This ain't Hell, but you can see it from here

Category: Big Army

  • Read ‘Em and Weep

    Isn’t it great that the world is so safe and peaceful these days?

    Army has fewest active-duty soldiers since 1940, report says

    I hope the sarcasm in the intro above was obvious.  Gee thanks, Mr. President.

  • No “Boots on the Ground”, Mr. President? Yeah. Right.

    As Jonn noted yesterday, we’ve lost another one in Iraq.  This brings to 3 the number of US troops lost during combat operations against Daesh.

    The SEAL (initial reports were that he was a soldier) who was KIA was acting as an advisor to Kurdish Peshmerga at the time.  He was killed by direct fire in an engagement that occurred after Daesh forces penetrated Pesmerga lines.

    But don’t worry.  The POTUS has repeatedly told us we won’t have any “boots on the ground” or “combat troops”  in Iraq or Syria.

    Yeah, right.  Being killed while serving as an advisor to Peshmerga ground forces certainly sounds like “boots on the ground” to me.  And getting killed by direct-fire during a ground engagement also sounds one helluva lot like ground combat, too.

    But rest assured – those aren’t “combat troops”.  And we don’t have “boots on the ground” there.

    But what do you expect?  This is the same POTUS that told everyone they could keep their doctor under ObamaCare, too.  How’s that worked out for everyone?

    Yeah, you’re right – your leg’s wet.  And it’s not raining.

  • Army Retains SFC Martland

    Army Retains SFC Martland

    Martland

    Jonn and I have written previously about SFC Charles Martland and the attempt by the Army to separate him for “assaulting” a child-rapist in Afghanistan.  The earlier articles can be found here, here, here, and here.

    According to Fox News, the Army yesterday changed its mind. They have now opted to retain SFC Martland vice discharging him.

    Sometimes sanity reigns – even inside that 5-sided asylum near the Open Air Brothel on the Potomac – and the good guys win one.  IMO this is such a case.

    Congratulations, SFC Martland.  Kudos to Rep. Duncan Hunter (and others) for publicly supporting him.

    And while SFC Martland never should have been considered for discharge in the first place, kudos also to the Army for finally seeing the light and doing the right thing here.

  • Milley frustrated at Bureaucracy

    Milley frustrated at Bureaucracy

    According to Fox News, the Army Chief of Staff, General Mark Milley expressed some frustration over the procurement process for a new handgun for the military services. The military is trying to replace the M9 pistol they began buying in the mid-80s to replace the venerable M1911.

    Milley said at the conference that the program is an example of a bureaucratic system that makes it overly complicated to get field equipment to soldiers on the frontlines in a timely matter.

    “We are trying to figure out a way to speed up the acquisition system,” Milley said. “Some of these systems take multiple years, some of them decades to develop.”

    Milley also pointed out many issues and concerns with the MHS, particularly the $17 million price tag.

    “[A] 367-page requirement document. Why?” Milley asked the crowd. “Well, a lawyer says this, and a lawyer says that, and you have to go through this process and that process and you have to have oversight from this that and the other.”

    “The testing — I got a briefing the other day — the testing for this pistol is two years,” he added. “Two years to test technology that we know exists. You give me $17 million on the credit card, I’ll call Cabela’s tonight, and I’ll outfit every soldier, sailor, airman, and Marine with a pistol and I’ll get a discount on it for bulk buys.”

    Lawyers and politicians involved in the process of selecting firearms for the next conflict. Not a particularly timely or useful process. Not a process that either will surrender any aspect of control, either.

  • SFC Charles Martland; To Free the Oppressed

    SFC Charles Martland; To Free the Oppressed

    Martland

    The Army was supposed to make a decision on whether Sergeant First Class Charles Martland could remain in the Army or not after the 2011 incident wherein he scared an Afghan tribal police chief who was raping a pre-teen boy. First of all, we’re upset that he’s even being considered for elimination from the Special Forces, and secondly, we’re upset that Big Army can’t summon the testicular fortitude to make a decision on the issue at all. Martland was supposed to have known their decision today, but Big Army has pushed it out to May 1st – you know, maybe because we’ll forget about the whole thing, you know, because there’s so much to be angry about these days. From Fox News;

    One year ago, the Army conducted a “Qualitative Management Program” review board and called for Martland — among thousands of other soldiers with prior disciplinary issues — to be “involuntary discharged” by Nov. 1, 2015.

    Martland appealed the decision and a final ruling on his discharge has been delayed until now. With the deadline rapidly approaching, other legal advocates have come to his aid, and even garnered more than 300,000 signatures in a petition calling for the decision to be overturned.

    The motto of the Special Forces is “To Free the Oppressed” and I’d bet that you’d be hard pressed to find someone more oppressed than a pre-teen boy tied to a bed for the sexual pleasure of an older man who beat the boy’s mother because she couldn’t be quiet about the treatment of her son. I guess the Army thought it was a pretty good motto when The Institute of Heraldry approved it decades ago, but now it’s a little inconvenient when soldiers take it seriously.

    One way or the other, Martland needs to get on with his life, either in or out of the Army, so the boys at the Pentagon need to sack up and make their choice. Sooner is better than later.

