Review of US Military Study Released
Thread Starter
Review of US Military Study Released
An in-depth review of the US Military is saying the US Military is in crisis as a result of a series of problems....recruiting shortfalls, misplaced priorities by Civilian Leadership.
The full Report can be found at this link......
https://www.heritage.org/defense/rep...-and-readiness
The full Report can be found at this link......
https://www.heritage.org/defense/rep...-and-readiness
The following users liked this post:
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,810
Received 136 Likes
on
64 Posts
I wonder if the outgoing CAS has read it?
What a terribly unhelpful, biased and politically divisive document. Direct swipes at, or blame placed on, the Biden administration and linking current policies to 'Marxism'. Oh and an undefined level of racism is ok but acknowledging the level of subjection of non-whites in the US is not ok. Oh and throw-in abortion too, just to keep section of the US happy.
I think this thread will be moved from Military Aviation in reasonably short order!
I think this thread will be moved from Military Aviation in reasonably short order!
I see it is not an independent impartial review.
So it clearly has an agenda (My bold.)
The review was set up by the Heritage Foundation which is a self appointed think tank rather an impartial body
The report should be read in that light.
Purpose
The panel’s mission was (1) to identify personnel policies and practices within the Department of Defense (DOD) that, by reason of their political orientation or other potential for divisiveness, reduce military readiness, impede military recruiting, and undermine retention; and (2) to recommend actions necessary to ensure that the Armed Forces are prepared to protect the nation for the foreseeable future. The primary audience for the panel’s final report are the policymakers in Congress, Administration officials, and the American public.
The panel’s mission was (1) to identify personnel policies and practices within the Department of Defense (DOD) that, by reason of their political orientation or other potential for divisiveness, reduce military readiness, impede military recruiting, and undermine retention; and (2) to recommend actions necessary to ensure that the Armed Forces are prepared to protect the nation for the foreseeable future. The primary audience for the panel’s final report are the policymakers in Congress, Administration officials, and the American public.
The review was set up by the Heritage Foundation which is a self appointed think tank rather an impartial body
Now more than ever, the American people need a champion to preserve the great American experiment and everything good and just that it represents. That’s why The Heritage Foundation exists. We champion policy solutions that benefit all Americans. But Heritage is also much more than a think tank. Every day, Heritage works in our nation’s capital to build an America where freedom, opportunity, prosperity, and civil society flourish.But unlike so many other organizations in Washington, D.C., The Heritage Foundation’s focus isn’t on putting more power into the hands of government—it’s on returning power to the people.
So... more of an opinion than an objective report then? My opinion is that everything's fine.
My evidence base is chats with people who think everything's fine.
CG
My evidence base is chats with people who think everything's fine.
CG
The following users liked this post:
"Every day, Heritage works in our nation’s capital to build an America where"
And we all know what THAT means = providers of swill
regardless of their political orientation
And we all know what THAT means = providers of swill
regardless of their political orientation
Heritage Foundation is responsible for at least 3 Supreme Court justices, possibly 5. Guess which ones.
Know why recruitment might be a problem? Republicans lying about weapons of mass destruction and going after Bin Laden. Literally Vietnam 2.0, followed up by telling veterans to go screw themselves if they need medical care of any kind. It's like no one has noticed the Internet works for almost everyone now.
Know why recruitment might be a problem? Republicans lying about weapons of mass destruction and going after Bin Laden. Literally Vietnam 2.0, followed up by telling veterans to go screw themselves if they need medical care of any kind. It's like no one has noticed the Internet works for almost everyone now.
Thread Starter
My evidence base is chats with people who think everything's fine.
Any of you know of LTGEN McMasters background, education, military, and civilian accomplishments to include his widely acclaimed book on similar issues re senior military and civilian leadership failures leading up to and during the Vietnam War?
You might read "Dereliction of Duty" and compare what is described in it to the current situation and even the lead up to and conduct of the Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan before you get too far ahead. of yourselves.
We should learn from History even if we do not like its lessons.
If McMasters was willing to put his name and reputation behind the Report I am willing to consider what it has to say even if I might not fully agree with all it has to say.
What I take from the Report is the question about the "priorities" being assigned to various training content and funding which should be based upon the mission objectives assigned to our Military......American and British.
Despite Manning cutbacks I seem to recall recruitment goals are quite challenged on both sides of the Atlantic and there should be careful objective consideration of the causes.
Have not we been discussing the USAF Single Pilot crewing thing.....the lack of F-35 pilots in the RAF/RN....Army retention and recruitment issues of late?
Perhaps acknowledging your own personal bias might be in order before you point fingers elsewhere.
Can you compare Resume's with McMaster and declare yourself to have a superior insight.....I suggest very few of us can do that with any credibility.
The following 2 users liked this post by SASless:
As for the “everything is fine,” viewpoint, that is certainly in contrast to the many media reports and DoD testimony before congress that the U.S. military is well short of recruiting goals and unprepared for major contingency ops due to depleted munitions stockpiles.
At least McMaster had the sense to resign (or was he sacked) from working in the Trump administration but accepting the post in the first place calls his judgement into question.
-An inordinate amount of time is being spent by senior leadership, and the ranks, on diversity and inclusion issues. While these issues are of huge importance, they have been at the expense of warfighting emphasis. Senior leaders going to focus groups, diversity panels, not wargames. Please do not take this as being opposed to these initiatives, but they have sucked time from primary missions.
-Telework. Sounds good, but leaves those actually at the office doing more and becoming burnt out. Yet we have those that insist we are just as productive while working in our jammies- news flash: we are not.
