What's the most important thing the military should do while going through this downsizing period?

2013-09-27T19:27:12-04:00

As the military enters a significant downsizing period, it's important to talk through relevant issues and solutions.  Enter your response below, and if it gets the most Up votes, you win a free iPad Mini and we will personally deliver your thoughts to our Advisory Board, which includes retired Generals George Casey and Norton Schwartz, the recent Chiefs of Staff of the Army and Air Force, respectively.<div><br></div><div>Tip: Get all your friends to vote Up your response by the end of the contest on Oct 7, 2013.</div>

Response by SPC Christopher Salustro made Sep 28 at 2013 8:17 AM

2013-09-28T08:17:13-04:00

The most important thing is my eyes, keep the standard. Don't lose sight of the goal. I really think that people are so up in arms over the military and the government "losing control" that they forget how to keep control of thier own lives.

Other than that, understand that everyone in the Army is different, we're not all cut from the same cloth. Know that not everyone is going to take what "Big Army" lays out like a lollipop at the dentists office. It's our profession, we chose this, stop trying to be a "mom" and start being a force.

Response by Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2013 8:53 AM

2013-09-28T08:53:12-04:00

Inspire innovation.  We need to find better/different ways of doing things and not accepting a process/program is good enough as is.  From big things to little things, we need to all stop and think if what we are doing every moment is really being done the  best way.  

Response by LCDR Jason Woodward made Sep 28 at 2013 10:38 AM

2013-09-28T10:38:29-04:00

If by military we are including the military communitee and not just "the military", then hire vets.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2013 10:42 AM

2013-09-28T10:42:45-04:00

The civilian side should work as much as the green side.

I am fairly new to the military, but I have already heard many times that 'it' is sitting on one of the civilian's desk and they only work 'such and such' hours and on 'such and such' days.

Response by SGT Byron Reiger made Sep 28 at 2013 10:43 AM

2013-09-28T10:43:59-04:00

Training and continue to maintain freedom

Response by COL Dan O'Rourke made Sep 28 at 2013 10:47 AM

2013-09-28T10:47:13-04:00

There is plenty of focus on the downsizing of the troops already, let's provide more accountability in the civilian workforce.  I'm sure there are plenty of good civilians out there, but let's inject some rationality to the hiring and firing process. 

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2013 10:57 AM

2013-09-28T10:57:38-04:00

Don't forget the soldiers and their families. Yes we can still do everything we were trained to do, but when families are effected the job gets effected also.

Response by SSgt Gregory Gardner made Sep 28 at 2013 11:06 AM

2013-09-28T11:06:16-04:00

The most important thing for the military to do at this downsizing period is to remember that they are professionals and that the majority of Americans support them and what they are doing. It is important to remember that the military works for us and it is up to us to support them always. One other thing the military can do is through proper channels, let their elected officials, including the commander in chief know that they do not support cutbacks to defense spending.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2013 11:15 AM

2013-09-28T11:15:30-04:00

Rewrite doctrine, for the modern world. Combat has changed from a linear battlefield and doctrine needs to change with it. Training needs to be updated to reflect new technologies that are in use, and defense spending needs to be placed under control. And lastly we need to avoid unnecessary conflicts, and start taking care of our own sick and wounded.

Response by PO3 James Ford made Sep 28 at 2013 11:16 AM

2013-09-28T11:16:50-04:00

don,t, we did this downsizing thing before and it took a decade and billions to rebuild and retrain and in the time it takes we were vulnerable. leave the military alone.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2013 11:16 AM

2013-09-28T11:16:56-04:00

Have a reward program for best ideas through AKO. If your unit saves so much money they get recognition, 4 day pass, ect. Hold commanders responsible for enforcing recycling. In TRADOC I have seen it pushed but in line units I never saw it promoted.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2013 11:17 AM

2013-09-28T11:17:23-04:00

Response by SGT(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2013 11:19 AM

2013-09-28T11:19:20-04:00

As leaders we should continue to train our soldiers in the basics I.e skill level 1,2,3,4,5..... We need to be up to date on what we lack as a whole I have seen countless amounts of troops who for example cannot do things like call for fire, a 9 line medivac, land navigation. I struggled with these things as a younger soldier still to this day I am not as proficient as I should be. With that being said no matter what your MOS is you are a soldier first and we need to be proficient at our basic soldier skills, because in this day and age of war anything and everything is possible to happen on the battlefield,This in my book would be the most opportune time to sharpen those skills, test us as leaders to teach,train and mentor our replacements as we get promoted or retire.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2013 11:22 AM

2013-09-28T11:22:42-04:00

Think about the present and future needs, make the military a lot more efficient (needs it badly), and get rid of a lot of deadwood equipment and personnel while you have the chance.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2013 11:23 AM

2013-09-28T11:23:15-04:00

Watch how we downsize. We have seen the problems we created in our leadership the last time we did this. We need to cull not by the PT studs staying in but keep some intelligence and forward thinking soldiers and leaders to pave the way. Also revamp our contract system. The outsourcing to contracts is not cost efficient. And bring our military home or change locations. I have been stationed in Germany and it is very expensive to maintain our bases. If we need to stay in Europe let's start shopping around for countries that need and want us. Our SOFA agreements are outdated and need to be modified. 

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2013 11:24 AM

2013-09-28T11:24:33-04:00

Downsize very carefully- remember what has happened before, when the military downsized and then was caught off guard. 9-11, Korean War...

Response by CPO George Fox made Sep 28 at 2013 11:26 AM

2013-09-28T11:26:25-04:00

I think we need to focus on leadership and the advancement process. The best test takers aren't always the best leaders, but it's the test takers that get advanced. Leadership is about performance, not test scores.

Under President Clinton the military lost a lot of experience. This is going to happen again if the system isn't changed. I find myself in this category. I'm a high performer, but don't always have the time afforded to study before the test. Life gets in the way. My wife has lupus, kids have homework and school functions.

Experienced leadership can effectively change the other areas, especially those penny pinching changes we need. We just need the right leaders. Just my 2cents.

Response by CPT David McDonald made Sep 28 at 2013 12:13 PM

2013-09-28T12:13:21-04:00

The most important thing the military should do while going through downsizing is.....

To know your job, be or become the subject matter expert. I went through the retirement process and the nightmare continues 20 months later.

Response by MSgt David Mann made Sep 28 at 2013 12:14 PM

2013-09-28T12:14:48-04:00

I can only speak to the AF side of the house, but I believe the evaluation/promotion system needs to be overhauled. Too many maxed EPS/OPRs; these are supposed to be reserved for the elite performers, not the "show up and do your job performers." Too many people in positions of leadership are willing to accept mediocrity instead of excellence; I agree with PO2 Fox's comments above. DoD Civilian personnel need to be subject to the same scrutiny; it's near impossible to get an underperforming civilian out of their job when I can find eager and hardworking vets who are focused on the mission instead of a paycheck.

Response by SSG Jim Handy made Sep 28 at 2013 12:50 PM

2013-09-28T12:50:10-04:00

The first thing is to make a concerted effort to retain the very best personnel. I use to hate it when people I thought were awesome soldiers would leave the service. The next thing we need to do is make sure that those top notch soldiers who do leave active duty are given all the information on National Guard and Reserve options. In a time of crisis we need to have these assets easily at hand. I know when I left there was no effort at all to inform about the Guard or Reserves. This process needs to star while they are still in, not after they get out.

Response by MSG Michael Shannon made Sep 28 at 2013 12:53 PM

2013-09-28T12:53:31-04:00

Get rid of monetary incentives for reenlistment. Too much
money is spent when it should be for the flag. instead offer non monetary
reenlistment incentives such as retirement points, duty assignment of choice,
or special schools such as airborne air assault or pathfinder.

Response by CPL Jack Share made Sep 28 at 2013 1:12 PM

2013-09-28T13:12:24-04:00

Regroup & redefine our mission. Nothing remains the same in this world, change is constant. The choices we make now predict the life we will have tomorrow. We need "think tanks," better intellligence & planners of "experts" in their respective fields to advise & guide us for tomorrow. Most important we need the people that are & have been on the line as part of such a group. To be up to date the group could have some rotated to bring in fresh ideas, dynamic. Good luck

Response by SSG Bradley Ford made Sep 28 at 2013 1:29 PM

2013-09-28T13:29:04-04:00

When going with a draw down,i would get rid of some of the dead weight.People in the chapter period,fat bodies that can not meet standards,an not just the enlisted peopl

e.The military is to top heavy with alot Col an General that are just hold a job an do nothing but get paid.

Response by CMSgt Lee Beausoleil made Sep 28 at 2013 1:39 PM

2013-09-28T13:39:37-04:00

Instead of spending ungodly amounts of money on garrison support contracts, why not use our internal manpower and keep a viable defense of our country on the roles.

Response by PFC Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2013 1:45 PM

2013-09-28T13:45:04-04:00

Remember that combat effectiveness is directly proportionate to morale. While there are cuts that must be made, I don't think morale raising amenities such as MWR and commissaries should be placed on the back burner. We're already experiencing this with not fully mission capable equipment. I think one of the biggest issues is depending on contracts to provide very expensive equipment to the government. We need to go back to providing for ourselves. The army engineering corps should go back to engineering new and efficient ways to accomplish the mission. I believe we're on thin ice now; having become so reliant on those not employed by the government. Bring back ingenuity and provide for ourselves. It doesn't have to be this way...

Response by SSgt Timothy Butterworth made Sep 28 at 2013 1:51 PM

2013-09-28T13:51:22-04:00

Strip out as much non-war fighter spending as possible and remove programs that do not provide defense at all such as the Chaplaincy!

All funding should be going to the war fighter and national defense! US Military installation do not need golf course and religious institutions they need more firing ranges, more training and a push on professional development! Less members means explicitly more work per member!

All branches need an overhaul on PT and should change it to a more regulated program that builds, Strength, Dexterity and Stamina a martial arts style workout is the bet not just running for a mile or two!

Response by LCpl Michael Peters made Sep 28 at 2013 1:51 PM

2013-09-28T13:51:33-04:00

We need to find new ways to improve the existing technologies that we are able to employ on the battlefield. Every command needs to have a R&D team to analyze each piece of equipment used to max out and improve the capabilities of that piece. We also need to incorporate more cross training.

Response by SGT Joe Lakey made Sep 28 at 2013 1:52 PM

2013-09-28T13:52:31-04:00

Downsizing the military is always the response of liberal government. A government who protects the spew jam interest of those who have no issues utilizing their right to free speach to bad mouth our brave men and women but never will put themselves in a position to defend that right. A government of those who value and encourage citizens and illegals to feed off the tit of those who work hard to provide for their families.

The best thing we can do as leaders in business is to hire our veterans and assist them in their transition. We must look out for those who have looked out for us. No one deserves our respect more than our military. Our Military represents less than 1% of our nations citizens these men and women are trained in leadership, teamwork, and personal discipline. What more can you ask for in an employee.

You ask what should we do in times such as these? Easy. Hire Vets!!!!

Response by SGT Michael Vigliotti made Sep 28 at 2013 1:54 PM

2013-09-28T13:54:51-04:00

Hire a non-government efficiency expert team to QUIETLY look at EVERY MOS to determine WHICH IS essential and which is NON-essential and AFTER the study is complete - END FUNDING to the areas to be Eliminated.

Response by SSgt Randall Farr made Sep 28 at 2013 1:55 PM

2013-09-28T13:55:01-04:00

Maintain the priority of honoring God; Country, and Self in all you do. Stick to this and the "dross" will be exposed for what it is!

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2013 1:56 PM

2013-09-28T13:56:24-04:00

Bring our guys home and redeploy along our borders. That will save money without having to reduce manpower. We have verifiable evidence of al-Qaeda and Iranian operations along our southern border and we are talking about reduction in force. Asinine if I've ever heard it.

Response by CSM Lawrence Ruley made Sep 28 at 2013 1:56 PM

2013-09-28T13:56:35-04:00

Don't draw down! This is a huge mistake our political leaders are making. If anything they should let our commanders and troops do the job they are trained to do. If they want to help out have them keep their lawyers and their I know how to fight attitudes to themselves. Everytime our political leaders send troops out to fight they tie our hands. Turn our commanders loose and let us fight.

Response by SSgt Timothy Butterworth made Sep 28 at 2013 1:57 PM

2013-09-28T13:57:32-04:00

Remove the sales of Alcohol and Tobacco from all installations and implement prohibition against these substances! This will improve health reduce medical costs, improve the amount of work that gets done. Substantially reduce the amount of alcohol related incidents! Ready to work now not ready to work after sleeping of a hangover!

Response by SSG Willis Baker made Sep 28 at 2013 2:02 PM

2013-09-28T14:02:02-04:00

All the comments here are good. I remember back in '92 when my unit in Frankfurt had to go to the theater and watch a video from a General in Washington. He was talking about downsizing and the main point I took away from this was when he said, "We don't want another Task Force Smith." The more units we take out Germany weakens our hold on Europe. It's only a matter of time before some country(s) cross into Europe and all we have left to defend are Headquarters Units of once a great fighting force.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2013 2:08 PM

2013-09-28T14:08:59-04:00

Over the years while us The Military rotated through numerous of deployments either to Iraq or Afghanistan; the civilian sector jobs increased on Military Instalations, bigger salaries, more red tape nonsense by catering to the special needs of its civilian employes. I suggest we the Military take over what is rightfully ours and start dismissing the civilian employment and start moving our troops back to peace time occupations Lessening the down sizing in the Military. However, we all know that communication is the key; keep us in formed of the process step-by-step by giving a curtsy to the Military members who are under review for QSP/ QMP and RCP. A letter notifying the individual 24-36 months prior to QSP/ QMP and RCP date; " you are being recommended for, so forth." Our young Soldiers who are not meeting the standards due to drugs, diciplinary over weight and etc... should get bar from reenlisting and forced out allowing other Soldiers with a fighting chance. Incentives for reenlistment must remain in order to stay competitive with the civilian sector, who ever says other wise is a fool. We MUST take care of our own, keep our good Officers, NCOs and Soldiers in our ranks; we are in the family business that the military is a way of life not meant forevery body...

Response by LTJG Robert M. made Sep 28 at 2013 2:10 PM

2013-09-28T14:10:54-04:00

Retain the brain trust of the Senior leadership, too often in a downsizing, it is the senior members who are asked to take severance or retirement. When you do this you lose the knowledge base that they have earned and developed throughout their careers. Don't lose the seasoned Senior Enlisted and Officers to imposed budget cuts.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2013 2:11 PM

2013-09-28T14:11:20-04:00

There is just no easy answer to such a dynamic issue. I think the most important thing to focus on will be training. Make sure the soldiers that remain are adequately trained, physically and mentally, to sustain maximum effectiveness in a diminished capacity. There is lot of factors to pay attention to though like morale, fatigue, resources, and intelligence. Also, focus on maintaining better inventory to minimize spending so that the already limited budget can be used more efficiently. Pennies add up, and no office 'needs' 60 staplers or a printer in every corner. Increase revenue by auctioning off items and equipment that isn't used, isn't needed, or just plain broken.

