« Another Pathetic Fallacy | Main | "Apocalypto" - Farrell »

15 December 2006

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

John Howley

More from today's WaPo (sorry about the long quote but it's right on the money):

As a result, out of the total of 522,000 Army National Guard and reserve members, only about 90,000 are still available to be mobilized, according to Army data. "We're out of Schlitz," declared an Army chart depicting the shortage as a depleted barrel, saying this leaves "future missions in jeopardy."

Compounding the problem, the Pentagon has restricted repeated involuntary call-ups, leading to deeper and deeper holes in Army Guard and reserve units. Since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, hundreds of thousands of reserve soldiers have been mobilized for Iraq and Afghanistan. So when a unit is called to deploy, the only soldiers who can go are volunteers and new soldiers. The remainder are often drawn from dozens of units across the United States.

The result is systematically "broken" and "non-cohesive" units, said another Army chart titled "OSD-mandated Volunteer Policy Stresses the Force," referring to the office of the secretary of defense.

For example, Army Reserve units now must take an average of 62 percent of their soldiers for deployments from other units, compared with 6 percent in 2002 and 39 percent in 2003, according to the Army data. In one transportation company, only seven of 170 soldiers were eligible to deploy. The other 163 came from 65 other units in 49 locations, said the commission chairman, retired Marine Corps Maj. Gen. Arnold L. Punaro, who quoted a Marine Reserve officer as calling the policy "evil."

"Military necessity dictates that we deploy organized, trained, equipped cohesive units -- and you don't do that by pick-up teams," said Schoomaker, a decorated veteran of the Army's Delta Force who served in the ill-fated Desert One rescue mission in Iran in 1980.

Frank Durkee

Col. this has been being bruited about in the mainstream press for at least 2, if not more years. why is it just now that it is being made plain? and how does this fit with the Whitehouse 'new strategy'--yet to be unveiled.
Thanks.

Connecticut Man1

Instead individuals are brought in from all over the country to fill the places of friends.

I believe that the Army has been doing that for years already. When I was at my unit they were in a constant state of being undermanned, when they were not preparing for deployment, with soldiers being counted 2 and 3 times in positions that a truely combat ready unit would need to have "different" individuals serving in. (I think we discussed this at BooTrib a year or so ago?) They would ship in soldiers from other units to fill out the rosters before we deployed.

The other real problem? The NG/Reserves are already even more broken than the regular Army. They are in no real position to supplement the needs of the regular Army.

arbogast

Colonel Lang,
This post MUST (I'm not ordering you around:-) be submitted to the WaPo and the NYT as an OpEd piece. Please!
You know what you're talking about.

semper fubar

Maybe it's about time Americans rethought how important it is to staff 700+/- military bases in 130 countries around the world. What are we doing there? What is our purpose?

Why do we need hundreds of throusands of military people scattered out all over the globe? How much is this costing us, the taxpayers, and what benefit are WE, the ordinary Americans, really deriving from it? What else could we be doing with all that effort and manpower and money?

So, break the Army? Maybe it's about time. Maybe that's the only way to save ourselves.

ked

I'm shocked, SHOCKED, that US ground combat forces are in this mess! How could this possibly be? It must have been completely unforeseen over the past ten years (when I first heard about systemic, unaddressed optempo problems & the impact on readiness, cohesiveness, sanity, etc).

So, we are engaged all over the world w/ an Army no larger than half the size that the missions & national strategy (well, if you can call it that - how 'bout "policy-makers behavior modalities"?) calls for... Schoomaker either just woke up OR Rummy was one heck of a scary boss (make HIM the ME spl envoy in recognition of his skills!).

Yeah, manpower is soooo expensive, unlike giant gee-whiz (& failed / failing) weapons systems dev programs (FCS, Land Warrior, JTRS, etc, etc - not to mention the cold war style USAF & USN fleets).

Hi-tech toys useless to the guys getting blown up every day, great for Tier 1 contractors, though... Does stupidity belong right up there w/ fraud, waste & abuse?

I can't quite recall... just what constitutes (sorry for the pun) high crimes and misdemeanors, anyway?

chimneyswift

A story comes to mind.

In 2003, when the invasion part of this war was going pretty full-swing, I was sitting with an friend "watching the war" on CNN. My friend is a Gulf War I vet and very much a pro-troops kind of guy. We're watching and talking and doing math on what we know of troop levels in Germany and Korea and still in the States, and he says to me very simply, "You know what bothers me? What if this is all we got?"

I had no answer for him then, but what occurs to me now is a point I would like to see made from time to time:

This is the problem with wars of choice. If there is no need to fight, there will be no support from the population in terms of new volunteers. There was never a good reason for this war and so now we're grinding down the very human resources the Armed Forces are made of.

What did Rumsfeld say? People are fungible? Fung this, Rummy.

Dan Tompkins

Gen. Schoomaker is getting some unjust heat for a seeming contradiction between his statement this week and earlier denials that the army is "broken," e.g. to Joe Galloway in Aug '06. Reserve Chief Gen Helmly had introduced the latest "broken" thread in Jan '05 (! two years ago) about his own branch, and Galloway had picked up on it.

I think that the attacks on Gen. Schoomaker, by people I generally like, are misplaced. He has spoken openly about deployment challenges, e.g. in a presser on 2/2/06 with Gen Helmly. His language has been less confrontational but the implication that he's become straightforward only with his boss out the door seems to ignore the data.

In any case, good post, Colonel. Thanks.

Dan Tompkins

Sam

As to unit's being tribal groups - anyone other than me remember the FNG syndrom from VN?

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

February 2020

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
            1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
Blog powered by Typepad