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

".......support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God." (Title 10, US Code; Act of 5 May 1960 replacing the wording first adopted in 1789, with amendment effective 5 October 1962).

"............support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So help me God." (DA Form 71, 1 August 1959, for officers.)

This is a loaded question.
Personnel: I have seen the downsizing before and it is not fun!
Soldiers need to meet standards but that’s only one criteria. I have seen the 300 Pt soldiers that commanders love to have been worthless to a unit. I have seen soldiers who are minimal who hold up the unit. Who stays and who goes also has to be judged by their talent, the ones that can think outside the box and outside their job skill. The one answer that will get me going is NOT MY JOB. (That Person needs to go)

Communication:
Soldiers have to be kept inform of up-coming mission! Soldiers who are blindsiding by a event will have a bad attitude which can and will affect the mission.
Commanders need not be YES soldiers because they are afraid of their OER. I always looked at situation in the military as: if it sounds right probably is and if sounds wrong probably are. Like a e-mail my Brigade CSM sent out once. I hope you BN CSM and 1SGT are not making decision in a bubble. This was sent out because no one wanted to clarify the intent of a message.

Spending:
Uniforms should be the same; the boots should be the same. Just because someone in Washington is trying pork package money to their state does not mean the military should have a dozen or so types of daily uniforms and boots. Yes this mean the Marines might have to look like the rest of us but they still are the Marines.
I have seen so much waste in the Military that if I had 1 percent I would be in the top 1percent income holders for taxes. The military need a better understanding of what to buy and how to buy it. Navigation equipment is a good place to start. There is better dager type equipment that anyone can buy cheaper than the ones the military buys.
Look at the junk yards in the states and overseas. The military has thrown away pcs of equipment and parts that are still good for something and cost thousands of dollars.
I have said I could save the Military 100 Billion a year just in waste. The problem is that this a type of economic boost for the economy that is hidden.

The simple and most common answer is to retain the best personnel, but that isn't enough. We still need to maintain a trained fighting force that can be activated in the event of a mojor conflict. This will require an active increase in the National Guard and Reserves. We will still be able to maintain our overall fighting force while reducing total costs.

I'm in complete disagreement with the Military "Downsizing" As a Nation still involved in conflicts across the Globe, The last thing we want to do is downsize our Military strengths. Remember Pearl Harbor, and the harsh lessons we learned ? To Downsize our Military now, is not what we need in America. If we weed out the Slackers across the board,we need to Beef-Up all our Military forces. We don't and can not afford the strength reduction. in the state the World is in now. We are far outnumbered right now. Thats why all the Stop Loss Mess, we got in to. We didn't have the strength to order in fresh troops. We don't want to impose the draft, again, Do We ? Though that is what we will have to do if our Military Strength is compromised. If we allow the reduction, We put America in harms way, or did you all forget 9/11? The weaker our Military Strength the weaker larger countries with the most Military Strengths, will be, and are reviewing this information now. What happens when we are attacked again on Our Great Nations,Land Of THE FREE. It's bound to happen, we haven't fought a war on Our Land in more than 200 years. I think and believe that this "Old Marine" will see invaders on our soil. Reduce this.................!

When it comes to cuts, the largest expense on a financial statement is usually the salary of the people we employ. It's a "no brainer" to start cutting here first. It's easy to execute and has an immediate impact on the bottom line. It's done all the time in corporate America. Finding ways to quickly reduce cost in the future that have a "material impact" on the budget without affecting the salaries of the military personnel should be an ongoing program. It should be the focus of every person from Senior Officer to Junior Enlisted. Reward those individuals.
The issue here is not where we can have the most savings. The issue is identifying where can we realize the greatest savings in the least amount of time. As such, "low hanging fruit" that could substantially reduce cost get passed over because of the amount of time it would take to show the savings. Those programs that take longer to execute but would result in a drastic savings should be identified and officers should be in charge of ensuring continuous progress towards the systematic elimination of those areas. Those in the know who look at this all the time are probably saying, "yea, I know this but how do you do it?" Make cost cutting a program and part of the new military culture. Instill the idea from the first day every person enters the military. Anymore detail and you'll have to hire me as a consultant..... (smile) There are always those who say "we already do that." To them, I would say, if you were successful, there would be less urgency to make the reductions you are currently seeking. (Think GE) Yes, force reduction is a normal response to the reduced need for resources do to a roll back in two wars. However, cost reduction is also a necessary, normal, and ongoing component of daily operations for any successful organization. This is where finance actually has to take the forefront, be assigned a more powerful role and make a greater impact.

CPT Kletzing, it's good to know General Casey is concerned about this issue. I served with his dad when he was commander of the 2nd brigade. I was on my way back when he was so tragically killed at the time he was a Major General. ( Division Command of the 1st Air Cav.) Now to your question. The military is bounded by the oath we take when entering the service, to obey the orders that is passed on to us, even those we don't like! Any thing other than that would be anarchy. I pray this great country NEVER has to experience any thing close to that.
CPT, I am in my eighties, I fought in Korea and Vietnam. I would like to do it all again, maybe, just maybe I could do it a littler better. Thank your for your service.

I am cpl Kiel S. Adams USMC Veteran i believe it to be the best interest of the military to go through cuts backs but keep as many of the good military members as possible instead of kicking them out and recruiting new kids it cost the government more to fully train a service member from scratch than to keep one that already has the experience and knowledge and let him press on if they decide to leave fine but if they are pushing for a reenlistment let them stay i was forced out in 2012 after trying to reenlist 3 times if i was afforded the opportunity to return i would take it in a heartbeat i miss being in the military i have 2 njps on record one was supposed to be scrubbed because of cg waiver but never got there instead of throwing away the ones that want to stay let the ones that want to leave go and keep the good ones if that means we have to cut back on recruiting then so be it at the end of it all i would rather go to war with someone i know standing beside me that has the experience and knowledge than a new person that i may end up babysitting

The most important thing the military should do while downsizing is to provide the best possible transitional training to those service member that will be forced out.

Washington needs to rethink the priorities for downsizing..New weapons are great but we still need boots on the ground..Our military is once again spread too thin..When young men think about their future options as far as joining the military, they need to realize that they are expected to do the same job with less manpower..Maybe they need to cut back on the number of Air Force personnel as well as Navy personnel and put more emphasis on combat troops in the Army and the Marines

With the reduction of personnel staffing, renewed focus should be placed on leadership training, preparation for leadership roles, and re-setting the force structure for the next conflict. History has shown a separation between the retention of E9 grades and losses of E6 through E8 as personnel reset and evaluate career options including TERA. This means the more junior and less experienced leaders will be called upon to fill the void.

Leadership development must be approached with a mindset of developing greater skills, knowledge, and ability each day so when the opportunity comes, the Soldier is ready. The skills of informal leadership need to be exercised, noted, and rewarded.

The end state is we MUST do more with less. The deployment cycle has slowed but for how long and where is the next contingency on our horizon? Prepare today for the battle tomorrow.