Response by Cpl Paul Hughes made Sep 28 at 2013 2:11 PM

2013-09-28T14:11:55-04:00

I think that the Elected Officials are Not using their collective brains with enough power to make a good doorstop. They have the military fighting thousands of miles away while allowing our country undeffended and allowing illegal aliends to come in to our country, take over our jobs, claim underserved medical benefits, claim undeserved pay beneifts, and do whatever they want to do with the symbol of our great nation; the U.S. flag. They even allow for a non- U.S. flag to be flown on U.S. soil, that is NOT a member of another nation.

Response by SGT Brian Springer made Sep 28 at 2013 2:20 PM

2013-09-28T14:20:19-04:00

WELL I THINK EVERYONE NEEDS TO COME BACK FROM DOWNRANGE THAT WOULD SAVE ALL KINDS OF MONEY. WE DONT NEED TO BE IN AFG. ANY MORE THEN AT THE UNITS THEY SHOULD LET MOST OF THE CONTRACTERS GO HOME AND USE THE SOILDERS FOR MOST OF THE WORK . THAT WOULD SAVE MONEY.

Response by TSgt Shawna Coleman (retired) made Sep 28 at 2013 2:20 PM

2013-09-28T14:20:27-04:00

the most important thing i think the military should be looking at is when it come to downsizing is are we totally utilizing our force effectively do we have personnel in positions that are not in their scope can they be utilized within their job they are supposed to working in instead of working in a unit that is not their scope. i also think that manning number should be properly represented so many unit double billet personnel so they can keep peopl instead of fixing it so other organizations that need people can get people.

Response by SrA Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2013 2:21 PM

2013-09-28T14:21:44-04:00

Just hang in there, hopefully we will in the next election, elect a man or woman with leadership Qualities that will build our military instead of tearing it apart. In God I Trust.

Response by LT Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2013 2:23 PM

2013-09-28T14:23:42-04:00

"Grand strategy is the art of looking beyond the battle and calculating ahead. It requires that you focus on your ultimate goal and plot to reach it. Let others get caught up in the twists and turns of battle, relishing their little victories. Grand strategy will bring you the ultimate reward: the last laugh." Identify future regional hegemonies and steer policy and resources to limit their influence or win them as allies to benefit US interests. The height of strategic wisdom is to avoid all conflicts and entaglements from which there are no realistic exits. Reduce redundant platforms between services. Increase performance standards across all services and remove the bottom 10%; never decrease standards in a meritocracy to fit political agendas it destroys moral in a volunteer force. Restructure the antiquated warfare officer career path it leads to a "jack of all trades and master of none" mindset which impact our bottom line: warfighting. Retire Baby Boomer generation politicians in the Pentagon, they may have lost sight of their oath.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2013 2:23 PM

2013-09-28T14:23:55-04:00

<div>> Retain the top personnel. Spend effort (a team of smart unpaid outsiders, like interns from good schools, who know data analysis, anthropology, industrial engineering) into getting some good data analytics on NCOERs/OERs/deployment experience in order to make a decision on who the low performers will be and who the high performers will be. Pay the high performers to stay and deal with the pains associated with downsizing, and pay the low performers to depart.</div><div><br></div><div>> Get the contractors out of IT/C2 and forget the sunk costs and sunk legacies. CPOF, DTMS, etc. are great ideas troubled with poor understanding and horrible implementation because the input/interface is non-obvious by design. You don't need training to use your iPhone, but even with training it can take a team to figure a CPOF report feature out (this isn't true everywhere obviously)... Our network-centric infrastructure's robustness is dependent upon civilians who work set hours, set days, can be furloughed, and who are invested in bureaucracy; our signal Soldiers down at the battalions lose their rights to fix problems over to higher civilian oversight as a form of reactionary stop-gaps and fears of what those Soldiers could do, because the Army can't afford to pay the contracts necessary to fix the software such that it conforms to the user. Instead, the Soldier must conform to the software's oversight or issue, and we get more new policies and new training. "FRAGO to the FRAGO" and so on in regards to a policy that our E-1s have to be trusted to implement for our own OPSEC... which has a direct impact on our agility. Let units program their own ground-up, low-level databases and queries in a contained cloud to automate and synchronize the administrative stuff and then customize how that query presents to the Soldier! Let units share those products with other units. Open this market to smart Soldiers we have all over the place, not companies that must design the IT/C2 products such that they need eternal maintenance, updates, and field service reps to coax paychecks. 3 Soldiers could make a better, usable DTMS in a year if only they had the space, rights, and we weren't afraid to replace the fragmented network of separated databases that don't communicate. How many databases must my SSN be in...? When Soldiers have IA violations they need to get their certificates again, but the IA training videos are contracted (cost money, cumbersome to change) and not updated to reflect these policy changes upon policy changes - so nothing is learned and time is wasted; it's a punitive solution to a problem that shouldn't exist in any organization that values robustness and agility. Our IT/mission command problems at battalions are pervasive, crippling, and getting sillier every day.</div><div><br></div>

Response by SPC Johnny Wilson made Sep 28 at 2013 2:24 PM

2013-09-28T14:24:10-04:00

I think they should use all the money from the downsize and use it to better help the injured war veterans.

Response by PO1 Walter Laughlin made Sep 28 at 2013 2:25 PM

2013-09-28T14:25:11-04:00

Vote every Democrat out of office, remember Nov. is election month and they all need to go! Any Republican that voted for Obamacare needs to go also!

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2013 2:32 PM

2013-09-28T14:32:24-04:00

Many people seem to be responding from a standpoint in their own military branch. The question is: "What's the most important THING." There are many important things that should be happening during the downsizing period, and its too much to explain in entirety. One thing that every organization has is standard. It starts at the recruiting level. Recruiters should be given strict rules about the quality of troops joining without any regard to standard. That is why troops are not professional, making uniforms look bad, they can't keep up on fitness, they don't improve their education, and they cause trouble throughout the ranks (DUIs, rape, AWOL, etc). We are supposed to be elite in comparison with the U.S. population of civilians. We've lost that. ONE of the most important things to do is STOP BYPASSING THE STANDARDS so the caliber of our troops remain valuable.

Response by Col Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2013 2:32 PM

2013-09-28T14:32:45-04:00

Do their jobs to best of their abilities by supporting and defending the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; continuing to bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and obeying the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over them, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice; and that they will well and faithfully discharge the duties of their office.

Response by CAPT Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2013 2:33 PM

2013-09-28T14:33:58-04:00

Begin early to develop a transition program so our service members and their families are fully prepared for employment after leaving Active Duty. The transition program should be extensive enough that everyone has the best possible chance to find a new career.

Response by CPT Stephen Talugende made Sep 28 at 2013 2:36 PM

2013-09-28T14:36:06-04:00

The military isn't an island but a dot in the universe. All actors, stakeholders and leader contribute to the causes of military build up and active involvement in national and international peace and security. Reduced incidences of inequity, inequality and injustice could significantly reduce the occurence of violent conflicts and related political turmoil. In so doing, efforts and resource committed to massive military spending could be reallocated to other human development priorities!

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2013 2:38 PM

2013-09-28T14:38:39-04:00

We have a lot of organizations that cater to the needs of veterans but the problem is that many are institutional and pretty much like going to the VA. One gets the sense that we are just a number and get lost in the red tape.

What we can do is establish Meetup Clubs to take care of our own. If they are homeless for example, we can work as a community of veterans to figure that veteran's situation and his needs and not with a stop watch or a time card of what officials can do.

The VA does what it can, but if we really care about our fellow veterans then we need to show that and follow through. Last night for example, I was a racetrack to raise money for the Humane Society, so that they can buy food for a veteran's pet, if they cannot feed that pet.

And this was just the first year. We can do this veterans. We can show what our brotherhood means to the community and an innovative way to make things better. Many veterans wish for that comraderie we had during our active duty years and we can do that on our own at very little expense. Let's do this!

Response by SPC Steven Torma made Sep 28 at 2013 2:39 PM

2013-09-28T14:39:27-04:00

we should bring our troops home and stop being the world police. We have to start to build up our economy and not pay for the world defence,

Response by SN Anthony Buck made Sep 28 at 2013 2:43 PM

2013-09-28T14:43:08-04:00

Do as their contract on induction agreed to, not modify as time go's by.

Response by CPT Stephen Talugende made Sep 28 at 2013 2:44 PM

2013-09-28T14:44:22-04:00

All efforts should invested on reduced inequity, inequality, injustice and investment in expensive military operations and programmes. Collaborative leadership within the complex and multicultural world is a matter of urgency. Promote tolerance, cultural awareness, shut up and listen to each, and empathetically engage in constructive engagement that come up with non-violent means of resolving conflicts!

Response by SN Anthony Buck made Sep 28 at 2013 2:47 PM

2013-09-28T14:47:48-04:00

Make Shure all contracts are honored as they were written at time of Induction. Fallow through with what is promised at that time!!!

Response by SSgt Chip O'Roke made Sep 28 at 2013 3:02 PM

2013-09-28T15:02:44-04:00

Be fair about how they do it, take all things into consideration and don't assume anything.

Response by LT Bob Gill made Sep 28 at 2013 3:02 PM

2013-09-28T15:02:58-04:00

Build an esprit de corps in all services the like of which we've never seen.

Response by MSgt Mark Hillyard made Sep 28 at 2013 3:05 PM

2013-09-28T15:05:08-04:00

keep up your training listen to your neighbors about the truth not the the obumer propaganda , as he is trying to split this country, bad things a comming get ready to defend America,from the muslim brotherhood,be safe

Response by SGT Luis Arevalo made Sep 28 at 2013 3:05 PM

2013-09-28T15:05:30-04:00

the military can grant early outs for those that want out sooner. prior to that, have classes on transitioning back to civilian life such as: writing a resume, interview techniques, finding a job (not guaranteed)!!

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2013 3:16 PM

2013-09-28T15:16:46-04:00

Get rid of marginal in all NCOES schools and in force the PT standards so that the out of shape soldiers are put on hold while the other to standard soldiers can advance and lead.

Response by Col Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2013 3:22 PM

2013-09-28T15:22:45-04:00

The military must re-focus on its core mission
sets and eliminate mission creep/non value training…get back to the basics!

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2013 3:32 PM

2013-09-28T15:32:40-04:00

Keep in mind the 70% of the logistic support the National Guard has done in the past. Remember that the active Army always decreases in number after a conflict. Look out for its veterans and increase standard to allow for a leaner, stronger military.

Response by SPC Glenn Lovell made Sep 28 at 2013 3:36 PM

2013-09-28T15:36:38-04:00

The most important aspect won't be done - reintegrating the forces. There are a lot of duplicate services and specialties which bloat payroll and program budgets. For example: personnel, finance, medical, culinary, pilots, mechanics, and various support staff, should all be under the DoD (or US Armed Forces), while under that there should only be two branches - army and navy. Incorporate the Marines into the Army as a SpecOp branch, like the rangers. Let them keep a distinctive dress uniform, and BDU/ACU headgear. A specialized school and naval deployment keeps their traditions, but integrates their supply chain into the army's which reduces duplication and expenses. The air force simply melts back into the fold, which provides a brigade or division increased support and mobility while again, reducing costs and duplication.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2013 3:36 PM

2013-09-28T15:36:51-04:00

Im not saying get rid of recruiter but they should cut out all advertising for recruiting. Also lower the recruiting quota. That would add a large amount to the budget to all branches and lower the amount of people joining. If people want to join they can seek out a recruiter. By getting rid of service members that have experience and time in they are loosing great leaders and lowering our ability to be prepared for future conflicts.

Response by SPC Glenn Lovell made Sep 28 at 2013 3:37 PM

2013-09-28T15:37:36-04:00

Move all landing craft from the navy to the army, and integrate it into the 7th Trans, which can then better train with the marines and army combat arms. Distinctive rank insignias can be worn by pilots and flight crew, or by marines. There would be a cost to integrate the forces, but the overall savings would exceed the cost in a short amount of time. The biggest saving would be in the cost to administrate a large service, since it effectively would reduce the overhead by creating one system to maintain. The number support MOSes reduced and consolidated would be shifted to combat arms, which would then increase the flexibility and strength of deployments. The service academies would still function, as the AFA would work in conjunction with WP to produce officers.

Response by PO2 Jack Hinds made Sep 28 at 2013 3:49 PM

2013-09-28T15:49:00-04:00

Defend the Constitution of the United States of America from terrorism both foreign and DOMESTIC no matter the cost.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2013 3:54 PM

2013-09-28T15:54:49-04:00

First, we must be better at our current UCMJ, chapters, and pending MEB cases. These Soldiers are in a "idle" status for months holding slots, but not deployable or an asset to the current units mission statement. Too much time is taken for "administrative paperwork", especially in today's high state of technology capability. Let's outprocess these Soldiers, allow them to get on with their lives, and when the case is settled, send them any allowances owed. This free's up the slot to bring in a quality Soldier that is beneficial to the battlefield. Why do we continue to send large amounts of Soldiers on TDY status for training? Each base has plenty of students, all rgquiring the same training, isnt it easier to send a cadre team to teach it from base to base. Prime example of how it works and is cost effective: The Battle Staff course in Europe. Students no longer need to travel all the way to the states. this can be just as effective for students within CONUS. We have some of the best technical and advanced NCOs in the world, let's use that to our advantage and allow them to teach from their home stations. Imagine the money that saves. Recruiting Command must recruit the best qualified candidate. Let's not just accept waivers because we want to meet our goals. It should be an honor and priviledge to join, not a last resort goal because they cant find a job or have a criminal background. No recruit should be allowed to advance until they meet a physical requirement. We have Soldiers showing up at units unable to meet Army Body Composition standards or Physical Fitness stadards after at least 16 weeks of training. That is unacceptable, we arent talking failing by one push-up or 1% of body fat either.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2013 4:04 PM

2013-09-28T16:04:34-04:00

In my opinion, the best us Soldiers can do is make sure your doing the right thing. Stay fit both mentally and physically. Like the game show The Weakest Link, don't be that guy. Finish up an education you started on a deployment, keep your uniforms is good condition, get better at your job and learn your supervisors job. The biggest thing is stay motivated and put your best foot forward.

Response by MAJ Derrick J. made Sep 28 at 2013 4:06 PM

2013-09-28T16:06:32-04:00

1) Emphasize training for trainings sake and take away all the cop-outs that have been allowed in training, and make training more rigorous and allow drill sergeants to actually push slacker recruits.

2) Move leadership away from political correctness and encourage principled leadership.

3) Obtain an outside opinion (or 3) about the current downsizing and ensure that it is being done for strategic, not political reasons.

4) Re-emphasize the Oath of Office and what it means, constitutionally and otherwise, to serve and that serving is a privilege not a right.

Those are just a few off the top of my head.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2013 4:07 PM

2013-09-28T16:07:09-04:00

The most important thing the military should do while downsizing is to ensure the mission is accomplished and our troops are taken care of. Those are the most important responsibilities. We need to make sure that we have enough assets to continue on and excel as the greatest fighting force the world has ever laid eyes on, and ensure that our men and women in uniform accomplishing the mission are taken care of.

Although difficult, our nation has never backed down from a challenge and will continue on making the most of available resources. American service members can make do with little to nothing and have the skills, knowledge, and will to accomplish any task at hand, no matter how difficult it may be.

