Cortillaen sends us a Fox News article from his new station in Japan that trumpets the return of the M1911A1 .45 caliber pistol to arms rooms across the Marine Corps. Apparently, the Corps has placed a $22.5 million order for the iconic handguns;
Colt Defense, based in Hartford, Conn., will supply as many as 12,000 of the 200,000 U.S. Marines with semi-automatic, tan-colored M45 Close Quarter Battle Pistols, and they will include spare parts and logistical support. The gun has long been the weapon of choice for special operations agents, thanks to its reliability and the stopping power of its massive bullets.
I was disappointed with the Army when they bought the Beretta, it made no sense whatsoever, except to make us pantywaists like the Euro-wienies. I spent some time with the XVIIIth Airborne Corps pistol team in the late 70s and learned what an awesome weapon the old 1911 was.
I’ve always owned at least one except when I lived where handguns weren’t allowed and most everyone I know owns some variation. I have two; a government model in .45 and a Colt Double Eagle in 10mm.
At least the Marine Corps is smarter about the weapons their troops carry.
Jonn’s recent article about the recent QRMC proposal concerning military reserve compensation got me thinking. So I guess you should consider this fair warning that I’m about to go down another rabbit hole. (smile)
Introduction
The 11th Quadrennial Review of Military Compensation (QRMC) has proposed a significant change in the way Reserve Component personnel are compensated, both while serving in the reserves and during retirement. In a nutshell, this proposal would reduce drill compensation significantly, and would reduce overall retirement credit (and thus retirement pay) less dramatically. In exchange, the QRMC proposes to allow a Reservist to begin receiving retirement pay substantially earlier – for many, between 7 and 13 years earlier – than allowed by current law (age 60 unless one qualifies for retirement under Active Component rules, for disability retirement, or for early receipt of Reserve retired pay due to contingency service) .
The obvious question arises: is this a good deal or not? And if it’s a good deal, for whom: the government, the Reservist, both – or neither?
What I’m going to attempt below is to come up with some numbers for a few representative scenarios. The first involve Reservists who are pure Reservists (no prior active duty) and serve 20, 25, and 30 year careers under each system. The second set of scenarios involve Reservists who have 4 years active duty prior to going into the reserves, then complete a 20, 25, or 30 year career in the reserves.
Time magazine has an article this week about suicide in the military, which does have some interesting points. Too bad they can’t see those points in their very own reportage. First of all, as pointed out by Richard who sent us the link, they arrive at a stunning conclusion not often admitted to by the drive-media when talking about military suicides, combat participation doesn’t have much to do with identifying prospective suicide attempts;
…combat trauma alone can’t account for the trend. Nearly a third of the suicides from 2005 to 2010 were among troops who had never deployed; 43% had deployed only once. Only 8.5% had deployed three or four times. Enlisted service members are more likely to kill themselves than officers, and 18-to-24-year-olds more likely than older troops. Two-thirds do it by gunshot; 1 in 5 hangs himself. And it’s almost always him: nearly 95% of cases are male. A majority are married.
So, it looks to me from Time’s own statistics, soldiers are less likely to commit suicide the more they deploy. And then they pretend that they never wrote that paragraph;
One theory of suicide holds that people who feel useful, who feel as if they belong and serve a larger cause, are less likely to kill themselves. That would explain why active-duty troops historically had lower suicide rates than civilians. But now experts who study the patterns wonder whether prolonged service during wartime may weaken that protective function.
It seems to me that if only 8.5% of troops who deploy three or more times commit suicide, prolonged service during wartime strengthens that protective function that they mentioned there. Of the two soldiers that they highlight in the story, one had deployed as a helicopter pilot but never engaged the enemy, the other was an OB/GYN in a hospital in Hawaii, neither hard-bitten combat soldiers who fit the neat mold that the media likes to talk about.
We had four incidents of suicide in my unit during Desert Storm. Three were from the Scout platoon and killed themselves before we deployed, the fourth had deployed, but he, an E-7, had been the Battalion S-4 NCO and shot himself when he came back and found out that his wife had been unfaithful while he was in the war. Repeatedly. And she discovered that she liked it and didn’t stop cheating after he came back. None of those can be linked to combat, either, except they thought that the three Scouts killed themselves to avoid combat which makes no sense. I’m not aware of any other suicides from that unit, but I might be wrong.
And while I’m more disturbed by suicides by military members more than the rest of Americans, they still only account for 20% of the total suicides in the US.
But what makes preventing suicide so confounding is that even therapy often fails. “Over 50% of the soldiers who committed suicide in the four years that I was vice [chief] had seen a behavioral-health specialist,” recalls [Peter W. Chiarelli, former Vice Chief of Staff of the U.S. Army]. “It was a common thing to hear about someone who had committed suicide who went in to see a behavioral-health specialist and was dead within 24, 48 or 72 hours–and to hear he had a diagnosis that said, ‘This individual is no danger to himself or anyone else.’ That’s when I realized that something’s the matter.”
Of course, Time tries their best to blame the military’s inattention to the problem, but that’s hardly the problem. If they’re sending people to behavioral specialists and those patients then commit suicide irrespective of the diagnosis, then there’s something wrong with the science, not the military’s culture.
I think the solution is in our own veteran community, not in the school-trained “specialists. And I think it was what these Medal of Honor recipients were trying to convey;
Veterans saving veterans. If the military wants to help potential suicide victims, they need to look at who they’re hiring instead of looking solely at credentials. And the VSOs need to start their own outreach programs. This is the next war that veterans need to engage with, and we all need to get further ahead of it than we are right now.
