Force structure

[pecunium]

Recall I mentioned the recall of the IRR, and the new policies on retirement, and the stop losses, and now we have the request to extend some RC soldiers beyond the 24 month mark.

Recall I also mentioned that officers were subject to call up, unless they actually resigned their commissions (OK, perhaps I didn't go into that much detail but I did say they could be recalled).

It's happening. A 67 year old COL(ret) has been recalled to active duty. Unlike Gen. Schoomaker, he is less happy about it.

Seems, what with a 17 percent incidence of PTSD, and some niggling little problems like a higher than normal (even for the army, which, by virtue of the strains, and the age ranges has a higher than normal) rate of suicide (we had one at Dogwood, though it was listed as an accidental death. Our chaplain came back and said it was a suicide... hard to explain away an accidental discharge which happened after the pistol was cleaned and reassembled, even if one discounted the placement of the wound), that they need psychiatrists, and his number came up... seven years after he retired.

But, not to worry, because the Air Force and the Navy are doing fine. They are offering early outs (as much as 12 months) with no penalties to first term enlistees because they have (sit down, it's a deusy) 50,000 too many people.

Any wonder why the Army feels used, and the RC feels abused?

Comments

[wcg.livejournal.com]

Any wonder why the Army feels used?

Kinda like a used condom, I'd imagine. I feel for you guys.

[ex-soothemys349.livejournal.com]

Talk about military-eese! TK you're killin' me.

Anyway, doesn't make sense to me why they'd be calling in retirees in one division (if that's what it's called) and have an over-abundance in another. Is there not as much interest in joining the RC (??).

[pecunium.livejournal.com]

It isn't one division. The services do different things, and with different cultures.

The Army has always gotten the short end, of a very rough, stick (though the Marines bitch about the peculiarities of the stick they get too... they have, or ought to, a very specific mission, which requires a willingness to take higher losses, for a short period of time).

But this is painful. More irony, than anything else. Think about it. We have a war going on (two, if one doesn't think Iraq relates to terrorism) and here we are, kicking people out of one service, because we don't need them.

At the same time we have the President (and his SecDef) saying, "No need to increase the size of the Army, they're doing a bang-up job, with what they've got."

While we extend people's contracts, refuse to let them leave, insist on the full term of their obligation (IRR call-ups) won't let them retire at 20 years, and now call some out of retirement, after they've hit that 30 year window.

Oh, and we have a smaller number of people who think joining up, to fight this war, described as the crisis of the age, on which the entire future of the civilised, modern, world depends, is, forget worthwhile, even worth considering.

I have very mixed feelings about a draft, I also have some mixed feelings about the all volunteer army, what I don't have mixed feelings about is this... we are getting shafted, because the folks in charge seem to think loyalty is an absolute, and they forget that fealty runs both ways.

TK

[ex-soothemys349.livejournal.com]

Sounds to me like they don't want to enlist a lot of new people in long term contracts, they'd rather utilize the people they're already paying because they'll want back out asap?

[wcg.livejournal.com]

the Marines bitch about the peculiarities of the stick they get too

It's that "and such other duties as the President may direct" clause in the Marine Corps charter that makes life so interesting in the Corps. We're not just an amphibious landing force, we're expiditionary light infantry with lots of supporting elements.

But you're right. The Army is taking a big BOHICA round in this. The civilian leadership in the Department of the Army and the Department of Defense are taking advantage of you guys' basic loyalty in lots of ways.

[michaelduff.livejournal.com]

Would it help to offer recruitment incentives -- like higher pay and so forth?

Couldn't we just throw money at this?

[pecunium.livejournal.com]

When the Democrats in the House tried to get bills to raise pay, and extend benefits, the Republicans (with White House urging) killed them.

They said it would cost too much, and not really fix the (non-existent) problems.

TK

[sinboy.livejournal.com]

Whatever happened to the whole contracting concept? Jeeze, we've contracted out food service, so why not counseling and psychiatry?

[pecunium.livejournal.com]

Cost.

The argument for food service is that, even with the higher unit cost of contractors (the food is a fixed cost, but soldiers cost less, on average, than contract cooks and servers, even when one factors in the room and board, esp. in a deployment area) the theory is that frees up a number of troops.

We actually do have contracted shrinks... I saw one when I was at Ft. Lewis (I gave honest answer to questions like, "Are things you don't like to think about." "Do you feel disassociated from things," "In the past week have you had trouble sleeping?" It wasn't really fair to the shrink. I wanted him to think I was fine, so he did, but I digress). But they cost more, even than a Colonel.

And they's cost even more if one plans to send them to a combat zone.

And, even at that, they aren't knocking down the doors. The best they are likely to get (if they are good enough to be hired) is about the same as they are making now (and that's with a medium-sized practice) and when they come back they'll have to start, largely from scratch, all over again at building a practice (who wants to bounce from shrink to shrink?).

So it isn't really feasible.

TK