The military should continue focusing on the mission and understand that our continued success lays in the hands of our highly trained forces. The military is one big family and we need to look after one another and help eachother out. Do not jeoparadize the quality of life for people in uniform, even after they conclude their service to the country. Use every and all resource to take care of them. Afterall, they are using every and all resource provided to them to take care of the country.

SSG Goehring

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2013 4:08 PM

2013-09-28T16:08:20-04:00

Response by LCpl Tim Harbison made Sep 28 at 2013 4:08 PM

2013-09-28T16:08:50-04:00

How much money are we wasting on civilian contractors that are now doing the work that military personnel used to do? We need to move back toward a self sufficient military that's capable of doing every job that needs to be done.

There is no excuse for using civilian contractors to provide security at military bases. There is absolutely no reason to use civilians to cook in the mess halls. We can do it better and more cost effectively ourselves.

Response by SrA Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2013 4:13 PM

2013-09-28T16:13:33-04:00

While being downsized, the question comes up again and again; why did I enlist in the first place? If you enlisted for money reasons only, then yes, you will lose your motivation. If you enlisted because of your love of God and country, and the ones that fight beside you, the downsizing will not affect you. The answer to this question is the same answer without the question. Be the best you can be at all times, and continue to better yourself for the military and for your future. Continue to inspire others to be the best they can be, and lookout for your troops. If you are the best you can be, you don't have to worry.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2013 4:17 PM

2013-09-28T16:17:57-04:00

Start thinking seriously about their Military Jobs and what it does to defend the Constitution, Family, friends, the flag and Country. Their Faith is also going to need to be strong! Faith in each other, Faith in their Weapons and Gear, Faith in their leaders, most of all faith they are backed at home and by a Supreme being. It doesn't matter what religion, it just matters you believe in something! Support each other, Train with the idea that you are the last defense. Improve everyday. Support each other and get your families to support you! Work as a team with a winning mentality. Most of all remember you represent the best America has to offer where ever you go respect the customs and women and men you will be in contact with. Treat children as you would want yours treated. Lead, Follow. or get out of the way.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2013 4:26 PM

2013-09-28T16:26:33-04:00

Anyone that is not deployable (except for those that are on profiles due to surgery, acute illness pregnancy, ect...), have substandard reports, substandard work performances, substandard anything, should be the first to go. The brightest and the greatest should not be the ones leaving. Train those that are left with viable skills and civilian certification. Cut down on useless programs. Start charging a $5 no show fee for missed medical appointments. Standardize the medical computer systems service wide, both stateside and overseas. The approved system should be utilized by both the military and VA system. Provide electronic medical records. The money wasted on manpower (to include the military, civil service and contract workers) to copy and maintain paper records is astonishing. STOP changing the uniforms! There should be ONE uniform for deployment to any one location. The money saved here would be astronomical. If the services want to make the uniform unique, do so in the color of the name/service tapes and/or add patches. Very simple to implement. Use the CAC in its fullest capacity: ID card checks (not just those at the gate which use scanning capabilities already), Medical appointment check-in's, Check-in's for any military and/or veteran (VA system) service that requires you to sign in. The redundancies with the sign in system increase's workload and manning requirements.

The military should already have process's in place for when there is downsizing. Streamline the process and make sure it is the best one in place. Provide those that are being forced out with the proper training to assimilate to the civilian workforce. For those that have outstanding EPR's and were an asset while in the service, give them first dibs on civil service jobs in their career field. The monetary savings would be in training and retainability. Stop repeating the process of security clearances for military that have just gotten out/retired who are hired for civil service or contract jobs. This is a waste of time. A better system needs to be implemented to fast track the process for those that have a current military security clearance. Thus, saving manpower and money.

Response by Sgt Jim Darty made Sep 28 at 2013 4:29 PM

2013-09-28T16:29:52-04:00

Keep an eye on the Rank and M.O.S reports make sure the Company level support and manpower stay at Standard Operating Procedures. That would go for battalion and regimental levels also.

Response by SN Victoria White made Sep 28 at 2013 4:32 PM

2013-09-28T16:32:10-04:00

Ensure that the military we are reduced to is strategic and effective, by any and all means. Its a necessity at this point, not a desire. We don't have the choice to keep our one and only child, son, or even daughter's home from war today. We have to hope for them the best, but have them prepared for the worst. Semper Fi my one and only son, I love you, Mama. CYA soon , I hope!

Response by 1SG Eugene Tucker made Sep 28 at 2013 4:34 PM

2013-09-28T16:34:49-04:00

Remember no matter how much high tech does IT ATILL TAKES BOOTS ON THE GROUND TO HOLD THE GROUND!!!

Don't get rid of too many foot soldiers if we really do want to win.

"Walk softly and carry a big stick".

Response by TSgt Abel Balle made Sep 28 at 2013 4:37 PM

2013-09-28T16:37:59-04:00

A transition program for exiting military. Education, job placement, VA follow-up support. Those currently stating active, again education, multiple training in different fields so as not to depend on specialties. Last but not least, dependent support like wise.

Response by Cpl David Mulldune made Sep 28 at 2013 4:51 PM

2013-09-28T16:51:37-04:00

Using the greatest asset our military possesses: maximizing the considerable strengths of our remaining troops. We will still be the best military in the world!

Response by PO2 Michael Hopkins made Sep 28 at 2013 4:53 PM

2013-09-28T16:53:33-04:00

hang tough we been though this before and it should all work out in the end

Response by SrA Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2013 4:56 PM

2013-09-28T16:56:25-04:00

When asking the question, “What’s the most important thing the military should do?” The rest of the question should not even matter. The answer is the same whether or not the military is downsizing or growing – be the best you can be at all times. If you do the minimum required of you, and are barely scraping by, you should be afraid; because you are not giving the military your best. If you signed up to serve God and country; and take care of your brothers and sisters who serve beside you, you will have nothing to be afraid of. Wearing the uniform is an honor to wear, and not everyone has the privilege to wear it. Make yourself needed by your unit and worthy of your next rank.

We should be even more vigilant because we will be picking up the slack that others have left off. We will be doing not only our work, but the work of others as well; yet we will still be required to be the best military in the world, because that is our legacy. We owe it to those who bled in these same uniforms before us. We owe it to those who will wear it after us. Trying times call for people with a purpose. If you are not that person, either find your purpose, or make way so others can and look back on your service with pride because no matter what anyone else says, you still served in the best military with the best people of our age.

Good, better best. Never rest until your good is better, and your better is best.

Response by CDR James Clemson made Sep 28 at 2013 5:12 PM

2013-09-28T17:12:43-04:00

Change the strategy to right sizing. Re-establish the Navy - Marine Corps as the Amphibious Expeditionary response force. Reduce the US Army and increase the National Guard to replace HLD and Army Reserve to augment the USA for long term Overseas Contingency OPS (OCO). Let the DoD hire prior military experts, Operations Planners and Logistics Operators to develop corporate knowledge in support of the lean mean fighting machine. Finally cap officer and enlisted promotions at O3/O4 and E5/E6 with brevet promotions in time of war and national calamity.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2013 5:14 PM

2013-09-28T17:14:16-04:00

Ensure that our men and women that serve are taken care of and not forgotten.
That our government not jeopardize our countries safety and security from this ongoing threat.
The families of our fallen be taken care of.
Retain leadership that well take us to the next level of our nation defense and security.

Response by LTC Rob Beidleman made Sep 28 at 2013 5:35 PM

2013-09-28T17:35:00-04:00

Try not to do more with less... as the Army downsizes we have to take things off the plate. Don't break the downsizing force with tons of stupid additional task besides what is really important -- shoot move and communicate

Response by Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2013 5:36 PM

2013-09-28T17:36:53-04:00

Take a hard look at the current promotion system and identify those who truly possess leadership qualities to promote and "cut the fat" on the rest. The current promotion system frustrates talent and puts everyone through the same "meat grinder" instead of singling out & promoting those who have demonstrated they are clearly a cut above their peers.

Response by SFC(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2013 5:37 PM

2013-09-28T17:37:15-04:00

Keep paying the Soldiers.

Response by TSgt Jack Gee made Sep 28 at 2013 5:38 PM

2013-09-28T17:38:38-04:00

I believe we are downsizing in the wrong area's of the government. Downsizing should be in congress and the senate in their pay, perks and medical benefits. The Military can take care of their own.

Response by LTC Rob Beidleman made Sep 28 at 2013 5:39 PM

2013-09-28T17:39:19-04:00

Don't try to do more with less. Don't break a downsizing force with stupid unnecessary tasks. Take stuff off the plate- slow down do the stuff that matters

Response by CSM Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2013 6:05 PM

2013-09-28T18:05:26-04:00

Keep the long term, big picture, most likely scenarios front and center while remembering the keys to our past success, Excellent Leadership through hard preparation, Realistic Training to Tough Standards, and at least good if not great Equipment. We have a problem with living in the past without learning from it. Trying to prepare for the future without studying history. It takes too long to adapt if we aren't flexible enough to confront all of the most likely challenges. We tend to look for the technology solution rather than focus on the human dynamic.

Response by PO2 Steven Bryant made Sep 28 at 2013 6:07 PM

2013-09-28T18:07:18-04:00

with everything going on in the world how do they think they can downsize we need to keep what we have and upsize we need the people to care like we used to the military is the only thing keeping or freedom and safe I wonder what our four fathers would say or do if we keep downsizing we keep losing good men and women which we can not afford to do so we need to keep our military strong and keep updated with the world

Response by CPT Paul Bowers made Sep 28 at 2013 6:16 PM

2013-09-28T18:16:52-04:00

Don't keep all the PT freaks and those who look good in their official photo like they did when the Army downsized in '80 and '81. Too much intelligence went out the door and too many "yes men" remained and too many "do as I say, don't do as I do" types rose to levels way beyond their capability. I personally worked for an 0-6 that couldn't lead a hamster our of a paper sack and he became a BG! Let those who want out, out. Screen those with real, proven 'get your hands dirty' leadership capabilities and innovative minds and a will to win and then we'll have an Army!

Response by SMSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2013 6:18 PM

2013-09-28T18:18:42-04:00

Alignment, the bases and Command Staff require a re-alignment of personnel, programs, and services. Their is to much redundancy, in the layers of Command. that perform similar functions, roles, and responsibilities plus up one staff and eliminate the position not the person. Align personnel in the areas that require additional resources. Evaluate the logistic template aircraft, ships, and technology systems that are no longer sustainable or antiquated look at how to phase them out.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2013 6:28 PM

2013-09-28T18:28:18-04:00

One of the biggest issues with downsizing is the size of the bureaucracy. Bureaucracies are built to compensate for under-performing organizations/people but there comes a time when the system becomes a "self-licking ice cream cone." DOD leaders need to invest in reducing the bureaucratic structure of the services, which will then require fewer bodies.<div><br></div><div>Part of reducing the bureaucracy is changing the rules of hiring and retention of military and civilian personnel. Getting top performers, and retaining them, will allow the organization to be more efficient and effective. That, in turn, allows the structure to shrink because there are fewer rules needed to keep the top performers in check.</div>

Response by SGT Alejandro Cruzrio made Sep 28 at 2013 7:04 PM

2013-09-28T19:04:41-04:00

The military should keep the people that want to stay in, as well as get the people getting out ready for their transition. Organizations that prior military have started have helped veterans, the military should make the transition easy to fall in to. Vietnam veterans had it tough,they made it better for us, I see no reason not to take care of somebody that fought for this country.

Response by SSG(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2013 7:05 PM

2013-09-28T19:05:20-04:00

Change the "unfair promotion system". I've seen good soldiers / servicemembers got out because they couldn't get promoted. Being a PT stud doesn't make you a good soldier, because most of them got promoted quick and doesn't even know how to lead people. The military should look at promoting everyone based on their leadership skills, work performance, job knowledge, and military branch knowledge. Not because they can score a perfect on the pt test and looked confident on the promotion board. Look at the whole soldier concept and don't promote everyone so quick. Look at the time in grade and service.

Response by CW5 Jose Rodriguez Fabiani made Sep 28 at 2013 7:13 PM

2013-09-28T19:13:45-04:00

Balancing accessions and losses is key to shape the Future of our military forces.

Response by MSgt Kris Braddock made Sep 28 at 2013 7:21 PM

2013-09-28T19:21:38-04:00

Get rid of anyone who doesn't want or deserve to be in the military. Next, everyone left should be doing anything possible to get educated because when the downsizing happens people need marketable and transferable civilian skills. Military members should consider certifications first and foremost. After you have certifications then go for a college degree. Finally, if the day comes and you are told thank you for your service but we don't need you, make sure you move where the jobs are and not where your heart is.

Response by CPL Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2013 7:39 PM

2013-09-28T19:39:34-04:00

The best thing they can do is to get the soldiers who are ending a men done and get them processed and med boarded out.Next all the soldiers who can't pass a pt test and have a history of ucmj issues out of the army.

Response by MSgt Kris Braddock made Sep 28 at 2013 7:39 PM

2013-09-28T19:39:51-04:00

Get rid of anyone who doesn't want or deserve to be in the military. Next, the entire DoD should be reviewed for redundancy and cost savings. Cut the fat but leave the bone and muscle in place. We can't trust the DoD to decide where to cut so it should be an independent commission. Finally, every active duty person should get as much education as possible. With the draw down coming everyone is expendable. Get certifications before degrees. If the call comes to get out and you're on the list you need marketable civilian skills now.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2013 7:40 PM

2013-09-28T19:40:03-04:00

back to basics........being a soldier

Response by CPL Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2013 7:44 PM

2013-09-28T19:44:19-04:00

Let's get rid of the med board soldiers and the ones who can't pass a pt test. All the soldiers with ucmj need to go too.if they want out then send them home.

Response by SGT(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2013 7:59 PM

2013-09-28T19:59:11-04:00

What's the most important thing the military should do while going through this downsizing period? First and foremost the Military needs to take a look at all the contracted jobs that were given out and created due to the short in troops for deployment. We need to fill the jobs we joined the military to do such as cooks, engineers, military police, clerks, and many others that now are fully civilian jobs or are heavy with civilian personnel. Also as most stated before enforcing the Army Standard for weight and tape and also APFT failures would help with cutting numbers. There is no reason the Army can not be self sustained by all the MOS's in it.

Response by Cpl Leland Riffel made Sep 28 at 2013 8:02 PM

2013-09-28T20:02:03-04:00

Focus on the bare necessities and essentials to obtain a purposeful goal of survival.

Response by SGT Michael Long made Sep 28 at 2013 8:05 PM

2013-09-28T20:05:01-04:00

Bring all the troops home to guard the United States of America. We have no business in the middle East any more. For the ones who want out send them to their Reserve Units for the remainder of their time so they may at least be Honorably Discharged. For the undesirable , give them a Undesirable Discharge and send them on their way. Each and ever true soldier should write their Congress Man about the cuts " Obama" is trying to make law in congress to cut pay and medical benefits of the Solders that guard our great nation and ask that he be impeached before he destroys our great Country. I am a Solider still at Heart , I believe in America, and by all means I am still Red, White and Blue. God Bless America. (served 76-83, 101 ABD SF & 6/56 ADA) My status now: Retired & Disabled.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2013 8:23 PM

2013-09-28T20:23:02-04:00

While some gainsayers might
consign GEN Odierno's recent statement to the House Armed Services Committee as
alarmist, the Chief of Staff's discussion was quite balanced.