Parachute Cutie can tell the story about how she firmly believes that I saved a soldier’s life one night over pitchers of beer in Silver Spring, Maryland. I don’t know if that’s true or not, but all I did was tell him that he’s not the first to have those feelings, that we all think about it from time-to-time, and somehow we make the brave decision to stick it out instead. And apparently, he agreed, because he’s still around. But it convinced me that the newest veterans value our opinions and look to us for guidance, and it’s time for us to step up and accept the challenge.
If you haven’t clicked the “Shoulder to Shoulder” link in the left side bar and watched the video, you should really take the 15 minutes to watch it.
Well, maybe “minor error” is a slight understatement. The error consisted of landing on a 3,500’ runway at an airport on an island near Tampa vice the 11,000’ runway at MacDill AFB a few miles away.
I’m guessing that landing certainly made for a high APF day for those onboard.
There was no crash, and the aircraft was apparently not seriously damaged. It was later able – after removing cargo and pax – to fly out and return to operational use.
Kudos to the pilot for managing to land safely on a very short runway. But I’m guessing he or she has a bit of explaining to do. And I’m also guessing his/her career prospects may well have taken a rather sharp downturn, at least in the short-term.
Predictably, the incident has generated a bit of discussion. I’m no aviator, so I’ll pose my questions here:
Just how bad of a screw-up was this?
Do the pilot/co-pilot need to start working on their resumes and/or making plans on how to use their GI-bill to get education/training in a different career field?
Has this incident killed their chances of getting post-service employment in the commercial aviation industry?
Apparently, winning the repeal of the Clinton era Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy towards gays is more important than winning any war against terror, at least in San Diego this weekend. From the Associated Press;
Dozens of soldiers, sailors, and Marines marched alongside an old Army truck decorated with a “Freedom to Serve” banner and a rainbow flag. They were joined by dozens more military personnel in civilian clothes, but the uniforms stood out among the flower-bedecked floats and scantily clad revelers.
Spectators waved signs reading, “Thank you for your service.” A woman held a placard that said: “My gay son is a Naval officer.”
“Today is so important,” said Navy Lt. Brian McKinney, who marched with his civilian partner, Hunter Hammonds. “It’s about putting on my uniform and taking pride in my service, my fellow service-members, my family and myself. It’s something I’m incredibly thankful for.”
The head Birther nutjob, Oily Titz, or Orly Taintz, or whatever, is giving really bad legal advice in an attempt to destroy the military careers of some more service members. Somehow she thinks that the Pentagon’s decision to allow military personnel to wear their uniforms at the gay pride event in San Diego this weekend also allows them to wear their uniforms at a protest at the Democrat National Convention this summer;
Breaking news: members of the military can demonstrate in uniforms in front of the DNC convention against usurper Obama with forged papers
Until now members of the military were not allowed to demonstrate in uniforms. Now this ban was lifted, when members of the US military were allowed to march in their uniforms in a gay pride parade.
Here is a new line of attack: “American patriots against the usurper pride parade” in military uniforms. We need members of the military in their uniforms demonstrating in front of the DNC, RNC conventions and in front of the American Bar association convention in Chicago. We need signs “Proud Americans against the Usurper”. “End usurpation of the US Presidency, send Obama to prison” “Prison for Obama and accomplices for forgery”.
Important: if members of the military can demonstrate in uniforms in gay pride parade, they can demonstrate in their uniforms in front of the DNC convention and demand prosecution of Obama for usurpation of the Presidency using forged papers.
PS. If someone is not given permission to demonstrate in a uniform in American pride against the usurper parade, let me know, we will sue the military for the discrimination. what’s good for the goose, good for the gander.
Yeah, Titz is a self-promoting shyster. Three officers have trashed their careers in her name when they refused to deploy to the wars until the president shows his birth certificate, and now she wants you to trash your career so she can lose your case when you protest at a political event in your uniform.
Since I’m most familiar with the Army Regulation 670-1, that’s the one I’ll quote. I’m sure the other services have similar regulations;
j. Wearing Army uniforms is prohibited in the following situations:
(1) In connection with the furtherance of any political or commercial interests, or when engaged in off-duty civilian
employment.
(2) When participating in public speeches, interviews, picket lines, marches, rallies, or public demonstrations, except
as authorized by competent authority.
(3) When attending any meeting or event that is a function of, or is sponsored by, an extremist organization.
(4) When wearing the uniform would bring discredit upon the Army.
(5) When specifically prohibited by Army regulations.
So, Orly Taintz doesn’t care about you or career, she wants you to martyr yourself for her and her intellectually stunted minions.
ADDED: Someone sent us a copy of the letter that was meant for interim guidance pertaining to the wear of a military uniform in public from the Department of Defense; (more…)
From NBC’s affiliate Channel 7 in San Diego comes the news that the Pentagon has authorized military members to wear their uniforms at the gay pride activities scheduled in San Diego this weekend;
“Based on our current knowledge of the event and existing policies,” the memo read, “we hereby are granting approval for service members in uniform to participate in this year’s parade, provided service members participate in their personal capacity and ensure the adherence to Military Service standards of appearance and wear of the military uniform.”
Local commanders previously had the authority to grant military personnel to wear their uniforms. However, approval at a higher level was granted “now since the event has garnered national media attention,” the memo stated.
So the Pentagon has capitulated to political pressure from the “national media attention”. I’m sure that something will happen that will make them come to regret this buffoonery, but they have to remember that Big Pentagon sanctioned it.
