF600, and a $20 prescription for antibiotics. Why not let the medics do their own preliminary sick call, then from there determine the need to seek further care.

Why are we contracting medical and mechanical assets outside of the military, paying benefits and STEEP salaries when you can't work them overtime like you can a Soldier. When it came time to sequestration, they sent our contractors home....some places created a contract to replace the contractors that they sent home. What kind of logic is this??

Bring business back in house, because even if you save money on benefits, placing someone on orders with the knowledge that you can work them beyond 40 hours without paying extra at a pricy cost to take care of the Soldiers ultimately wins.
v/r,
CPT Butler

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 15 at 2015 3:44 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 15:44:32 -0500

This line tells me everything that I need to know about the article: "In March 2014, when 80,000 Russian armored combat forces were poised to invade Ukraine, the U.S. Army was incapable of deploying an effective combat maneuver force to Europe or anywhere else."

We weren't "incapable" of deploying an effective combat maneuver force. We decided not to.

End of.

Response by GySgt Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 15 at 2015 4:05 PM

GySgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 16:05:06 -0500

Reminds me of the 80s in the post war period after Vietnam when everyone was asking if the military was up to task. And then we hit the 90s with two decades of conflict. I think the Army and services in general will be fine. The troops always step up.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 15 at 2015 4:20 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 15 Feb 2015 16:20:20 -0500

First, no one was successfully prosecuted following the 1929 crash (or the 1932 crash, either).

Everything else, I am four square behind. The only criticism I have of Col MacGregor's thinking is that, in my opinion, based on the few comments he makes on them, he doesn't fully understand the Reserve Components, so he leaves them out of his plans.