While I'm cautious not to draw an absolute parallel with the hollowness that

wracked our Army following Vietnam, the similarities are in fact quite

palpable, particularly in terms of the potential readiness and modernization

shortfalls resulting from the full actualization of sequestration and its

attendant discretionary cap reductions. The differences, of course, are

just as acute. For me, the most striking differences deal with personnel management and

the depth and breadth of the military's commitment abroad what with

America's managerial and "special" responsibilities relative to other
states

given the country's comparative advantage in talent, materiel, and

logistical expertise. Therefore, while the lesson of Vietnam must inform

any discussion of the Army's actions amid sequestration, we cannot become so

mired by the analogy that we lose sight of a significant set of dissimilar

conditions that contextualize our current predicament.

Chief among these conditions, and notwithstanding the importance of other

training, equipment sustainment and modernization, and installation

maintenance issues, is personnel management and the "contract" the
Army -

the Nation, really - has made with its Soldiers. Most worrisome for me is

the appreciably rising cost of so-called compensation (ergo, incentives

given the All-Volunteer paradigm). According to Odierno, "[m]ilitary

manpower costs remain at historic highs and consume 46% of the Army
budget."

Moreover, "[i]f we do not slow the rate of growth, Soldier compensation
will

double to approximately 80% of the budget by 2023." That-is-astronomical.

While we don't serve for money, we should all realistically expect some

compensation (whether a pension, enduring health care, and so forth) for the

continual physical and meta-physical sacrifices we make relative to 99.9% of

the American public. How we reconcile these countervailing trends,

incentivizing and caring for Soldiers on the one hand, and reducing the

obviously unsustainable nature of such compensation, may figure to be the

most challenging issue of our careers. What's more, it is precisely our

success or failure that will determine the caliber of Soldiers attracted to

serve in the future. The one variable, it seems, is leadership. For me,

inspirational leadership carries the potential to transcend all discussions

of debt ceilings, profligate spending, and the like to result in retention

of Soldiers capable and willing to serve.

V/R,

Paul

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2013 8:27 PM

2013-09-28T20:27:39-04:00

Sir:

Be Fair and TRIM from the TOP and Bottom equally. Ensure QMP/QSP encompasses everyone and is used effectively.

Take this time to "re-energize" our military. In some ways we have become complacent with our military customs & courtesies. We've become relaxed with enforcement of regulations, and we've blurred the lines between being "friends" versus being leaders to an embarrassing degree.

Take this downsizing time to also hone in and perfect our younger Soldiers with great mentorship programs.

Thank you,

SSG Best

Response by CPL Timothy Sweat made Sep 28 at 2013 8:37 PM

2013-09-28T20:37:49-04:00

Teach those staying in how to advance in there JOB and there RANK.

Second those getting out show them how to get all transcripts of the experiences so they can better ready for the CIVILIAN Market.

Response by SSG Richard Gaytan made Sep 28 at 2013 8:42 PM

2013-09-28T20:42:02-04:00

What is your response? We need to protect our troops and family while in unform or out of uniform

Response by SGM Matthew Quick made Sep 28 at 2013 8:53 PM

2013-09-28T20:53:26-04:00

Ensure that leaders are affording our Soldiers time to take full advantage of the ACAP process beginning 12-months from from ETS.

The Army does not owe its Soldiers a 20-year career, but the Army does owe its Soldiers a quality transition to civilian life.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2013 8:54 PM

2013-09-28T20:54:11-04:00

back to basics.......being a soldier

Response by SrA Kurt Hass made Sep 28 at 2013 9:43 PM

2013-09-28T21:43:33-04:00

I believe retention of the best, brightest is paramount, when our veterans return to civilian life they need job counseling housing education available to them . I'm talking a hand up not a hand out.they deserve respect.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2013 9:53 PM

2013-09-28T21:53:28-04:00

I agree with SSG Shaw- let folks who *want* to get out, do just that. But I would also take it one step further and say the promotion system needs an overhaul as well. <br><br>To be promoted in the Army you need simply to be a PT stud who takes the easiest college route available and get the tower NCO to "hook you up" at the range. It's going to be controversial to say this, but promotion should be based on two basic criteria- MOS knowledge/proficiency, and overall leadership ability. Of course those could be further broken up, and you could still factor things like combat experience in. <br><br>But honestly, whether someone gets a 250 or a 300 on their APFT really has no bearing on their ability to do their job or to lead troops. Same with a college degree- it should *certainly* put you ahead of your peers, but not be an end-all requirement. Take the Air Force's model of MOS proficiency tests for each skill level and test the individual at the next skill level. Be brutal. Then the Soldiers Chain of Command and NCO Support Channel convenes and gives an overall, HONEST assessment of their leadership ability. Not the NCOER rating, but a real one. There could still be a board of sorts, but rattling off memorized answers is pointless too. They could be answering a quiz about Harry Potter books for all it matters. Additional points can be added for college degrees or 290+ APFT or 40/40 range scores. How many awards someone has? Come on. That would mean the E-4 sitting in NATO or at the Pentagon on a desk job with no combat patch would be more qualified than the E-5P on his third deployment who has been hands-on in the MOS for years and years. The awards system is no better a method for promotion criteria than rattling off memorized book answers.<br><br>On the other hand, and once again I know most people will disagree with me here, I say return the RCP to its original state. If a Soldier likes- I mean truly likes their MOS, likes working in that MOS, likes training Soldiers in that MOS, has a great deal of knowledge to bring to the table and is more concerned with job satisfaction, why would you want to put that person out telling them "you should have reclassed into a job you don't know and have no interest in or passion for to get promoted." That Joe shouldn't have to reclass or be that PT stud with sham college under his belt. I've seen great NCOs in my time but I've also seen NCOs who were exactly that- PT studs with excessively generic degrees getting promoted fast but have no MOS knowledge or ability getting shown up by the E-2 out of AIT and have NO leadership ability at all, even after WLC. This method is effectively putting out the people who have the wealth of knowledge and encouraging people to focus on the Army only rather than the MOS that they trained them for. At this rate it's going to be just like the Army after the last drawdown- an Army full of Specialists and Captains.. because there's such a push to put out the top folks and to weed out all the knowledgeable mid-to-upper-level Joes. And when it's all said and done you'll have all these guys looking at the equipment realizing that they can read the TM just fine but no one really knows the realities of it- the real ins and outs of it.<br><br>I've said it more than once and I know it's true- most people here will flat-out disagree with me. That's fine. That's the beauty of opinions. We're all entitled to our own.<br>

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 28 at 2013 9:58 PM

2013-09-28T21:58:53-04:00

I would suggest downsizing the civilian workforce we have em-placed to do the Military's job while we have been off fighting wars. Time for contracts to not be renewed, place our Soldiers' back in the DFACs, Use our MOS's as they were intended to self sustain our force. Soldier's that can't meet the standards set forth need to be removed in a more expedited fashion and not let it be drawn out over the course of 1-2 years that it takes to chapter a Soldier for HT/WT or APFT failure. This should come from the top down, QSP and QMP are great tools but should be E-4-E-9 not just E-6 and above. If a Soldier has not attended the promotion board for 6-7 years as a E-4 why allow them to continue their service if they aren't going to reach the next rank and they have been counseled for non recommendation for promotion.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 29 at 2013 12:13 AM

2013-09-29T00:13:01-04:00

I see all these responses saying "keep the best and cut the worst". Question becomes how do you identify those people? By NCOER/OER? Too many raters have the attitude that "if my subordinates get an 'among the best' rating, that means I get an 'among the best' too" or "This guy tries really hard, I don't want to ruin his career". Just going by ratings can be just as subjective as using PT scores or number and prominence of awards: different people will have different standards for all of those things.

How about we utilize the metric of those who can contribute the most to the mission? Not just the Soldiers who "do their job" but who seek out additional duties and skill sets, (i.e., Ranger, SF, jumpmaster, master gunner, etc) that make them more valuable members of their team/unit?

Or maybe trim some of the flag officer positions. The latest numbers I could find (April 2011) are that there are currently just shy of 1000 flag officers, for a total military force (all branches and components) of just over 3M SM, or one for every 3k SM. During WWII, there were a little over 1000 flag officers, for a total military force of over 13M SM, or one flag officer for every 13k SM. How many of those positions are duplicates? Could some of them be done jointly for all services, e.g., does each service need a separate procurement system, headed by a 4 star with all their attendant staff (i.e. 2 3-stars, 4 2-stars, 8 1-star, all their chiefs of staff and the staff itself, aides in the rank of captain through colonel whose main job seems to be to carry a bag full of coins, etc)?

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 29 at 2013 12:40 AM

2013-09-29T00:40:42-04:00

Keep the Faith with those that had/have guaranteed retirement.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 29 at 2013 1:57 AM

2013-09-29T01:57:19-04:00

Educating separating members on all benefits and entitlements. Using the VA, assisting with continued education, and building a competitive résumé to market themselves into civilian life are the top three things the army should focus on as many soldiers prepare for the downsize. With the oldies who will be staying in the service there should be an equal amount of information being shared as many programs that were available in the past will most likely be discontinued due to the downsizing.

Response by 1stLt Benjamin Spaeth made Sep 29 at 2013 2:01 AM

2013-09-29T02:01:35-04:00

Retain the best. DOD will save money by giving the best service members incentives to stay (pick of duty station or billet, family friendly, length of time at duty station, cash bonuses) rather than organizational relearning or hiring private companies.

Go back to basics. When did we stop working full work days in garrison? PT, train, study, teach, clean a full 8-10 hours a day. Stop playing games as PT and find out who your really warriors are. Enable small unit leadership and discipline throughout.

Speed up the separations process for substandard and law breaking service members. What a waste of a units time and manpower!

Response by SGT Leigh Barton made Sep 29 at 2013 2:13 AM

2013-09-29T02:13:55-04:00

The government has a bad habit of sticking round pegs in square holes and vice versa, the one action that in my opinion would gain the most positive response is simply prior to discharge, in the last six months or so, arrange for 3 correspondence courses for the service member in varied career fields, preferably in subjects of the service members choosing. Prior to discharge evaluate for reclassification based on performance. If the service member is retained, the service has significantly increased the members versatility, if not, the member has increased the chances of employment in a difficult economy. It's win-win. And it can help overcome bad career matches due to recruiting quotas.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 29 at 2013 2:22 AM

2013-09-29T02:22:30-04:00

First by getting rid of people that can't meet weight standards. There are a lot of them. Get rid of the people that struggle with pt tests. Raise the standard on the asvabs because some of the jobs seem to easy to get a score for. And cut back on some of the office workers. Most of the ones I've talked to her have almost no job. It shouldn't take 5 people to push the same email.

Response by SGT(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 29 at 2013 2:25 AM

2013-09-29T02:25:26-04:00

The main focus should be on retaining quality personnel. To coincide with this, DOD must make an effort to ease the transition of chaptering unsatisfactory soldiers. By this, I mean, let's stop paying soldiers large amounts of severance pay for their inability to maintain the standard. This only burdens units and makes the chapter process not even worth it. Also, in order to retain the productive and contributing soldier, there must be some type of incentive program in the likes of reenlistment options. We as a military have fallen victim to what is known as Packards Law in which, there have been an outstanding amount of small bureaucratic red tape placed around our nco's, driving away the right type of leaders which then forces higher level leadership to promote the wrong people, in turn forcing more red tape to ensure they are properly doing their jobs and the cycle starts over. This cycle has left us in an endless state of mediocrity. Once we learn that micromanagement is the opposite of effective leadership, we may begin to dig ourselves out of this hole we are in.

Response by Col John Tedor made Sep 29 at 2013 2:40 AM

2013-09-29T02:40:27-04:00

Maintain technology/R&D funding.

Response by Col John Tedor made Sep 29 at 2013 2:43 AM

2013-09-29T02:43:30-04:00

Maintain technology/R&D investments. With downsizing and limited budgets, technology as a force multiplier becomes ever more important.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 29 at 2013 5:08 AM

2013-09-29T05:08:09-04:00

There are a few things in my opinion that the military must do while going through this period. The first thing is to keep the NCO's, Officers, and leaders that actually care about there soldiers, and the uniform that we wear. I believe that we are in a stage that we have entirely to many toxic leaders, NCO's, and Officers alike. we must get rid of these individuals in order even think we are going to be a stronger, and more professional service. The military must also take pride in the individuals that we recruit. We have to weed out the individuals that actually want to be part of a brotherhood, someone that wants to be part of something that is bigger then themselves, and not someone just trying to get a pay check, or money for school. Finally last but not least, the military needs to start taking care of the brothers, and sisters in arms, and there families a lot better. There are military families that struggle day to day, with different problems, and the government needs to crack down, and get to the root of these problems so that these military families become stronger, because without a strong family, our brothers and sisters that wear this great uniform, for this great country are useless.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 29 at 2013 6:53 AM

2013-09-29T06:53:32-04:00

I think that one of the most important things that we can do is the screening, and removal of "toxic leaders". If this were achieved, many of the young, bright forward thinking NCO's I know, that want to leave now, would reconsider.

Also, they should outsource contracts less to some of these civilian companies, there are many soldiers that are trained to do a job, and are drawing a paycheck, that do nothing related to the Military Occupational Specialty that the government spent thousands of dollars training them to do. Since it seems like most of the big budget cuts are coming from the defense sector, this would seem like a win win for the DoD.

Response by A1C Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 29 at 2013 8:43 AM

2013-09-29T08:43:24-04:00

A large problem we face when entering a downsizing period is a disconnect between the working "gears" of the military and the decision makers in the White House. We are viewed as simply another category to reduce spending on and when its time to cut costs downsizing seems the easiest way to do so. Leadership in government needs to see us not as an easily expendable category but as individual assets that work together to be the backbone of the United States. We should not be afraid to question, and when needed, stand together against the decisions haphazardly made. We need to support those who will represent us and actively involve ourselves wherever possible to build a connection between the workers and those who will ultimately decide the future of our military.

Response by SN Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 29 at 2013 9:04 AM

2013-09-29T09:04:30-04:00

As civilian companies do give everyone close to retirement and whose position is not deemed critical early the opportunity to V.E.R.P. (Voluntary Early Retirement Program), allow those who have accrued over 30 days of leave to take them, re-evaluate those not meeting minimum health standards for their height/weight, and re-evaluate those not meeting minimum requirements for their time in rank.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 29 at 2013 9:25 AM

2013-09-29T09:25:03-04:00

There are alot of great ideas and sugestions right here on this page..... Try using some!

Response by SPC Jerry Mensah made Sep 29 at 2013 10:11 AM

2013-09-29T10:11:21-04:00

Downsizing will not solve any problem. If they want to cut soldiers off they should retrain them before doing so because we were not prepared well during service.

Response by PO1 Brian Weiss made Sep 29 at 2013 10:36 AM

2013-09-29T10:36:35-04:00

In determining how or who will be downsized, look at the individual, don't look at only their rank and/or years of service. Those that have proven their value, should not fall under the ax just because they did not get advancement. Look at their evaluations, awards, and assignments before they are downsized. Downsizing should not be based on a general rule.

