Weapons or Personnel; which is more important?

MSgt Donald G. — Mon, 19 Oct 2015 15:43:55 -0400

In defense bill battle, military pay and benefits are casualties
http://www.militarytimes.com/story/military/capitol-hill/2015/10/17/ndaa-benefits-losses/73930292/

In defense bill battle, military pay and benefits are casualties

Military advocates lost on almost every big benefits fight they waged as part of the new defense authorization bill.

Response by SCPO David Lockwood made Oct 19 at 2015 3:47 PM

SCPO David Lockwood — Mon, 19 Oct 2015 15:47:23 -0400

Both. You need people to maintain the weapons and fire them. You need weapons to be able to repel the enemy.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Oct 19 at 2015 4:01 PM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Mon, 19 Oct 2015 16:01:13 -0400

Our law makers dishonor the military which is fighting two wars. They are tired, weary, and bloodied. The law makers should not be stabbing in the back those who are fighting for them.

Response by SSgt Alex Robinson made Oct 19 at 2015 4:58 PM

SSgt Alex Robinson — Mon, 19 Oct 2015 16:58:10 -0400

Personnel or the weapons don't work

Response by CW4 Guy Butler made Oct 19 at 2015 5:23 PM

CW4 Guy Butler — Mon, 19 Oct 2015 17:23:32 -0400

That's the downside. OTOH, this shows Congress is serious about entitlement reform (and going after the low-hanging fruit).

Could be worse - could've raised the cost for Tricare again. Then again, there's the retirement changes...

Response by MSgt Curtis Ellis made Oct 19 at 2015 5:36 PM

MSgt Curtis Ellis — Mon, 19 Oct 2015 17:36:53 -0400

As it pertains to the nations defense, both are...

Response by CW3 Scott Webster made Oct 19 at 2015 5:47 PM

CW3 Scott Webster — Mon, 19 Oct 2015 17:47:30 -0400

The investment in the personnel through education, training, and understanding the processes to get results are far more important. The weapons, platforms, or systems are simply how we accomplish the nation's strategic mission. It will always be a careful balancing act of where to get the best return of time, resources, and funds to assess and develop a quality workforce and possess the right tools to counter our adversary's interests.

Response by LTC Stephen F. made Oct 19 at 2015 5:49 PM

LTC Stephen F. — Mon, 19 Oct 2015 17:49:11 -0400

Trained personnel are much more important than the weapons they operate MSgt Donald G.. The vast majority of new weapons funding seems to be usually spent of ever more expensive, more complicated and more tightly focused weapons systems.

Response by SSG Gerhard S. made Oct 19 at 2015 6:30 PM

SSG Gerhard S. — Mon, 19 Oct 2015 18:30:11 -0400

Personnel... Great weapons are worthless in the hands of the untrained, and unthinking, and inexperienced.

Response by SSG Ed Mikus made Oct 19 at 2015 6:32 PM

SSG Ed Mikus — Mon, 19 Oct 2015 18:32:34 -0400

you cannot fight without people, we fought before the invention of weapons.

Response by COL Ted Mc made Oct 19 at 2015 9:34 PM

COL Ted Mc — Mon, 19 Oct 2015 21:34:00 -0400

MSgt Donald G. - Master Sergeant; Second rate weapons operated by first rate personnel can almost always beat first rate weapons operated by second rate personnel - all else being equal.

On the other hand, you are talking about spending priorities and here I have to ask you "More important to whom?". To the people who rely on the spending to ensure that they get re-elected, then it has to be the spending on job creating industries in their local electoral district. To the people who the weapons are for it is the personnel benefits - just as long as they don't actually need the weapons. When the weapons are actually needed, then the people who actually use them tend to forget about personnel benefits.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 19 at 2015 10:03 PM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 19 Oct 2015 22:03:49 -0400

You have to have a balance of both or neither will be effective

Response by PO3 Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 20 at 2015 7:05 AM

PO3 Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 20 Oct 2015 07:05:06 -0400

a balance must be strike between that two. but personal always come first.