-hyper focus on chasing certain demographics in recruiting, retention, promotion panels...etc. Again while important, can leave a distaste when most have been accustomed to a "best qualified" criteria.
-Doing more with less. Budgets tight- new missions, no missions dropped.
-Streamlining- you used to have folks do your pay, get your supplies, do your maintenance- but now you have to access an app, talk to a different command, hope you find the right person to help, when you used to just shout over the cube.....
-Unintended consequences of well meaning initiatives such as extensions of maternity and paternal leave. Fathers in our organization were just granted 12 weeks paternal leave, and while well intended, there has been an impact- we just had 5 pilots at the same unit request paternity leave in the same time frame- guess who gets to fill out the duty rotation? Mom/dad can't deploy? Guess we double pump the single guy that just got back......
-Normally high performing individuals not seeking/desiring command positions- no longer seen as worth the BS.
-Coming train wreck of blended retirement. Another well intended (oh and saves money) program intended to give something to those that leave service before fully retirement eligible, but will greatly reduce the incentives towards a 20 year retirement, which was the norm, but will now be sharply reduced. Why stay 'til 20? More will leave at the 8, 10, 12 years mark- these are your most experienced folks.
-Grass is greener syndrome. Good economy, good jobs, telework/remote work....
-Green initiatives. Hot desking, green buildings where the toilets flush poorly, new HQ has purposely fewer parking spots to encourage mass transit, but mass transit is awful at that locale. Having virtual training which is touted as "just as effective" but it pales to butts in seats.
The following 2 users liked this post by sandiego89:
My post was dismissive of a hatchet job by a right leaning think tank. The remarks about my 'evidence and conclusions' really should have been seen for the banter they are!
CG
CG
The following users liked this post:
On logging on to have a look at this report I got a quick survey page 'Do you think America is under threat from a foreign power Yes or No.
I answered No because Anmerica s biggest threat is itself with is division ridden politics and creatures like Trump.
Its a bigger threat than China- who never invaded anyone in thousands of years but they are a powerful economic rival and,
Russia has neither the population size or military effectiveness to confront the US head on, they do a better job encouraging and financing the MAGA clowns
I answered No because Anmerica s biggest threat is itself with is division ridden politics and creatures like Trump.
Its a bigger threat than China- who never invaded anyone in thousands of years but they are a powerful economic rival and,
Russia has neither the population size or military effectiveness to confront the US head on, they do a better job encouraging and financing the MAGA clowns
Time, generally considered to be more impartial than, shall we say, a right wing think tank has a more impartial view.
https://time.com/6260526/army-recruitment-problem-us/
“Similarly, the data doesn’t support the idea that “woke-ism” and a focus on social justice is behind the recruiting gap. As the commanding general of the U.S. Army Recruiting Command, Major General Johnny Davis, told Defense One, “While there are many things that prevent young Americans from enlisting in the military, including a lack of awareness about military life in general, ‘woke-ism’ is not one of them.” This finding has been backed by the latest Army surveys, which queried some 2,400 youth between the ages of 18 to 25 on their attitudes toward the service.”
https://time.com/6260526/army-recruitment-problem-us/
“Similarly, the data doesn’t support the idea that “woke-ism” and a focus on social justice is behind the recruiting gap. As the commanding general of the U.S. Army Recruiting Command, Major General Johnny Davis, told Defense One, “While there are many things that prevent young Americans from enlisting in the military, including a lack of awareness about military life in general, ‘woke-ism’ is not one of them.” This finding has been backed by the latest Army surveys, which queried some 2,400 youth between the ages of 18 to 25 on their attitudes toward the service.”
Thread Starter
Pax,
You might wish to read up on China-Vietnam history.
China invaded Vietnam quite a few times over the years.
Somewhat recent history beginning in 1945 will show the two nations have had wars, invasions, and occupations.
As to the current situation in the USA....not much to argue as lots of problems extant.
China will use economic "war" rather than engage in a "military" war if they are as wise as they have been down through the ages.
You might wish to read up on China-Vietnam history.
China invaded Vietnam quite a few times over the years.
Somewhat recent history beginning in 1945 will show the two nations have had wars, invasions, and occupations.
As to the current situation in the USA....not much to argue as lots of problems extant.
China will use economic "war" rather than engage in a "military" war if they are as wise as they have been down through the ages.
Personally I dont care much about this thread, mainly because I have no idea what your all talking about but the China invasion thing intrigues me. What intrigues me more is how many the USA has invaded since the end of WW2, a little bit of digging produced this small list....not including Vietnam, Laos or Cambodia....
Cuba
Dominican Republic
Guatemala
Nicaragua
Libya x2
Sudan
Iraq x2
Afganistan
Syria
Overthrowing governments is another good one, I'm not going to list them but going from 1945 the total is 67! (some countries counted more than once as different governments)
All the above is checkable facts.
My personal opinion, still dont care.
Cuba
Dominican Republic
Guatemala
Nicaragua
Libya x2
Sudan
Iraq x2
Afganistan
Syria
Overthrowing governments is another good one, I'm not going to list them but going from 1945 the total is 67! (some countries counted more than once as different governments)
All the above is checkable facts.
My personal opinion, still dont care.
Possibly , but at my own modest, uninformed level, I know that I thought that the lunatic Trump would be reined in and guided, once inaugurated ( got that wrong, huh ? ) . I also remember thinking that many very high-level military officers would be consulting The Constitution and other legal documents that clarified exactly what their obligations to POTUS/The Supreme Commander were if they felt his orders were unlawful and how to determine that.