Response by SSG Daniel Poulin (Retired) made Sep 29 at 2013 10:37 AM

2013-09-29T10:37:07-04:00

I have read everybody's responses here so far, and the one thing I didn't see was about Fraud Waste and Abuse. We used to have a system in place to check this very problem we have now. The services now have Acrobat Pro, which allows them the latitude to not print every damn piece of paper in the printer, but they do not use it. The forces have become WAY TOO DEPENDANT on powerpoint. I have lead Soldiers many times, on many successful mission without one powerpoint slide. As far as downsizing the civilian workforce goes, I agree wholeheartedly, which is why I am part of a group of NCOs training to replace the ones currently at the helm of the network gateways (downsizing 224 access points/firewalls down to 20, and guarding/patrolling them with green suiters). The other thing I can't stand, is how we have gotten completely away from using the Company training calendar; without it, the troops have no assurances they are where they are supposed to be, and it allows for too many unprepared training events. While on that topic, every week we have a new MANDATORY training requirement on some computer interface, and takes away time that Leaders would have with their teams/platoons, etc. Keep trimming the FAT Soldiers out of the military, but do not miss the ones that are both lazy and useless, hiding in the background. As far as promotions go, if the services are going to make getting a degree a requirement, then they had better have it on the training calendar as well. There are way too many good idea fairies out there writing new policies that only patch, not fix or remove bad, antiquated systems. The services will have to downsize, not just because of the funding issues, but also because there are too many people filling one job slot, causing competitions that ultimately take time away from needed training and development; in most cases you CAN find one officer that can do the job that three are doing now. The Command constantly gripes about how the Soldiers are living the barracks/billets, etc, but they themselves have broken a proven system by taking the NCOs out of the barracks, and expecting NCOs living off post to somehow fill this duty between caring for their family and managing a squad/PLT/etc; in other wards, just because you're in charge, and it was idea, doesn't mean it's a good one, or that anyone supports it. As far as the OER system goes, it has become a buddy system, and anyone in the club can get a great OER just by not bucking the system; this is a broken system. In closing we do not need to create another damn team of idiots to go out and figure out where we can fix these problems, just listen to the NCOs, and they will tell you.

Response by CPT Jack Durish made Sep 29 at 2013 11:41 AM

2013-09-29T11:41:12-04:00

As hard as it is to believe, President Obama may have gotten something correct. We do need to rethink the mission of the Armed Forces and make adjustments in manpower, equipment, organization, and training accordingly. We have wasted a helluva lot of money preparing for a high-tech version of World War II. We will always need a Navy that can project force and an Air Force that can dominate the skies over any battlefield (and secure the sovereignty of the air space over America), but will we ever again fight Army or even corps size engagements?

Army reservists could be maintained against large unit actions, but active duty forces of Regiment and smaller size might be a better option.

Ultimately, we need to settle questions of mission before we make any adjustments of any kind and mission should be predicated on foreseeable threats.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 29 at 2013 11:53 AM

2013-09-29T11:53:03-04:00

The Navy and Air Force should retain their size because they are hard to build in a hurry. The Marine Corp should stay proportional to the demand for likely small scale contingency missions. The Army should shrink to the level that it can produce the highest level of pound-for-pound readiness in decisive action while sustaining the peacetime military engagement mission; then be optimized to grow rapidly when needed. This would be in-line with our traditions, present security demands, and economic reality.

Ideally the active army should be small enough to necessitate full mobilization of the reserve component and selective service system to conduct major offensive land combat operations. This would restore the connectivity between the average citizen, their elected official, and the nations military; ensuring that only wars of vital national interest are politically possible because it would mean taking the whole nation to war... not just those in uniform at that moment. This check on adventurism would spur America to become better at leveraging other elements of its national power (Information, Diplomacy, and Economics) besides just military power.

Response by SGT Rodney Wynn made Sep 29 at 2013 12:11 PM

2013-09-29T12:11:08-04:00

I think laying off the Department of the Army civilians and placing reservists on in

voluntary year long tours or voluntary for a maximum of 2 years every 5-7 years would free up money for other activities and give reservists excellent training in their MOS.

Response by LCDR Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 29 at 2013 12:39 PM

2013-09-29T12:39:24-04:00

We are going through a downsizing similar to the Clinton Era. The most important thing to do is to not over work our people. We should do less with less, not more with less. We need to train smarter and utilize other units for support and enhancing our training. We need to get rid of people that are out of standards and that don't want to be there. In this way we can make the most with what we have.

Response by CW4 Patrick Ramsey made Sep 29 at 2013 1:14 PM

2013-09-29T13:14:35-04:00

Do not repeat the '73 RIF manpower will never be replace by machines preserve and protect the current troopers the first cost cutting is usually the manpower machines which mean big business which means $ But a machine will never replace a person

Response by SGT Michael Le Master made Sep 29 at 2013 1:33 PM

2013-09-29T13:33:46-04:00

Well being a combat vet I know that a small force can be very effective given the proper weapons, having said that considering the current battle situations and most of the last few conflict conditions I have to say that because of the downsizing and the future of coming conditions we need just one thing. Upgrades, i.e. A force of ten men with newer more effective weapons and they can be as effective as 50 men, this one item can make the only needed change, better training or leadership will not make it happen, only taking and making one man work as well as three will, and only newer more advanced weapons on all level from armor to hand weapons will do it. This is not rocket science you just have to have been there. Thank You

Response by SPC Jeffrey Grise made Sep 29 at 2013 1:51 PM

2013-09-29T13:51:55-04:00

i think we need not down size the military at all we need to stop getting rid of our soldiers and the government needs to find other ways to save money to cut the deficit
down sizing seems to weaken the economy they down size and then the vets have no jobs to go to and allot end up on the streets and then we as Veterans and other agency's try to find ways to get them off the streets and jobs for them but i think when the economy is down that veterans suffer the most and to weaken our troops numbers makes no sense to me then they close bases as well and the land sits there forever and that is just a waste in my mind as well. keep bases open keep the troops we have in already if they want to down size make a plan of what recruits need to get into the service of there choice.

Response by SPC Jeffrey Grise made Sep 29 at 2013 1:56 PM

2013-09-29T13:56:27-04:00

do not let go of the troops or close bases down make it to were new recruits or high school kids wanting to go in to the service need to have certain criteria to get into the service more then just a diploma. we do not need to shrink our military at all i remember when they were offering big bonuses when they were looking for anyone and in California when i went in there was an option that courts were giving kids go to prison or serve in the military it flip flops so much of we got to many or we don't have enough i know after so long if you can not advance your rank they let you go as well keep it that way for the enlisted and lower officers.

Response by MSG(P) Thomas Finn made Sep 29 at 2013 1:57 PM

2013-09-29T13:57:22-04:00

Think the most important thing is effective, real world training.

Response by SFC Barton B. made Sep 29 at 2013 1:57 PM

2013-09-29T13:57:34-04:00

I believe the most important is not to become "stigmatized" by the downsizing mentality and techniques. Certain type Soldiers with in leadership levels will develop extreme and immature techniques to remove anyone. This deteriorates the military forces and society.

A more promising and moral approach would be for natural attrition to occur.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 29 at 2013 1:58 PM

2013-09-29T13:58:56-04:00

teach the soldiers how to properly disengage the mentality they have been groomed into so that they can better function in a normal society when they are released from duty. provide more time for the people that will be let go so that they can adequately take care of the families they have that have depended on the military as the only source of medical and income. help soldiers find homes before evicting them from what they know... dont send broken people into the normal world with the mentality they have had in the military.. because even when they are no longer employed by the army.. the way the adapt in society after serving is still a reflection of how the military groomed the person... dont let them out with a bad idea that the military did not try to help... so that they can still be "all they can be" even when no longer affiliated with the army!

Response by SGT Michael Le Master made Sep 29 at 2013 2:08 PM

2013-09-29T14:08:21-04:00

Well I am amazed at the responses here. Most of the response are way off, yes we need to retain our better people and yes accountability is important and yes training is lacking at times and yes or leaders need a clue sometimes but it misses the mark in all cases. We are here for just one thing and one thing only (Fighting) that is what any military is for bottom line. As a combat vet (68 - 73) I have seen what no one should and I know we can do better but it doesn't change what is coming. Looking at the conflicts of the last 25 years it is very clear what we need to make our current and future soldiers in every situation, branch, condition, location, or conflict. (Weapons)

Like I mentioned I am a combat vet from Viet Nam, I know a small force with the right weapons can do the job of a much larger force, having said that taking weapons and advancing them we can make 10 do the job of 100, and that is not an unrealistic figure either, as downsizing continues there is a greater need for more advanced weapons than ever, putting a smaller force into the field with current weapons is a guaranteed way to lose troops, yes todays items are good but I know we can do better and it wont take much to make what we have much better, It will do more than just make us a better fighting force but it will make the soldiers in the field no matter what the job more likely to come back home. Remember George Patton once said you don't win wars by dying for your country you win them by making the other guy die for his. Those words are so true and anyone who thinks that is not relevant is nuts. Remember what the job of a soldier is and why he exists, help our smaller force do a better job help the smaller force come home safe and make his job more effective as that will cure our current items of concern ( smaller forces due to smaller budgets) (needing to send less in harms way)(we as former vets need to help the ones there now in any way we can and giving them our experience and knowledge is the most important thing we can give we cant short change them by reducing men and not be able to bring them home because they did not have enough people) make them unbeatable with any amount and it can be done we have the ability we only need the drive and the will. Thank You

Response by SGM Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 29 at 2013 2:32 PM

2013-09-29T14:32:57-04:00

Ensure that leaders counsel Soldiers regularly from the time of integration into new unit until the time the Soldier/s separates from the service.

Response by SGM Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 29 at 2013 2:37 PM

2013-09-29T14:37:02-04:00

Leaders should counsel their Soldiers regularly on the opportunities the Army offers to them, from the time Soldiers are assigned into his/her unit until Soldiers separate from the service.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 29 at 2013 2:58 PM

2013-09-29T14:58:44-04:00

Response by SGT Leigh Barton made Sep 29 at 2013 3:18 PM

2013-09-29T15:18:59-04:00

Reviewing all of the comments here I would like to add this to my previous comment, taking advantage of the KISS principle (keep it simple stupid). FOCUS ON THE SOLDIER. We're in agreement about utilizing service members to replace civilian contractors, about retaining the best, especially career soldiers, those wishing to pursue a career in military service. THE SOLDIER IS THE TOOL WE USE TO GET THE JOB DONE, I for one like a clean rifle and a sharp and well balanced knife.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 29 at 2013 3:35 PM

2013-09-29T15:35:55-04:00

Why not combine certain MOSes again? What I mean to say is that we split several MOSes in the past to make room for the influx of new troops. Why not combine those MOSes again. For example, you can take make specialty intelligence like SIGINT or IMINT an additional skill identifier for Intelligence Analysts. That way you have a Soldier that is not only qualified on his/her given job but also multifaceted into another specialty. Additionally, we could stand to lose 60-70% of the civilian contractors now that we are expected to leave Afghanistan. This could help with the Military's funding and make the downsizing less painful.

Response by SMSgt Alan Saunders made Sep 29 at 2013 4:15 PM

2013-09-29T16:15:26-04:00

The military needs to stop being a social experiment and go back to being a lean, mean fighting force. Repealing DADT, pushing acceptance of homosexual relationships, suppressing respectful Christian expression - all these are distractions for the troops and draining much needed funds. Giving free leave days to allow homosexuals to get "married" is a huge expense and will be divisive causing a rift between them and other military members who want to marry in the traditional sense.

Put the focus back on mission readiness and training and remove the distractions.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 29 at 2013 4:21 PM

2013-09-29T16:21:46-04:00

As I read through these posts, we are hitting on one issue that has been a sore spot every sense I was in. The quality of the people we tried to train, and a Spirit of being a team player. There were many times good people were passed over just to retain an idiot by promotion to the point of incompetence. In other words a rating they were unable to function in!

Response by CW3 Miguel Rodriguez made Sep 29 at 2013 5:27 PM

2013-09-29T17:27:51-04:00

the most important thing the military should do while going through this downsizing period is to select quality recruits with no criminal records or any mental illness.

Response by CPT Lee Jackson made Sep 29 at 2013 5:42 PM

2013-09-29T17:42:54-04:00

Remember Our Oaths To Support And Defend The Constitution Against All Enemies Foreign And Domestic, And Never Compromise That - A Lifetime Oath.

Response by SN Brett Chambers made Sep 29 at 2013 6:28 PM

2013-09-29T18:28:42-04:00

I think everyone should go with two or three month with a reserve unit in which the state the service member is planning on living. Making transitioning easier and gathering important contacts in the state they choose. Plus a chance to see if reserve is a worth continuing. Or maybe making this one option. With taps being one week at the beginning and another week at the end of the two or three months. Which can check the progress of the veteran and see if they have everything needed.

Response by SN Brett Chambers made Sep 29 at 2013 6:45 PM

2013-09-29T18:45:11-04:00

I think every seperating service member should have a 1-2 month end of contract reserve commitment in there state of choice. First week should be taps class then a reserve weekend. They could then meet reservist in the area they want to live in. Ask questions see if they want to continue with reserve unit. The veteran would then check into the VA hospital and have another taps class at the end of the one or two months and beable to comfortable move on with the local contacts gathered or continue with the restive unit. A basic check like the one down at your last command. This would make the transition much easier for veterans and would hopefully cause less stress to those suffering with various disabilities.

Response by SGM Raul Martinez made Sep 29 at 2013 8:12 PM

2013-09-29T20:12:33-04:00

The Army needs to look at how they train, promote and equip our soldiers. MOS should be streamlined because as the Army downsize many jobs will probably be cut or filled by civilians.

Response by CSM Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 29 at 2013 8:58 PM

2013-09-29T20:58:54-04:00

This won't be popular with some service members but our most senior leadership at the DoD and JCS need to think about being much more joint than we were prior to OEF/OIF/OND. Combat operations over the last 12 years have shown, for the most part, both how interdependent we are, as well as how well we can operate together when we want/need to. There is likely a lot of cost savings to be realized by leveraging our "jointness." Those of us that lived thru Urgent Fury and Just Cause remember a lot of problems because we operated so independently.

