You have been given the authority to change three things in your branch or DoD wide … What are they?

1.) Make it mandatory that any new vehicle or weapon system under development is field tested by those who will actually use it in a combat zone and allow their input to have the final say on the contract to purchase. Body armor, the HMV and radio/telephone jammers for IED prevention are just a few examples of battle tested wisdom our troops had to suffer through in IRQ & AFGN because the system is broken on procurement and R & D. Don't get me started on the Air Force fighter mafia regarding the A-10 or the F-35.
2.) If a general hasn't served in a combat zone in the past five years, DO NOT make him a zone commander. The higher the rank, the less oxygen is available as you scale the chain of command. Rules of Engagement are crucial to the success and survivability of our ground troops.
3.) Cut the number of flag officers by at least 30% in all branches of our military. Cut their staff size in half. Superfluous doesn't even begin to approach how much duplication and waste these excess generals and admirals create.

1) Require that all specifications in a contract have a need other then to giving a preferred contractor an unfair advantage. The Army 2 piece rain suit had a specification for a yellow silk label, there was only one contractor who had a yellow silk label, this was inside the jacket and pants, and was never seen, and as I recall the labels did not last very long. The outer example was a contract for cotton duck butchers aprons. Several companies made them and each used a different color thread to sew their aprons. These aprons are not used for a uniform, they are protection for the butchers clothing. To specify a single stitch color just eliminated all competitive bids on that contract.

2) Any contract to replace current vehicles or weapons platforms, should have attainable standards, recently 5 rifles were tested to replace the M-16. All 5 "failed", I say the failure was intentional, the specifications were unrealistically high. The VENERABLE M-16 was not included in the test! I would say if there is a test to replace a weapon, the weapons being considered to replace an existing platform should be tested against that platform. The best performing platform should be adopted, if none of the replacement weapons nor the the existing platform can meet the contract specs, a modification of the specifications is in order, Don't just fail the contract and say we'll keep this 50 year old weapon. Maybe we should reconsider the 30-40 Krag-Jerogison from the 1890's.

#0 When I was in Germany the Americans had been working to get the Germans to adopt many of our governmental processes. In particular the competitive bid process. The Germans examined the process, and adopted it with modifications. They issued a specification and requested bids to provide what the contract called for. They took all of the bids and ranked them from high to low, just like the U.S. Then the took the top 10% of the high bids, and discarded them reasoning the bill was padded, They took the bottom 1% of the bids and discarded them reasoning that the contractor would cut corners and deliver an inferior product. The remaining 80% of the bids were added together and divided by the number of remaining bids, to get the average bid. The bidder closest to the average bid was awarded the contract.

Those are my three ideas what say you?

1. Eliminate the Air National Guard. No governor has the authority to use the fighters, bombers and refuelers. The Air National Guard exists because in 1947, when the Air Force was created from the Army, the Army had 3 components, so the Air Force got 3 components. Eliminating the Air National Guard eliminates Joint HQs at the State level and eliminates the NGB Joint HQ status, enabling the rank structure to return to State 2-star AGs and 3-Star NGB Director reporting to the 4-Star FORSCOM Commander.
2. Eliminate Active Component, including AGR, and replace it with Active Duty tours that last between 30 days to 20 years. Everyone would be a member of the Reserve Component and would serve on Active Duty or in a Reserve status. As a result, we have one retirement plan, one benefits plan and one HR, Finance and promotion system. No more AC preference for schools, billets or promotions.
3. Reduce HQ and Pentagon staff by 30%. This includes reduction of GOs and SES.

1. Remove criminal prosecution/investigation from the chain of command, if not from DOD control entirely.
2. Show the neanderthal racists, sexists and bigots of all stripes where the door is. You cannot defend this country when you don't have a clue about what the country stands for.
3. Promotion should be either be beyond the scope of human influence, or incorporate an outside agency to review qualifications. Carrot/stick promotions and firewall 5s are a problem

Oooooh, this is fun!

