Posted on Sep 27, 2013
What's the most important thing the military should do while going through this downsizing period?
64.7K
1.87K
661
49
49
0
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>
Posted in these groups: 
Downsizing
Downsizing
Posted 11 y ago
Responses: 502
4
4
0
I think they should use all the money from the downsize and use it to better help the injured war veterans.
(4)
(0)
4
4
0
"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.
(4)
(0)
4
4
0
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.
(4)
(0)
4
4
0
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.
(4)
(0)
4
4
0
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.
(4)
(0)
4
4
0
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...
(4)
(0)
4
4
0
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.
(4)
(0)
3
3
0
As the Army is "downsizing", there are many great opportunities to trim the fat and I think that the issue could be handled in 2 very simple steps.
1- Conduct APFT and height/weight test TO STANDARD. The only change I would make to this is that the test be administered by senior leadership OUTSIDE of the unit being evaluated so as to prevent any "Johnny can't pass a PT test, but he's really friendly and is good at his job" leniency. If they fail any of the events or height/weight, are placed on a remedial PT plan and fail to make any improvements by the time the next APFT comes around, then chapter paperwork needs to be started immediately and executed correctly and quickly. I see so many units that let guys slide because "he's a good guy" or "he's really good at his job". The standard is being upheld by most, but it's very apparent when it's not.
2- Units determine which MOS is overstrength and hold a formation. When all of the Soldiers are formed up, the commander in charge of that formation tells the Soldiers to simply raise their hands if they don't wish to be employed by the Army anymore. Those individuals that raised their hands walk on down to S-1 to collect their clearing papers, file through the finance department to collect their final paycheck, then leave the Army to do as they please in the civilian world. This would be effective in more than one way. Not only would it cut the numbers desired but it would also get the guys/gals that don't want to be in the Army out. Those individuals are a cancer to the force as a whole. They influence a private straight out of basic, highly motivated and eager to learn, to begin to question his decision for joining and bring morale down. To have an Army of Soldiers that all WANT to serve would be a welcome change.
1- Conduct APFT and height/weight test TO STANDARD. The only change I would make to this is that the test be administered by senior leadership OUTSIDE of the unit being evaluated so as to prevent any "Johnny can't pass a PT test, but he's really friendly and is good at his job" leniency. If they fail any of the events or height/weight, are placed on a remedial PT plan and fail to make any improvements by the time the next APFT comes around, then chapter paperwork needs to be started immediately and executed correctly and quickly. I see so many units that let guys slide because "he's a good guy" or "he's really good at his job". The standard is being upheld by most, but it's very apparent when it's not.
2- Units determine which MOS is overstrength and hold a formation. When all of the Soldiers are formed up, the commander in charge of that formation tells the Soldiers to simply raise their hands if they don't wish to be employed by the Army anymore. Those individuals that raised their hands walk on down to S-1 to collect their clearing papers, file through the finance department to collect their final paycheck, then leave the Army to do as they please in the civilian world. This would be effective in more than one way. Not only would it cut the numbers desired but it would also get the guys/gals that don't want to be in the Army out. Those individuals are a cancer to the force as a whole. They influence a private straight out of basic, highly motivated and eager to learn, to begin to question his decision for joining and bring morale down. To have an Army of Soldiers that all WANT to serve would be a welcome change.
(3)
(0)
MSG Reid Zohfeld
If you pass the PT Test then weight should not matter!
I do agree of having outside units admin the test!
I do agree of having outside units admin the test!
(0)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
MSG Zohfield, I'm afraid I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with you when you said weight shouldn't matter if someone is able to pass the PT test. The first part of my disagreement involves weight in correlation to projecting professional appearance. I understand everybody is different and people come in all shapes and sizes. Whether an onlooker is a member of the military or a civilian on the street, a Soldier that projects a "lean and mean" professional appearance is much more likely to earn respect and approval than one that is busting at the seams. If a soldier is overweight because he/she spends some time in the gym due to the amount of muscle (heavier than fat), that soldier will fail to meet height/weight standards yet more than likely go on to pass tape. If anybody eating excessively, not staying in shape, and lacking discipline could join the military, I would imagine we would be speaking German right now. If perception is reality, and most of the time it is, a physically disciplined and fit force is a dominant one. The second part of my disagreement has to do with combat and it's direct correlation to your argument. Soldier A weighs in at 160lbs/200 (rifleman) in combat gear while Soldier B is a big fella, 6'5", 310 lbs/400 (SAW gunner because he can hump the weight) in full kit. Soldier A scores a 300 on the APFT while Soldier B squeaks by with a 185, busts height/weight and tape, but he "passes his PT test" so they deploy. If Soldier B goes down in a firefight, do you honestly think Soldier A has a chance to pick his buddy up and throw him over his shoulder while in full kit and weapon system up while still maintaining security while on patrol, let alone drag him out? While I've always been one to cheer on the underdog, there are some challenges that can't physically be met and I feel a 200 pound weight difference might meet that criteria, especially if Soldier B is unconscious, therefore not providing any help to Soldier A who has to get his buddy who is kind enough to provide a 200 pound weight difference with deadweight. I understand not all jobs in the military are combat oriented, but the standard is put in place because in basic training, everyone learns how to exercise proper firing fundamentals behind an M4 just in case they are ever called upon to leave their desk or wherever it is they work to utilize that skill. Weight standards are put in place for a reason. I think the two I've written about are a couple. I've been wrong before though.
(0)
(0)
MSG John Wirts
I disagree, I have worked with millwrights, and bodybuilders. THEY ARE NOT FAT. I have seen them with bicepts the size of my thighs, six pack abdomen, they were able to out perform the skinny guys who were not overweight, while carrying one of them. But the Army's arbitrary weight standard had them on an over weight watch program. The Army can't seem to find the easily available way to test body fat accurately!!! The submersion test will determine body fat percentage very accurately. But The Army steadfastly refuses to use it, and changes inaccurate tests to intimidate anyone who is not a bean pole.
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
3
3
0
Experience, experience, experience!!
After a Desert Storm we lost ALL of our top personnel to the drawdown. From mechanics to gunners to the top LTs, CPTs in the BN.
Today, it seems like all ANYONE cares about is numbers!
The Army needs to KEEP THE RIGHT PEOPLE and I'm NOT talking about the good ol boy system either. Branch managers watch out (typically) for the chosen few. I think each unit should be able to protect a certain number of personnel, with additional numbers available from their higher HQs' allotment. IF THE NCOs ARE ALLOWED TO HAVE A SIGNIFICANT SAY IN THE MATTER, WE'LL KEEP THE RIGHT PEOPLE. NCOs aren't always as tactful as you'd like them to be, but I've NEVER had an issue with their honesty. Let them get the job done and shrink the force.......they'll get it done. THIS INCLUDES OFFICERS to a certain extent. Obviously not commanders, but those not wearing a green tab.....the SR NCOs are very much aware of the quality of their officers.....they'll tell the truth. Anything less......well, I'm glad I'm retired.......I get depressed when I think of where the Army is going.
(3)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google