  • Army; Recruiters should focus on female recruits

    Army; Recruiters should focus on female recruits

    Chief Tango sends us a link from the Associated Press which begins telling us good idea that the Army has about recruiting and job-placement. he want to test recruits strength and endurance to determine what jobs they should have;

    Prospective soldiers will be asked to run, jump, lift a weight and throw a heavy ball – all to help the Army figure out if the recruit can handle a job with high physical demands or should be directed to a more sedentary assignment.

    OK, well, that makes sense, except that I probably wouldn’t have qualified to be an infantryman after the “Summer of Jonn” following high school.

    The article also addresses the question on everybodys’ minds – how can the Army enlist more women;

    As part of the effort, the Army will increase the number of female recruiters to better target women. The goal will be to add 1 percent each year for the next three years in order to get at least one woman at each of the Army’s more than 780 larger recruiting centers across the country.

    Right now, only about 750 of the 8,800 Army and Army Reserve recruiters are women.

    The head of U.S. Army Recruiting Command, Maj. Gen. Jeff Snow, told The Associated Press that adding more women as recruiters will give female recruits someone more credible to talk to about options for women in the military and how an Army career could affect married or family life.

    See, that sounds sexist to me – are women the only ones concerned about married or family life in the Army, and are women the only people who know those answers? I’m pretty sure that there are male recruiters who can already answer those questions.

    For those of you who aren’t already familiar with the process, many recruiters are forced to work in those positions. I’m sure there will more than a few women who won’t like being jerked out of their chosen profession to fly a desk and make cold calls to high school seniors just to make the Army look like they want more women in the ranks. That brings me to my big question – the question I’ve been asking since this whole discussion began, the question which still hasn’t been answered. How will recruiting more women, and making more women recruiters help us kill more of the enemies of democracy?

  • This Just Doesn’t Seem Right

    During the early part of World War II, the US Army Air Forces had a pilot shortage.  A relatively small group of women helped mitigate that shortage through various programs.  The first two such programs were the Women’s Flying Training Detachment (WFTD) and the Women’s Auxiliary Ferrying Squadron (WAFS).  In 1943, these two programs and organizations were merged to form the Women Airforce Service Pilots, or WASPs.

    The WASP program, like the US Merchant Marine, at the time was technically a form of civilian wartime service – a paramilitary organization vice uniformed military service.  Congress did consider making the WASPs a formal part of the Army Air Forces, but ultimately declined to do so.  Later in the war, sufficient USAF male pilots had been trained to eliminate the pilot shortfall.  The WASP program was then terminated and its members were released.

    Both WASPs and US Merchant Marine personnel serving during World War II were later granted military veteran status by Congress with the passage of the GI Bill Improvement Act of 1977 – though it took a Federal court decision in 1988 before US Merchant Mariners were recognized as veterans under that act.  And since 2002 each group has been deemed eligible for inurnment (the placement of cremated remains in a cemetery storage area, often above ground) in Arlington National Cemetery as a military veteran.

    Until last year, that is.

    Sometime last year the Secretary of the Army, John McHugh, determined that WASPs and World War II Merchant Mariners were no longer eligible for inurnment at Arlington National Cemetery.  Curiously enough, both groups apparently remain eligible for both inurnment and in-ground burial at National Cemeteries run by the VA.  (The Army operates Arlington National Cemetery and the US Soldiers’ & Airmen’s Home National Cemetery in DC; the VA operates all other US National Cemeteries.)

    You know, this seems just plain wrong to me.  One can legitimately debate whether or not Congress should have granted members of the WASPs or World War II US Merchant Mariners veteran status.  However, the fact remains that Federal law did exactly that in 1977.  Both groups performed hazardous duty in support of the national war effort under the direction and control of military officials.  Both groups suffered a substantial rate (3.5+%) of fatalities.  And for the last 38+ years, members of both groups have been, by law, World War II veterans.

    Under Title 32 Code of Federal Regulations Part 553, section 15a, any former member of the Armed Forces who served on active duty (other than for training) and whose last service terminated honorably is eligible for inurnment at Arlington..  It seems to me that people declared by Congress to be military veterans due to service as WASPs or Merchant Mariners during World War II who served honorably deserve the same.  If all other vets whose service ended honorably are eligible for inurnment in Arlington, I can’t see any good reason why members of these two groups should be excluded.

    But maybe that’s just me.

  • Wienies build a wienie NCO Corps

    The big benefit to the Army of a decade of war is the experience those back-to-back deployments gave those junior NCOs. They led troops in the most difficult times, they dealt with leadership problems that soldiers who never deployed will never understand. So, let’s just devalue that experience, shall we? From the Army Times;

    The Army has moved closer to launching a new promotion system for NCOs with the early-December redistribution of promotion points for specialists, corporals and sergeants competing for E-5 and E-6 stripes.

    […]

    The Army also is eliminating the points (up to 60 for sergeant and 90 for staff sergeant) that were available for combat experience in the “Military Training” section of the worksheet.

    So, you see, being a wienie has it’s benefits now. I’ll admit that schooling and all of that is important but serving in combat is at least as important – well, unless you’re a wienie. And the Army’s Sergeant Major wonders how 50,000 soldiers are non-deployable.