I also think it's critical that we recall the lessons learned from the drawdown following the "peace dividend" from the fall of the Soviet Union. We let (nay, encouraged) many of the best and brightest SFC/MAJ mid-grades to leave thru early retirement. They were our future 1SG/CSM and BC's. It took years to recover from that talent exodus.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 29 at 2013 9:34 PM

2013-09-29T21:34:02-04:00

Stop the enlistment bonuses for now.I know it motivates people to enlist but if they want a career in the military like their father's grandfather's etc..they will enlist like they did because of their love of Country. Also, There should never be a downsizing of military force in our country.When the world knows that a strong country like the USA is weakened by lack of its military stronghold they will be more likely to plan more terrorist plots. Where you need to make cuts is in the Federal Gov't where some of those people have been camping in the senate or the house or reps.for up to or maybe beyond 35+ years. Im an Army reservist. When I got home from Afghanistan Oct 2012 my employer did not hold my job and I couldnt find work because of the economy.While I was gone my wife had two major surgeries from an accident in our home only to find out she has MS and a debilitating Musculoskeletal disease.our 12 yr old daughter is also disabled and requires medication to keep her from acting out and keep her calm. Its a full time job for my wife when I am gone. When I got back I couldn't find work so I took advantage of my VA benefits and went back to school to change my trade to a Machinist. They pay our rent and utilities but we never seen any extra money from that. we get 237. a month from my drill pay and I use that for Gas for school, dr appts. and food. The Gov't says we make too much money for public assistance so we struggle. We are selling everything we own faster than you can blink. We have nothing left. I love the Army I just signed my new contract. I tried to go full time but could not find anything in the machinist area that was open. I think maybe if you could get some people switched around into different MOS's that they really like or want you probably wouldn't have to downsize all that much because with those who want out NOW and those who want to go to reserve status and those who want to go full time it will even out perfectly. go into conduct files, they mess up they are out. fatty's get kicked out. failed PT tests in the last year give them one now and if they cant pass it they get discharged. Your downsize should be complete. But remember...IT IS BETTER TO BE STRONG AND POOR; THEN TO BE WEAK AND RICH! The United States of America needs to continue to stand tall across the world. We cant do that if our military looks like it has a breach in the walls that keep it holding strong.

Response by Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 29 at 2013 10:52 PM

2013-09-29T22:52:05-04:00

First and foremost we need to revisit the NSS and determine if its the right flavor for US interests and security looking out beyond 2030, we have fallen behind in future tech, R&D, cyber and basic education. Do we really need to prepare for a conventional war against a nation state? (ie; pre-9/11 cold war style) Doubtful... which of the 9 current (and growing) nuke capable nations that we would fight a conventional war against just willingly give up land that we would occupy?.... none... we would have a nuke launched at us before they just gave up sovereign land. The future nation state wars will be fought on/in the cyber and space theater... all non-state irregular adversaries will be fought asymmetrically as we have vs Al Qaeda and the Taliban since 9/11, that means we need a lighter SOF focused ground and air capability for offense and defense for non-state irregular warfare and a robust cyber and space based capability for nation state war. The force needs to be re-aligned and trimmed to provide an affordable, sustainable and realistic capability. Additionally we need to revisit the relevancy of NATO which was built on the premise of the Cold War and the actual utility of the UN.

Response by 1SG(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 29 at 2013 11:27 PM

2013-09-29T23:27:06-04:00

Do a better job of prioritizing our resources.  By resources I mean personnel, cash, and time.  We need to define our missions well, and then determine whether our beans, bullets, and bodies are actually serving those missions.  If you analyze a concept, and at the end can't say, "by doing this we're able to be more effective warriors", then it's probably a waste of what little we may have.  For the Army it's sometimes as simple as asking "Is what we're doing improving the ability of an Infantry Private to do his job?"  It's not the military's job to make us feel good about ourselves.  We should feel good about ourselves when we accomplish our missions.<br>

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 30 at 2013 2:33 AM

2013-09-30T02:33:27-04:00

Develop a system of checks and balances that forces our government to be more accountable by having OTHER Departments (DOT, DOE, NSA, CIA, DHS, EPA) make similar budget and personnel cuts in order to trim the fat. The military is the only agency that will do as it's told because we took an oath to support and defend the Constitution and obey the LAWFUL orders of those appointed over us (i.e. Commanders, NCA, SECDEF, CINC, etc). This does not mean that we check common sense at the door and turn a blind eye to the rest of the world. If we could get entitlement programs, social security, Medicare to somehow shift  more responsibility to the states and less on the federal government, maybe we wouldn't have to pinch pennies on printer paper, toner, and cleaning supplies. The only recourse we have is to try and change things through elections, and it seems every year less and less business gets done. But the cost of living and taxes keep going up. 

Response by MSG Joseph Dutton made Sep 30 at 2013 6:00 AM

2013-09-30T06:00:48-04:00

Well i would have to say the single most important thing to do is take care of the Military Service Members, DOD Civilians, across the board. This means even with the down size the Military need to provide opportunities to those who separate i.e. transition assistance course to help them obtain meaningful employment outside, career and Job fair opportunities to those interested. (This happens for the most part but programs can be vamped up) This will some what lessen the sting for those who completely separate. For those on furlough and still need to make ends they should be allowed to obtain a means to offset the pay decrease such as able to obtain a part time job on top of their regular Job. For those wishing to separate completely the military should consider that option as well. Especially on the Active duty force. Quality service members can fill the ranks as time and budget dictate the ranks to be filled once again. End statement even with downsize the military needs to take care of the personnel who have dedicated themselves to the military weather Service member or DOD Civilian.

Response by CWO2 Shelby DuBois made Sep 30 at 2013 9:21 AM

2013-09-30T09:21:45-04:00

Rethink its priorities, reorganize and reload with an eye toward the future with a limited budget, a adversarial, agenda driven administration and a knowledge that we are never fully at peace. The next "Surprise!...We're at war" moment will once again require a rapid build up, so put into place a military that can quickly ramp up and down without breaking its focus on warfighting and at the same time detrimentally affect the lives of its men and women by a promise of a career that cannot be supported.

Response by PO2 Craig Hopkins made Sep 30 at 2013 9:53 AM

2013-09-30T09:53:07-04:00

Prepare every soldier, sailor, airman, marine and coastie for transition to the civilian world and actively engage with businesses small and large, to get them and their spouses employed. It's the least we can do for their sacrifice and service.

Response by MCPO Dean Phelps made Sep 30 at 2013 11:51 AM

2013-09-30T11:51:23-04:00

First priority is scalability.

-As we downsize its needs to be done across all ranks to maintain the same chain of command ratios. Typically we get rid of the junior servicemen and stay very top heavy.

Second priority is performance.

- The military so often draws an arbitrary line based on rotation dates, current locations etc... and the best and brightest are ask to leave while substandard performers are allow to stay.

-insure that we do not create gaps in knowledge and experience when the cuts are made. Example If you are cutting E6 numbers you should look at maintain equal numbers of new E6s / experienced E6s, and senior E6s ready for advancement to E7.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 30 at 2013 11:52 AM

2013-09-30T11:52:16-04:00

I understand the need to downsize, the military has been doing this over the years. We build our forces up when there is a war and then downsize when the war ends. Soldiers earn more pay and benefits, contractors make millions and politicians fatten their pockets. Still, downsizing should not come from our Wounded Warriors. Many like myself were wounded in combat and are sent to WTB/WTU for treatment. What we get is rushed service and processed out of the military for the VA to deal with. Often Wounded warriors get neglected and with the backlog at the VA, some are left to suicide and homelessness. The military is downsizing but is still recruiting in high volumes. Recruitment should be severely reduced. I could never understand why the gov't pays more to recruit than retain the already trained.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 30 at 2013 12:02 PM

2013-09-30T12:02:41-04:00

Leadership is the key to making this an economically responsible Defense Force. Leaders, starting at the highest level, must begin a rigid and uncompromising level of sacrifice. Gone are the days of frivolous trips and lavish "Seminars" paid for with tax dollars. This level of frugality is contagious and will find its way down to the lowest levels of our military forces. We always have an economic strangle hold on budgets AFTER spending gets out of hand. It is time for the DoD and all government to be the example of frugality. We need a responsible and standardized level of spending and keep it that way. No more war time treasure chest of spending. Relevant and ready means always being trained and equipped to defend our nation at home and abroad, it just has to be done sensibly. We are asked to maintain our Arms and Equipment and as Soldier we will as long as leadership maintains their responsibility to fund necessary programs to maintain our forces. We need honest and educated decisions makers to determin what programs, combat equipment and support items are truly necessary to defend the current and future needs of our nation without compromising veteran's and current members of our Armed Forces.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 30 at 2013 2:28 PM

2013-09-30T14:28:51-04:00

I believe that keeping tuition assistance funded and available while ensuring that the Noncommissioned Officers Education System and the Officers Education System are current, relevant, and meaningful will keep the spear sharp. The two previous/current wars have been executed with great precision as accomplished in part by the greater level of responsibility placed upon the Strategic Sergeant (Newell 08) and the On the Scene Commander. The critical thinking skills of our greatest instruments, our Soldiers, should not be allowed to dull, but instead should be sharpened with better training, schooling and appreciation of their ability to wield additional responsibility.
The military is the only business that puts so much responsibility and risk onto its newest members. Its leader’s lookout for their training and education would be the least they could do as one day those Strategic Sergeants and junior lieutenants will be the leaders of our military and need to be able to think critically for roles of greater responsibility, as well as the caring for the new junior Soldiers in which they are leading.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 30 at 2013 2:29 PM

2013-09-30T14:29:42-04:00

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 30 at 2013 2:34 PM

2013-09-30T14:34:20-04:00

Looking at the military like any other corporation, if I were a controlling board member my suggestions would be this: Offer those that want to leave a severance package, offer top performers incentives to stay. Do a top-down assessment of all departments to ensure they exist to support the product we offer, which in this case is the ability to perform in combat. If they they don't directly affect that, then integrate them into areas that do, reduce civilian contracts and shift to support MOS's, or cut completely. Improve the promoting system by incorporating a two part process, one being: an assessment of knowledge in your area/mos with APFT included, two being: an assessment of your performance by your peers. This would insure that fully capable leadership is being promoted, not just the physically fit that show up. Liquidate all assets that aren't intuitive to the product, ie: auction all outdated, unused excess, or damaged equipment and donate a portion of the proceeds to Veteran charities. Perform regular spending assessments (quarterly?) for each area and recognize and reward top performing areas and intuitive ideas for reducing waste. Do a cost assessment on base locations and start shopping around for better prices. Also look to more strategic placements ie: is it better to have a base at point A and another at point C or could we operate more efficiently with a single base in point B and be strategically effective. Create a panel of combat Veterans and Leaders to assess what equipment and training is essential in todays combat environment and cut the unnecessary. In the ever increasing technological world, seek to incorporate and streamline more user friendly systems that could eliminate the need for staffing and manpower for some of the more mundane and easily automated tasks. Focus on a continuing effort to reduce waste as waste maintenance and disposal costs $$. These are some of the things I've come up with after my initial response and putting more serious thought into it.

Response by SGT Sean Whitenton made Sep 30 at 2013 2:52 PM

2013-09-30T14:52:41-04:00

Maintain combat effectiveness; I'm reading a lot of responses on here that seem to come right out Dilbert corporate speak. The thing- the only thing- that the military ever needs to emphasize is maintaining combat effectiveness. Unfortunately it ranks well down on the list of things that are emphasized by senior leadership.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 30 at 2013 4:44 PM

2013-09-30T16:44:37-04:00

Recognize those that are willing to fight the fight and serve their country (like myself) and get rid of those that no longer care. I know for a fact that there is a lot of military members that are just there because they are getting paid and not willing to put any effort in to self develop.

Response by PO1 Kenneth Cary made Sep 30 at 2013 5:08 PM

2013-09-30T17:08:09-04:00

Educate those who will be downsized as to having a professional social media presence such as LinkedIn to be better prepared for the job search job. Searching for a job is a full-time job & requires all your military soft skills & knowledge to get noticed and get the interview.

Response by CAPT Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 30 at 2013 5:45 PM

2013-09-30T17:45:12-04:00

Educate the workforce about their transferable skills, and their worth to the business sector. When mediocre performers realize that they are better than most in the civilian workforce, they won't be so afraid of getting out. For high performers, in addition to showing them that the military knows their value (which we sometimes neglect to do...), we remind them that no other organization on the planet gives so much responsibility at such a young age, and thereby tempt to stay for the challenges that only the military organizations can offer. The right ones go home, and the right ones stay; what more could you want?

Response by Spc 1 J W. made Sep 30 at 2013 10:22 PM

2013-09-30T22:22:25-04:00

Morale - lately morale has been discounted because it cannot be quantified. Morale is not easily marked down on a commander's spreadsheet/scorecard like required training or medical requirements. When morale is low your troops don't want to know you. When morale is high the troops will do almost anything, which is what you want especially when the money is tight. Ignore morale at your peril.

So how is high morale achieved? Many of our current "higher-ups" are managers not leaders. We got to this point because we have become the scorecard military. Managers are selected for promotion because they know how to budget and check off all their boxes for promotion. But I don't want to work for a manager, I am not inspired by a manager. I want to work for a leader.

We have to get back to realistic appraisals for enlisted and officer. Not everyone is "truly among the best". Awards are not done evenhandedly. Too much of appraisals and awards are subjective instead of objective. Morale suffers when there is a real or perceived inequity. How we recognize our people says a lot about us as an organization. Keep the best, dump the rest.

Lastly is utilization. Identify those that are underemployed or over employed. Personnel in both these groups will walk away from the military when they have their chance.

Response by SrA Eric Jelle made Sep 30 at 2013 11:59 PM

2013-09-30T23:59:34-04:00

Personnel transition development is hands down the most important thing the military should manage responsibly during downsizing and even when not in a downsizing economic climate. Our country's best citizens departing military service matter the most because they can make the biggest difference as ambassadors to our communities as they transition from the Branches of the U.S. Armed Forces the military regardless of the reason they return to civilian life whether retired or non-retired vets. Having a meaningful, successful, and relevant transition development program for these key personnel means they need to be far far better equipped than non-military counterparts to qualify for interviews and be selected as top candidates not just nationally, but globally wherever they separate and settle following their committed service. The U.S. military has a far reaching network of active duty that is utilized as sponsors for inbound new recruits being welcomed to their first duty assignments, but the TAP program doesn't bring veteran ambassadors out of the communities where our departing service members will be settling back into the civilian work grind to help them acclimate to the current economic, social, and technological demand changes that will be pivotal factors to the success of any soldier's, sailor's, or airman's return to life outside the military's protective wings of key benefits like solid housing, BAQ, BAS, medical, work clothing allowances, and other key care like MWR needs. The least amount of surprises any separating member faces, the better and I think that is the least we can manage but the most important - to ensure the separating military member and their family when applicable don't go it alone when transitioning as if it were merely as simple as changing from a uniform back into your civies. Nothing could be more further from the truth from my experience. Strive to merit the respect of all with whom you come in contact.

If we are to respect our dead at Arlington and National cemeteries nationwide and who died in service abroad, why should we not respect our departing brethren in arms enough to care that they will succeed so that when we ourselves retire, separate, or die to leave our own enlistment or commission under America's Eagle wings, that we have them as an ambassador who can return and honor what matters most beyond service.

