Army adds cognitive test to track new soldier brain health

Interesting to note the RP overlords change my tag of “Mental Health” to “Political Opinion” …

LTC Marc King so you think POTUS should be required to go on Navy SEAL Ops and be SCUBA qualified and HALO certified? After all, he asks others to do that.

POTUS should jump in front of the Secret Service to take the bullet they were trying to take for him?

POTUS should go into foreign nations as an undercover intelligence asset?


No, no, no, and no.

I have always found your espoused definition of good leadership laughable.
IMHO a good leader finds the people most suited to every mission and inspires them to do it. And a good leader ALSO knows their own strengths and weaknesses and is humble enough to know that they are NOT the person most suited to personally complete many, if not most, missions.

If I can't do a HALO jump, does that mean I can never accept a multi-phase multi-component mission which includes a small group doing a HALO? No. It means I take the mission, assign the few HALO qualified folks the HALO portion, and then divy out the other responsibilities in order of importance according to order of competence.

Also, Generals can either lead charges or lead Armies. If you want to do the latter, you have to give up the former. And the latter is FAR more valuable to winning wars.

SFC Casey O'Mally Wow very deep … misguided but deep. You see in order to understand my brand of leadership you have to have first been a PSG not a SFC, a 2Lt of Infantry/Armor/Artillery. You have to have been in the suck to inspire others to get in the suck. Seriously SFC …. It’s a mental acuity test not Navy SEAL training. If the Army thinks it can weed out those who might be dangerous the same standards can be applied to the most senior leaders especially when they carry the nuclear release codes. You need not look any further than the current administration. A CinC who is sketchy at best a SecDef who disappears for a week and no one knows it, with a Deputy who is in sunny PR with no clue where her boss is … a Sec Army who is woke I think you get it. You see we served in different Armies with different standards. Which is why we see it differently. My Army trained the Army that took down the Sadam regime in 100 hours… it was a post Vietnam Army …we learned our lessons in the jungles and rice patties and while the politicians did not let us win that war we dint lay down or quit … we trained and equipped the army that came after us … with great battlefield success. Leading from the front.

LTC Marc King Sir, I cut my teeth in the Infantry. It's true I was not a PSG, but I was a Squad Leader. And I carried those leadership lessons forward into the MULTIPLE PSG and 1SG positions I filled - including in a Cav Squadron, an Infantry Brigade, and an Engineer Battalion. Not once did any of my subordinates OR my seniors in those combat units doubt my leadership or accuse me of weakness.

When stating aphorisms, one should ensure that the rule being stated is actually a RULE and not just a generality. So stating that leaders should only expect subordinates to do what they do is a horrible philosophy. Great leaders expect juniors to be able to do things that leader never could - that expectation spurs the subordinates to newer and higher levels of greatness. It is a poor leader, indeed, who never challenges a subordinate to be even better than the leader is. Such is the leadership of stagnation and decline.

My Army was the Army that actually DID take down the Saddam regime. I was there for OIF 1.

Leading from the front is what average junior leaders are expected to do. It is what inspirational middle echelon leaders do. And it is what stupid senior leaders do. A Division has thousands of Riflemen. It has one CG. A CG storming the hill or taking the bunker has seriously miscallocated his/her personnel and is so deficient in tactical skill they are not fit to lead, IMHO.

Now, when I was there for OIF 1, and we had to start a duty roster for who was burning the poo, my name was the very first one from our unit. But I was a squad leader, not POTUS. I would have honestly been pretty pissed if I had seen the BC there. Because I know that time the Commander is spending burning poo is either time NOT spent drawing and approving battle plans to WIN THIS DAMN THING or time NOT spent coordinating with higher for resources. BC did not burn poo - and no one I spoke to expected him to.

And yes, you learned your lessons in the jungles and rice patties, true. But if you for ONE SECOND think that we didn't learn our lessons in the buildings and on the roads, and in the mountains and caves, then you are SORELY mistaken.

SFC Casey O'Mally Woof!

Good question here is why: RallyPoint has updated the tags in your discussion: "Army adds cognitive test to track new soldier brain health". Your original tags were:

MENTAL HEALTH

Your new tags are now:

POLITICAL OPINIONS

The discussion tags were changed by LTC Kevin Broom, PhD.

Because OP used the article to make a political swipe at POTUS. The commentary changed it into a political opinion.

SFC Casey O'Mally - Why can't a "Political Opinion" post have more than one topic tag?
After all you are offered 5 options to select.

SFC Ralph E Kelley in general, I would agree with you.

There has been a conscious move on RP to try to "wall off" the politics. Let the partisans bash each other over the head in their own little corner, without disturbing the rest of RP. I make no judgment on the validity of this decision, just note that is appears to have happened.