We often feel that we live in a high tech, high speed new
generation. We have iPhones, iPads, Tweets, Facebook Friends and LinkedIn
business contacts. The MISO force is pretty much out of Afghanistan and the
deployment rat race seems abated for the moment.
Yet perhaps this is not really the case.
Gilda Radner, the late Saturday Night Live Comedian titled
her biography “It’s always something.”
Interesting this is an apt description
of what is happening in today’s military.
I had a couple of sources for today’s posting, some of my
on-line students at American Military University and a highly competent field
grade officer who I have known for years. Based on these inputs and some
others, it seems as though the Army in particular is retreating into a Garrison
based personality.
This means that ‘requirements’, however well intentioned,
are being dictated down from higher HQ resulting in the prostitution of
training schedules and plans that were laboriously crafted based on the unit’s
missions and the CDR’s assessment of its training needs.
While the issues addressed by these new top down initiatives
are serious and surely merit attention, as a former CDR I believe these issues
are best handled by the units themselves, probably at the BN level down.
Getting out of the garrison or the drill hall provides the
opportunity to practice MOS, soldier and survival skills, and serves to bond
the unit and give everyone a new perspective to consider.
CDRs need to have the confidence to go back up the chain and
push for a direct common sense approach while trying to insure that their
soldiers are prepared to do their jobs under the most adverse conditions.
At least we don’t have the ‘paint the rocks white’ details
we did when I first entered the service, I suspect there is a 21st
century version of this busy work that continues to go on.
Reader feedback encouraged.
3 comments:
Sounds like your post is about leadership failure as opposed to a "garrison" mentality.
While I can't vouch for the veracity of your 'sources' (whomever they may be); I regret to inform you that they they are incomplete in their analysis. The PSYOP Mission continues to march along within Afghanistan, and will do so for at least another year. Those who argue differently are examining the overall picture through a very narrow straw. Typical of our community, though.
"Painting Rocks" is usually a reaction to an ill-attempt at developing a training schedule. While a training schedule may in fact be published, they are often underresourced due to ill-planning. Commanders don't need to be confident in pushing back, per se - they need to spend a few hours adequately planning, resourcing, and ensuring that their subordinate leaders are prepared to conduct training.
At least that is my perspective from my narrow straw.
@Anon - Afghanistan, less troops normally means less support personnel. In this case perhaps contractors are replacing troops to accomplish the mission.
You are correct - less troops means less support personnel.
Although official numbers are not widely available - given that we have between 45,000 and 68,000 currently deployed doesn't seem too small.
True, contractors are augmenting the effort, but I am not sure if they are "replacing" anything.
Post a Comment