Response by LCDR Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 1 at 2013 8:06 AM

2013-10-01T08:06:58-04:00

Eliminate or automate paperwork. Designation letters assigning collateral duties within units are unnecessary (except by regulation). Printing, signing, scanning, and then emailing anything (forms, letters, etc.) is a huge waste of time in the Navy. After eliminating unnecessary paperwork, make the rest easy by going to a web-based system with digital signatures from CACs. Older forms/letters may be used as back up where bandwidth is low or connections unreliable, but should be the exception, not the rule. Muster sheets should be done electronically by default (mustering officer logs in, checks off those present, signs with CAC, CO gets notification, logs in, signs with CAC). Doing things like this would eliminate man-years of work, reduce workload on IT systems, save paper and ink, and reduce headaches. Sailors could spend more time training to fight and less time fixing records.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 1 at 2013 5:08 PM

2013-10-01T17:08:06-04:00

I 100% agree with MSG Alex Petty, Fort Bragg, NC I think that he has the most refined answer I've seen on here THIS WAS HIS STATE INSIDE THE QUOTATIONS

"I believe that keeping tuition assistance funded and available while ensuring that the Noncommissioned Officers Education System and the Officers Education System are current, relevant, and meaningful will keep the spear sharp. The two previous/current wars have been executed with great precision as accomplished in part by the greater level of responsibility placed upon the Strategic Sergeant (Newell 08) and the On the Scene Commander. The critical thinking skills of our greatest instruments, our Soldiers, should not be allowed to dull, but instead should be sharpened with better training, schooling and appreciation of their ability to wield additional responsibility.
The military is the only business that puts so much responsibility and risk onto its newest members. Its leader’s lookout for their training and education would be the least they could do as one day those Strategic Sergeants and junior lieutenants will be the leaders of our military and need to be able to think critically for roles of greater responsibility, as well as the caring for the new junior Soldiers in which they are leading."

THIS IS MY ADDITION TO IT:

If they are going to downsize they might as well keep the education going on those left so that when it is time to move forward and strengthen the ranks again the training will be more advanced and will achieve much greater success when we are deployed in shorter time frames. At least that would be the hope. I mean isn't that what we've been taught our entire lives. The key to success in anything in life is an education. For those Soldiers who do want to stay or get to stay whether they are Officers,NCO,Enlisted,Reserve,etc..,

Start upgrading their education, new methods of training in and out of combat situations. This will save our Gov't time & money with the shorter deployments. Also, Instead of shipping all of that equipment to where ever we are deployed and then leaving it there because its too expensive to ship back. At least try to sell it to other Countries and regain some of the money and put it back into the military budget so that we are not the ones to lose our pay first when Gov't closures happen. There is ZERO reason and there should be a zero tolerance policy for leaving all of that expensive equipment over there. Recoup that money by selling it to the contractors or the countries we are in even at cost. The military can be self sufficient if we learn to cut our own spending within. I am a reservist and I would love to be an enlisted. I've asked to be full time for the last 6 years. Some recruiter was always giving me a reason why I couldn't. But, I am good at my job. Keep those of us that want to stay and train us. I've been passed over for rank for the last 5 years and I still re-enlist lol I love the Army, PERIOD. they have to stay in shape, do their jobs, no corrective actions, at least nothing serious, these kids that are right out of High School that want to join for just 2 or 3 years just to say they were in and aren't really serious about it. It is just like in the Civilian world, low man on totem pole goes first unless they qualify better than some one else that has been there longer. Downsize but first we are a Military Family all of us world-wide need to start being more frugal. If we could just retain that money within we would be so much better off.

Response by CPO Robert Retzler made Oct 2 at 2013 10:01 AM

2013-10-02T10:01:12-04:00

It is important to have military folks have access to civilian jobs. More importantly the availability of training to convert from military to civilian.

Response by SGT Hugh Nunn made Oct 2 at 2013 12:14 PM

2013-10-02T12:14:00-04:00

Any downsizing actions should be implemented with the clear intent to keep our best and brightest, allowing them to actually do the jobs they were trained to perform. I would start with three actions reducing cost, personnel, and infrastructure.

1. Reduce or remove reliance on C4I systems as much as possible. PowerPoint and the inherent subculture it pervades has all but destroyed traditional models of communication and leadership. Entire careers are reduced to bullet points. Leaders are too afraid of making mistakes to actually lead. Give leaders at all levels the opportunity to learn and be mentored without every misstep and minor transgression appearing on the General's "blotter."

1. Return C4I systems and support to the Military as much as possible. Contractors are expensive, and their corporations are more worried about the bottom line than the deliverable product. Making this infrastructure and support organic to commands will reduce the footprint, and subsequently the amount of personnel , equipment, and ancillary goods and services needed to maintain them.

2. Reduce the number of Officers and Senior NCOs from the top down. Reinforce and reinvigorate the NCO Support Chain. While in Iraq in 2011, I witnessed E-8s performing tasks that I had handled as a PFC. Don't pay a MSG to do a PFC's job. I would rather pay a PFC and have fewer Senior NCOs who actually have the chance to train, mentor, and lead.

Whatever form this downsizing effort takes, it will be a much tougher process with harder choices than similar efforts had in the mid-90's. However if those tasked with it shrink from the hard right over the easy wrong, our military will be immeasurably weaker and much less able to respond as needed.

Response by CPT Chuey Kwak made Oct 2 at 2013 12:23 PM

2013-10-02T12:23:43-04:00

FIDO (F*** It, Drive On)

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 2 at 2013 1:09 PM

2013-10-02T13:09:51-04:00

We cannot afford to lose the experience and intelligence that fills our ranks now. Sweeping across the board cuts threaten to replicate the "brain drain" that occurred in the 90's. The short answer, at least IMO, is to increase the manning at our Training Centers, Professional Military Education (NCOES, OBC, CCC, ILE, etc.), and our commissioning sources (West Point, OCS, ROTC). I feel the focus would be on providing more slots for E6 through E8 and O3 through O5 in order to retain that critical knowledge base. If the Army is ever asked to grow again, these are the ranks/positions that cannot be rapidly produced. By creating these positions in those teaching/coaching/mentoring positions, we would not only position ourselves to keep experienced leaders, but we would also poise them to have a direct impact on the improvement of the force at the operational and tactical levels. Furthermore, the addition of these positions would allow for alternate pathways of career development.

Response by SGM Ed Mounts made Oct 2 at 2013 3:17 PM

2013-10-02T15:17:28-04:00

I beleive the single most important thing we can do is to ensure our Soldiers are prepared for the civilian market by ensuring from the start we are training them how to be leaders, ensuring our Soldiers are properly educated and trained both on the military side and through civilian education while they are serving. There is a reason companies hire prior service and Leadership is a major reason and then their skills and training to include education.

Response by SGM Ed Mounts made Oct 2 at 2013 3:23 PM

2013-10-02T15:23:34-04:00

I beleive one of the most important things we can do is ensure we are training all of our Soldiers Enlisted and Officer alike to be leaders and ensuring they posses the skills needed to compete in the civilian marketplace. Some of the ways to ensure they are ready are education and training. Military and civilian education are both very important when transitioning to the civilian market. Leadership is a huge reason veterans are hired but they still must meet the requirements to apply for the position that is where education comes in. We need to make sure they are educated trained and prepared.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 2 at 2013 3:25 PM

2013-10-02T15:25:45-04:00

Train, train, train. Build the teams which will build pride and espirit de corps. Leaders take care of your service members. Soldiers donate to the Army Emergency Relief in the yearly donation drives. We have seen shutdowns before. This too shall pass.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 2 at 2013 3:32 PM

2013-10-02T15:32:39-04:00

If you would like to get better recruits you need to start sooner than we are doing now. Our youth need to know that the military can be a career, that you have to meet the standards to get in and stay in. That you need a good education. We have many high school kids who decide they would like to join the military only to find out, that little trouble they were in is keeping them out, or that they did not think they had to finish school to join.

The NCAA has learned they have to start educating the 7th graders about grades and studies if they want to play sports in college. So, why is the military not also looking at these young people and educating them on what is needed for a military life after high school or college?

Response by CPT Bill James made Oct 2 at 2013 3:40 PM

2013-10-02T15:40:45-04:00

Cut oil use 50%. There is no security for America when her defenses depend on foreign oil and buying that oil funds Al Qaeda.

Change the mission to defend America:
- Terrorism is the primary enemy. It is a distributed treat, create a distributed training system so a many citizens as practical understand how to defend themselves. If there are no sheep, there will be fewer wolves.

- Oil Supply Shocks and Oil Famine will create major crisis this decade. America's 50% dependence on imported oil purchased with printed/debt money will suddenly end. Life requires energy. Less energy, less life. Sorting this out will test everything.

- Mexico. About 40% of the Federal budget in Mexico comes from oil revenues. Their oil fields are depleting. Within 3 years Mexico's domestic consumption will out pace the oil production. Without oil revenues, the Federal government seems likely to destabilize and there will be 2-3 million people migrating north looking for food and water. Preparing and dealing with this will be complex.

Response by LtCol Dann Chesnut made Oct 2 at 2013 3:53 PM

2013-10-02T15:53:25-04:00

Reduce the number of Generals. Those positions at the top need to be pared down proportionally. This does not seem to happen during draw downs, but there always are increases in the number of Generals when the ranks swell. It is more important to retain combat and operation vets as a core. This does not usually happen, with mistakes and lives lost as a result.

Response by LT Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 2 at 2013 4:03 PM

2013-10-02T16:03:44-04:00

To address downsizing or 'Rightsizing' we must look at how we recruit and retain. Their is no quick answer but as leaders we must look at the climate we are in. We must forecast the future of warfare and review past conflicts involving our military.

General George Marshall built up the Army from a service of less than 200,000 soldiers before WW2 and after WW2 we had an Army of over 4 million soldiers. His battles with congress and our citizens were tough but he painted a masterpiece in his build up strategy.

We had a recession at home and a war in Europe and the Pacific. Our service members came back torn apart physically and emotionally scarred. However, our country came together and educated and supported our members back into society. Their was a transition from uniform back to civilian service and it was accomplished by recognizing the strengths of our military and the outstanding training & leadership they received during the war.

When I think of WW2 and how many served not only in uniform but as shipbuilders & weapons and plane builders their is no doubt that the impact of the war was not only felt in the battlefield but at home. This fact is no longer relevant in our country. When countries like Israel fight everyone serves and supports the military. Their service is based on necessity. We have a terrible disconnect from society because instead of watching war progress they are watching reality t.v. and feeling the impact of what is sacrificed by our military.

So to staff all of our military services we need to include our past into our future by creating awareness of what is needed from our citizens to maintain "our great society". We are saturated in media and that is what needs to be our outlet. We are not selling war bonds like we did in the 1940's, we are selling SACRIFICE.

When we are recruiting new members they need to know that like driving a vehicle, serving is a privilege. Our recruits need to know that our citizens recognize the outstanding training they receive and try to place them in civilian employment once their commitment is up or the needs of the military are changing.

My buzz word is "REBOUND" and not from a relationship or missed basketball shot. We need a rebound or second chance on how we recruit and determine what is necessary to maintain or services at the highest level for the next 3-5 years. After that period we will need to reassess our manpower and morale again. This is a continuous process that requires constant motion to maintain readiness for our country and to prepare us for our enemy.

My final thought is that every recruit should watch "Band of Brothers" and give a report on what they think of war and sacrifice. We should never forget why we fight.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 2 at 2013 4:17 PM

2013-10-02T16:17:24-04:00

The most important thing that should be done will shape all decisions that follow: make a "stop doing list". This may sound silly and simple, but it will inform all subsequent decisions - many of which have been already addressed in this discussion.

The first thing our leaders must do is re-evaluate the purpose and mission of the US military as we return to a "peacetime" military and describe those things which we are currently doing that we will not be doing in the future. Clearly identify the core competencies that the military must provide to the nation and scrap those things that do not clearly support these competencies. This must be clearly communicated to and approved by our civilian leadership, explained to all members of the military, and decisions made to trim the force while maintaining these competencies.

With these identified, other decisions will follow: what skill sets to retain in individuals, what important characteristics to include in evaluation reports and consider for promotion boards, what units to deactivate, what headquarters to close, what tasks to train and what to include in officer and NCO education.

None of these decisions can intelligently be made until it is agreed by our senior leadership what we will no longer do as we downsize. This is the single most important thing that should be done to make this transition effective and keep our military focused on what is most important.

Response by LTC(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 2 at 2013 4:34 PM

2013-10-02T16:34:44-04:00

Reversibility and the ability to expand again when needed should be the
focus on this both in terms of personnel, equipment and training. There will
inevitably be another conflict and we will have to expand again, our ability to
do that will be determined by how reversible the changes we make while
downsizing.

When reducing personnel the focus should be on retaining leaders in both the
NCO and Officer ranks as producing those leaders takes a considerable amount of
time. Consideration should be to both low density skills and to the opposite
end of the spectrum to those who have demonstrated that they are more than a
one trick pony (as in a smaller force Soldiers will be expected to become more
generalist and do more things). 1LT Fritz is right in that we need to retain
the right type of people and pay them commiserate to their worth

On the equipping side we must continue to invest in R&D so that we do
not lose technical overmatch, however not necessarily bring every program
through full production. That would mean that we could quickly ramp up
production if needed to fulfill a need in a particular sphere.

Training will necessarily be reduced (and we will return to a tiered
readiness construct to keep some units prepared for contingencies) particularly
in the heavy force but the focus their should be on virtual and constructive
training as we can get them to at least a baseline performance level that could
then be increased through an intensive training rotation if there is a
burgeoning need for heavy forces occurs.

Response by LTC Rob Hefner made Oct 2 at 2013 5:07 PM

2013-10-02T17:07:22-04:00

We cannot mortgage future capability for today's emotional concerns.

In other words, our first priority must be retaining if not a technological advantage at least technological parity with the most dangerous COA enemy. We cannot afford to be technologically superior to our most likely adversary (AQ or similar ideologically based actors), we must retain technological parity with the best force in the world that isnt wearing an American flag on their shoulder. This is not advocating technology because it's cool (F35) or technology that is theater specific (MRAP). From my shallow and poorly placed foxhole, this means cyber defense, targeting affects and delivery, and next generation mobility (regarding mobility, can we please get past the turtle mentality induced by IED's - more armor is not always the answer). We may have to accept personnel reductions to fund the technology we will need to be competitive ten or twenty years from now.

Second priority should be retaining the right Soldiers. Not all Soldiers, just the right ones. Military service is just that - service - not a priviliege and not a jobs program. This is much more difficult because it requires individual accountability from everyone who calls themselves leaders. Policies from on high won't change the culture that allows subpar performers to get promoted. Raters and senior raters who sign good evaluations for subpar performers are at fault. Leaders who fail to counsel are forced to sign good evaulations. Yes, people are people and will always seek out the path of least resistance. I expect more than that from leaders in uniform.

Response by SGT Michael Young made Oct 2 at 2013 6:02 PM

2013-10-02T18:02:29-04:00

First thing first, you weed out the ones who cant pass tape, pt test, drug tests (if you've ever failed one goodbye) the ones with with way too many article 15s. Then you conduct job testing see who knows how to even do their job there are many great NCOs who know nothing about their job and many that should be NCOs that aren't you will be surprised at these results. Next change the age of enlistment to 21 there are so many that are mentally mature enough for the military that won't solve the problem but with at least cut it in half maybe more. Then after all that straight up ask who doesn't want to be there and send em home early honorable discharge and bar them re enlistment or start with those 6 months or year from ETS see if they want out early. The next step is better screening before you let them in give them a PT Test you fail come back in 30 days see if you pass it then. If someone has a DUI or multiple arrests the military isn't going to straighten them out anything more than a traffic ticket see you later. Dont start looking for reasons to kick people out I have seen that more times than I wanted to good soldiers turn to crap because some NCO has a grudge against them or they got into a little trouble as a private there are plenty of standards the army has that people cant of wont live up to you will let go more than you need to by cutting people who dont measure up to the few things I've said. Go with the obvious you cant go wrong.