1. Institute a two-tiered system of service. Draftees are enlisted for three years at subsistence pay levels—no housing or subsistence pay (dependents get an allotment at equivalent levels to 1960s standard, but not more than the pay of a PFC) , maximum rank is PFC (or equivalent), can transfer to career status up to end of enlistment. As pre-WWII, no civies, liberty at the discretion of the CO, unmarried troops must obtain CO’s permission to marry (and if they do not—no pay or benefits to dependents) and then only in uniform. Career path: enlistment is for 8 years, current pay and benefits, enforce promotion so that NCOs have at least 4 years to make Corporal and 7 to make Sergeant.

2. No women in infantry.

3. Reduce the bloated civilian DOD work force. Any civilian employees must have served at least 4 years on active duty.

(If I was allowed a fourth—no one may receive a commission unless he or she has first served as an enlisted man or woman for at least one year in a post-recruit training , MOS-specific billet.)

1. eliminate co-ed Basic Training IN ALL BRANCHES
2. Upgrade Basic Training to Marine Corps standards for all branches
3. Seek out private sector replacements for outmoded equipment.

Same PT tests for all branches make more MOS specific events. Have 5 events, with 3 being the basis for schools and 2being MOS specific.
Get the civilians out of Military business. Funding should not ever be an issue. There are MOS's for everything... No need to pay a salary to a civilian when you can get a Spc. for half price.
Mandatory 2 year Recruiter/DI duty to go from 5 to 6. Recruiter/DI tours limited to 3 years and 1 promotion then sent back to normal duty.

For the Marine Corps:

(Not in order of importance)

1. The seperation of SUAS pilots into their own MOS
- I am an Intelligence Specialist and I wear a few hats within my occupational specialty. One of them is that I'm a Small Unmanned Aerial Systems (SUAS) subject matter expert for my Division and one of several Marines that pilot our drones. I've flown them on deployment and in many exercises. A big issue that I have is that BUQ-1 (smaller class) systems are flown primarily by people in my job, but we have a LOT of other tradecraft to juggle. It would be a far more efficient alternative to turn all SUAS operations into its own MOS (which I would then lat-move to). Drones, whether we like it or not, are becoming more and more a critical facet of operations. Soon, it will be lunacy to suggest it doesn't rate its own job designation.

2. Start weeding out the civilian contractors
- There are very few things that they can do that we cannot create a billet/SAD/MOS for. It's financially irresponsible and eliminates much of a unit's ability to train in-house for a lot of simple things. When there are only a small handful of civilian contracotrs because of budgeting, versus many Marine instructors for far cheaper, we experience clogging between many different units seeking the same training. Plus, on a less serious note, they take up all of the benches at the gym, as well as the Subway and Dominos workers that sneak in with them for free.

3. Eliminate Political Correctness
- This is the biggest cop out in the DoD in general. Nowhere else do I hear as many slurs against so many different people groups. I hear white guys using the N-word jokingly to their black friends, (who laugh along with them) have yet to meet a female who agrees with the new co-ed combat policies, and the words "faggot" and "wook" are more common than the word "the." Hardly PC. Some of the worst comes from Equal Opportunity reps themselves. The only difference now is that Marines now quickly glance over their shoulder before continuing with their dirty joke. So, how about we knock it off with the false pretenses and stop crying about it? Free speech unfortunately allows for peers to say things you don't like. Oh well.

As a previous enlisted than became an officer I have seen many men and women who would be very capable in the officer ranks but are restricted due to the regs. Any worth while corporation doesn't hold back any one who has the capability to move up to greater responsibility. The forces need to get ride of the artificial barrier between the enlisted ranks and the officers. I know of some who would have been better commanders then even I was.
George T. Muller Lt. Col (USAF ret)

I would start by changing the DFAS system get them on the same page as it is a very broken system. 2nd I would make it easier for Military personnel to rotate from in service to the VA medical system too many people falling through the cracks. 3rd I would try to make it easier for people to take college courses while on duty.