Response by MAJ Stephen Arango made Oct 2 at 2013 6:15 PM

2013-10-02T18:15:33-04:00

Focus on developing a serious transitioning program that works with business of every size to reach out to Active service members sooner then later. Address the types of positions in their home states that are attractive or training them in advance of release from active duty.

Response by Lt Col Marlon Ruiz made Oct 2 at 2013 6:20 PM

2013-10-02T18:20:09-04:00

Downsizing is not a new challenge faced by DoD. However, what we do in the interim, until we weather this latest storm, is to focus on what we have always focused upon - readiness and preparing to engage in and successfully execute our Defense mandate (I.e., fight and win the next war). Toward that end, I would focus current efforts on leadership and force structure.

Many have contributed some great observations and comments; however, where the "rubber meets the road" is our collective ability to meet head on and defeat the enemy, regardless of the engagement scenario. For me, this would mean producing leadership at all levels of command capable of being effective "warrior - statement." Some sectors of our military do this better than others but given the ever-increasing likelihood that our global engagement mission will continue to expand, it would be very prudent to expand upon our expeditionary savvy and capabilities.

If one subscribes to the notion that technology is a very effective "force multiplier" then there is some flexibility when it comes to revising current force structure alternatives that would meet both diminished funding and increased force lethality on the battle field. I believe that technology has proven its worth when it comes to timely response and global reach. Why not invest the effort to further enhance such capabilities across the engagement spectrum of strategic, operational and tactical operations?

Response by Maj Albert C. made Oct 2 at 2013 9:49 PM

2013-10-02T21:49:15-04:00

Remain true to its core values and don't give in to political correctness. Maintain the moral courage to always do the right thing, no matter the political climate. I see too many examples of service members "taking their packs off".

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 3 at 2013 12:19 AM

2013-10-03T00:19:47-04:00

A change in culture... When facing a situation of limited resources combined with consequent downsizing, the word efficiency normally is ventured into the conversation. However, discussing efficiency cannot be uttered without tremendous consideration for effectiveness. Therefore, I would say perception of today's reality is the most importantant thing all leaders should focus on. A discussion in messaging may help shift perception from hopelessness to a desire to innovate.

Empowering the field to innovate... Inevitably, when resources are tightened, additional oversight seems to be the response to prevent extraneous spending. The additional bureaucracy that is begotten essentially deters the field from making requests on time sensitive matters. There is a short term savings but a great loss of overall effectiveness. My hope is that eventually authority to approve is more aligned with the echelon that has the responsibility to execute. Therefore less time is spent on following up on requests sent higher allowing the lower echelons to accomplish a mission. Consider Simon's theory of plurality. Simon found that in studying convictions by a jury, that each time the number of jurors increased the number of wrongful convictions decreased. He further found that the greatest improvement occurred at the number twelve. While certainly, there is the concern that the more individuals involved in a project the longer it will take to reach consensus, the only logical conclusion is to strike a balance.

Our Army has many phenomenal leaders that are experts in a variety of fields. If we can empower our leaders at the tactical levels with intent, guidance, and a greater autonomy to execute, we capitalize on our greatest asset - the individual. By sharing our best practices in an environment of greater autonomy, we collaborate to find the greatest answers for an effective and efficient organization.

Response by LTC Carmelito (Sonny) Arkangel made Oct 3 at 2013 1:10 AM

2013-10-03T01:10:51-04:00

Cut back significantly on our huge logistical/administrative tail while still maining our capability to respond efficaciously to any significant combat threat.

Response by MSgt Robert Pace made Oct 3 at 2013 1:12 AM

2013-10-03T01:12:57-04:00

Retrain all remaining active duty personnel to reinstill pride and discipline in the services.....Abolish all this "PC" garbage and retrain as real professionals with the esprit they used to have....In my interaction with active duty Marines, I would not mount out to a hot LZ with the level of confidence necessary for a successful mission. ALL of our active duty service men and women need to be retrained.....

MSgt Pace, retired USMC

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 3 at 2013 2:43 AM

2013-10-03T02:43:01-04:00

What is preventing the merging of Service equipment and training?  How much money could be saved through a single DoD purchasing program to identify a single 5 ton truck, heavy lift aircraft, attack aviation, and uniform items?  Why does each Service need to have their own test and evaluation boards to make these selections?  Additionally, the cost savings in Class IX repair parts would be huge. There would be commonality between the Services on the items stocked in our warehouses. Non mission capable equipment would be repaired more quickly. Furthermore, there is a potential for combining basic training across the Services, and even some initial MOS training courses, then breaking these new recruits into their individual required Service training. 

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 3 at 2013 9:47 AM

2013-10-03T09:47:15-04:00

I have the biased perspective that the Military's role in US Society is first and foremost- an Industry, second- a conduit for political redistribution of National Budget, and lastly sustaining the work force (recruiting, training/support, and veteran entitlements). It isn't an issue of agreeing with this - it is just this is my observered priority of influence on issues/decisions concerning the Military. That being said, my recommendations on strategic focus areas during this downsizing period are: One, focus on maintaining capability versus institutions. Although this is a bit abstract, history has demonstrated that in these times the leadership focus is on maintaining status quo institutions and norms, instead of truly focusing on the future challenges and tailoring the force in this regard. This is a good formula to motivate the best folks to get out and kill innovation and initiative taking. Second, closely look at lessons learned from the past 10-years or so and "design" a relatively, rapidly scalable force that better incorporates all key participants (Active Duty, Reserves, Guard, Government Civilians, and yes, Contractors). The downsizing trend will emphasize training and exercise around Active Duty components - not train as we fight, i.e., an aggregation of the disparate mob. Key emphasis on sustainable scalability, i.e., avoid defacto forces service initiatives like chronic Stop-loss. Finally, institute a strategic focus to align with / integrate with US Society. The lack of mandatory National Service (DRAFT) has really isolated the majority of the US Public from the challenges of military service. As folks are enduring hardship and getting killed and wounded abroad today - the average American is more concerned about what's on TV. Consider the US Government going into a work-stoppage when we are obviously engaged in conflict abroad - it doesn't matter what side of the political issues your values align with, the representatives of our Society, i.e., US society, have prioritized everything but the lives of folks we have committed to conflict for reasons folks have forgotten and/or no longer appreciate. Anyways, this outreach may range for ensuring all installations have community outreach programs and events, increasing ROTC/JROTC, expanding roles of recruiters to particpate deeper in local communities. For example, as a Civilian, some of my business associates (real Civilians) particpated in a Program at Fort Gordon that allowed folks off the street to play soldier for 36-hours or so. They were given an active duty sponsors, equipped, received weapons orientation and some rudimentary training, and conducted a simple mission (FOB ops and some patrolling, etc). I can offer my business associates were profoundly impacted by this experience and their appreciation of the Military life enhanced. I also think some type of support for local Veteran's Groups - helping Veterans organize so we can advocate and represent the military values and experience to the general population by leading by example. These recommended focus areas proactively address areas where I think the military tends to fail during these moments in history.

Response by Maj Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 3 at 2013 12:01 PM

2013-10-03T12:01:18-04:00

There is way too much training for stuff we don't do down range. Take for instance the C-130H, we haven't flown SKE operationally since Vietnam, why are we still wasting up to 60-70% of a training sortie to practice this archaic TTP? Just go through the list of CBTs we have to accomplish and how many get added each year. Just because it's new doesn't mean it's a good idea. If it doesn't provide a benefit to the force don't require us to so it. The ORM CBT hasn't been updated for 5 yrs. We are in a big push for going green and energy savings, let's also focus that attention on physical energy. With a downsizing force we must do more with less, each individual will be taking on more additional duties and having to accomplish those tasks we were once able to sparingly distribute to our members. So if this is the case, we need to immediately identify the tasks that are either redundant or that provide no direct benefit to our current operations. OEF has tired out force, the physical and mental energy is depleted and we need to find ways to recharge it.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 3 at 2013 12:45 PM

2013-10-03T12:45:21-04:00

The NCO's are the backbone of the military and without their guidance the junior officers would only cause more havoc and maybe even the death or their people on the battlefield the NCO'S are the ones that the junior enlisted and even juniior officers look to for assurance and the senior officers even want the input from the NCO.S on possible senarios of battlefield operations ei Captains and Majors look to the NCO's to take charge and lead the troops and try to keep the junior officers out of trouble.

Response by SGT Ed Hugley made Oct 3 at 2013 12:48 PM

2013-10-03T12:48:15-04:00

We should pull our troops back to the US and protect our own borders. We don't always have to be the worlds police force.

Response by SGT Ed Hugley made Oct 3 at 2013 12:49 PM

2013-10-03T12:49:38-04:00

Pull our forces back to protect our own borders and not spend as much time being the worlds police force

Response by SN Mickey Layton made Oct 3 at 2013 12:55 PM

2013-10-03T12:55:58-04:00

Train more Special Forces

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 3 at 2013 1:03 PM

2013-10-03T13:03:18-04:00

First to cut government spending release a majority of da civilians, giving sm the jobs to do by retaining the best qualified soldier for the job. Second give everybody in the military a week to opt out of their contract if they want out let them go. Change the way med boards are held we have soldiers getting over on the system which is costing more money to tax payers and increasing spending in the govt. last but not least cut the amount of time a person can stay in the military instead of 32 years cut it to 22 regardless of rank and or position.

Response by SPC Jason Maxwell made Oct 3 at 2013 1:12 PM

2013-10-03T13:12:38-04:00

Less spending on missles and 'projects'. More investment in people and 'mental health'. Increase standards to meet the needs of each professional branch while holding current rank and file accountable to reach standards. Stop bonuses and incentives for new soldiers to enlist and focus on the current staff for incentives and bonuses. Fix the damn backlog of veterans claims before it really starts to look bad on the entire military and government agencies.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 3 at 2013 1:13 PM

2013-10-03T13:13:30-04:00

Keep those Soldiers worthy of being kept. The military's problem in today's military IS the military. I can only speak about the U.S. Army. In too many ways, at many installations, NCO's will turn their heads or claim it is not "their" responsibility to correct a Soldier due to the Soldier not being in their direct chain of command, nor will they get involved and fix something that they see wrong. Again, because it is not "their" responsibility. Personal feeling here- if YOU outrank the individual, it IS your responsibility. That Soldier IS your Soldier because you outrank them. Also, if you are anything over a Sergeant, it IS your responsibility to get involved and fix something, regardless of where it is or when it is found! If you feel it isn't, then you are in the category of the ones that should NOT be retained, and should be forced out and back to civilian life. A TRUE NCO is one who has no care as to what someone else will think if they make a correction or enforce a standard. Where I am currently stationed, I have personally seen NCO's IN UNIFORM who fail to meet the standards of AR 670-1, regarding haircuts. If you are a Noncommissioned Officer, you should NEVER have a fellow NCO tell you that you need a haircut. If this is you, then YOU are the one letting down the Corps of Noncommissioned Officers. Be the standard bearer- set the example for others to follow. If you can't, or don't think it is YOUR responsibility, then it is time for you to go!! NOONE promotes me, except for me. I learned that when I was a PV2 in 1987.

Response by SGT(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 3 at 2013 1:14 PM

2013-10-03T13:14:27-04:00

I say let the people who don't want to be soldiers get out its plain and simple. If you can't adhere to the rules and regulations you need to go. APFT Failures if you fail 3 times back to back gone. All the policies and regulations are there for a reason if leaders held all their soldiers to 1 standard and 1 standard only and that is being a soldier that meets height and weight, follow rules and regulations, that has competence in their jobs and as while tactical side for the none tactical personnel, then the army would downsize itself. The issue now is before the army was trying to meet numbers and that's all basically left now is numbers and not soldiers.

Response by SPC Brian Brown made Oct 3 at 2013 1:15 PM

2013-10-03T13:15:51-04:00

I feel that their should be waivers for those who have something on their record like myself which is why I was released and I served 4 yr 3 mo  which a yr of that was in Afghanistan and have to leave AD.... Not than anyone cares or what not, but its the simple fact that people like myself that loved being in the Army and would give/do ABSOLUTELY ANYTHING to get back in and be able to wear the uniform again to show to those around me what I really enjoy doing. But I know God will allow me to get back in if it's meant to be!!! And many of days I think of being back in the Army AD and knowing it means alot not only to myself but others more importantly my wife and kids. It's NOT about the paycheck or health care, that is irrelevant, it's about doing a job and doing something you want to do!! However, I may not be able to get back in, but maybe it will work itself out!  Godspeed to those going downrange, and may the Good Lord be with you in every step of the way.... Don't forget to thank Him for allowing you to get up each and every day and the food you eat. Because as long as you trust Him, he will provide and PREVAIL :)<div><br></div><div>Thanks</div><div>Sincerely, </div><div>Brian Brown</div>

Response by SPC Alois J Lohn made Oct 3 at 2013 1:16 PM

2013-10-03T13:16:37-04:00

1LT hit the nail right on the head.

Response by SSG Albert G Sergel made Oct 3 at 2013 1:49 PM

2013-10-03T13:49:50-04:00

Do your job and keep your nose clean.That was my fathers advice when I enlisted a WW2 and Korean war Vet holds true to this day.

Response by TSgt Joseph Adams made Oct 3 at 2013 2:06 PM

2013-10-03T14:06:35-04:00

Always consider the amount of training and loyalty that has come from the Military Member. If removed too early, you have wasted the resources to train which could be more then you save by eliminating the Military Member of Work Slot They fill.

Response by SCPO Del Wolverton made Oct 3 at 2013 2:07 PM

2013-10-03T14:07:12-04:00

<p>Having retired from the Navy in 1982, I probably cannot speak to the most current servicemen and leaders, but, I do stay current on what is going on in the world. My first concern for the country stems from the errant messages I have read so far from the other responses. </p><p> </p><p>1. The brightest and quickest of the servicemen may or may not be the most dedicated to the country. These two concepts need to be considered apart from each other, during my years of service, as a Senior Chief and Command Senior Enlisted Advisor, I could always depend on the "followers", but not always the "leaders"!</p><p> </p><p>2. Cost effective service has to be the result of more followers than leaders, you get more bang for the buck, so provide better for the followers, by reducing the number of leaders.</p><p> </p><p>3. Do the same at the Officer level, find dedicated young officers who want to be leaders in the military of the greatest country on earth, let them make "learned" decisions, and retire some of the top level officers.</p><p> </p><p>The net result will be a younger, leaner and more dedicated military. As for those who are Bright-Sparks, move them to instructor duty or incentive duty of some kind to keep them, but only if they have passed the "dedicated" standard.</p><p> </p><p>Thank you one and all for your service.</p>

Response by SPC Steve Loker made Oct 3 at 2013 2:30 PM

2013-10-03T14:30:13-04:00

Support politicians who still believe that America as a
whole is more important than their own political careers or private agendas.

Response by 1LT Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 3 at 2013 2:57 PM

2013-10-03T14:57:06-04:00

With the recent drawdown, Officers should clearly know where they stand amongst peers on the OERs to come which include mandatory quarterly or bi-annual counselings and an initial counseling. There is no easy way to tackle this.