billvon 2,471 #201 November 7, 2006 >So are you implying that we don't need to be readily equipped > unless the Pres. intends to send us to war . . . That seems blatantly obvious to me. That's why wars cost more - they require more armor, more ammunition, more food, more fuel, more spare parts etc. When I worked for Grumman, their logistics pipelines operated VERY differently in peacetime vs wartime. What is sufficient for a defensive force may well not be sufficient for an occupying force. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #202 November 7, 2006 QuoteI believe I included the phrase "en masse". No doubt Clinton sent some into harm's way, but not on the scale we've seen in Iraq, and we also didn't have so many casualties. Quote So are you implying that we don't need to be readily equipped unless the Pres. intends to send us to war, do you see that as a valid excuse for Clinton not hustling to get us body armor when it was first available? I suppose I am in a way. I think that it is advisable to keep our military equipped with modern gear, but I also think such expenditures should be correllated to need. Did GWB go balls to the wall on such armor the day he took office or did he significantly ramp up those charges when we had a greatly intensified need for such equipment? We could go nuts and build 10,000 B-2's, but would it be a wise use of tax dollars when we don't need that many (right now)? Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #203 November 7, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuote Under Clinton, you didn't need the body armor quite so much because he wasn't sending you into harm's way en masse. Blues, Dave I'll make sure to pass that along to the families of SFC Shughart and MSG Gordon, among others. I believe I included the phrase "en masse". No doubt Clinton sent some into harm's way, but not on the scale we've seen in Iraq, and we also didn't have so many casualties. Blues, Dave I know you did, Dave...there was no way to keep the other post from looking like a slam on Clinton, otherwise...Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites lawrocket 3 #204 November 7, 2006 QuoteAnyway, back to the point/issue; enlisted GI's are < intelectual than their colleg student counterparts as an average. I bet Lawrocket would agree. I would disagree. I've come across some real idiots in college and the military - officer AND enlisted. I've also come across some really intelligent people in the military (officer and enlisted). I was somewhat of a rogue in the Army, having been counseled numerous times over my interactions with enlisted. I always made it a point to ask them their thoughts and opinions on: 1) What they thought was supposed to happen; 2) What did happen; 3) What went right; 4) Why it went right/How we can keep doing right; 5) What went wrong; and 6) how we can improve it. Those E-2 privates have eyes, ears and minds. Everybody sees things that nobody else does. When told about what others saw, they also may have a way of looking at it that makes sense of what I found unexplainable. They may have brilliant and workable suggestions for dealing with a problem that no REMF Batallion brass has the intellect or experience to fix. Why did my maintenance platoon with the award for best in the RSC? Because I left them alone to do it and let the CW3 in charge know that he was to leave them alone, draw fire from higher, and act as an advisor because those enlisted guys were doing just fine. It was the collective intellect, resourcefulness of those enlisted that got me my promotions. The only thing I did was replace ineffective NCOs with effective ones, tell the NCO's what I wanted, and leave them alone - unless I wanted to learn something from all of them. I never underestimate the intellect of anybody. I never underestimate the guile or cunning of anybody. I let them prove to me their abilities - Forrest Gump was not intelligent, but was resourceful and got everything he could out of what he had. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites GQ_jumper 4 #205 November 7, 2006 That seems blatantly obvious to me. That's why wars cost more - they require more armor, more ammunition, more food, more fuel, more spare parts etc. When I worked for Grumman, their logistics pipelines operated VERY differently in peacetime vs wartime. Quote And all of the quick reaction forces we have in the military? those who are prepared to be on a plane within 18 hours of the call going out, I'm not arguing with you in any way that we can't just dump every penny we have into the latest and greatest so we can have it all at once. But there are instances when we don't have the reaction time needed to field new equipment at the last minute. And the fact that the same units who had body armor in Mogadishu were still the only units 7 years later who had such body armor says a lot. I won't argue with you about logistical channels working differnt in wartime, but we shouldn't be behind the power curve when the war kicks off, it is better to have and not need than need and not have.History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites lawrocket 3 #206 November 7, 2006 Quick response of thoe initial forces is not dependent on the logistics resources short of those that get them to the theater. However, logistics resources determine the maintenance of those quick reaction forces. If the logistics pipeline can't be set up within a couple of days, then they are in trouble. Then the logistics pipeline needs to expand to support the not-so-quick reaction forces that will be arriving. You are right - the quick ones don't have time to field the new equipment. From a military standpoint, they are THE LAST people you would want fielding that new equipment. New equipment is subject to breakdown while kinks are worn out. New equipment also requires new training. Finally, new equipment often is so new that they don't know how to utilize it. Take the F-117 in the Gulf War. It wasn't until they started trying it that they realized how to best use it. Another example? In Panama, the Rangers pulled the 90mm recoilless rifle out of mothballs. It turned out that in Panama City's MOUT terrain, the modern rocket-powered weapons did not have sufficient arming distances. So they pulled those Korean War vintage weapons (only a few lifer sergeants even knew how to use them) and trained with those. You need proven technologies for those forces. Only when you have a foothold do you want to use experimental technologies. That's when the price starts to skyrocket. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 1,679 #207 November 7, 2006 QuoteYep - military people are below average. I guess all those companies that actively recruit ex-enlisted and ex-officers into their ranks at much higher rates than college grads are wrong. I'm assuming that my own company which has a much higher retention, promotion and success rate with employees hired from the military over those from the private sector is part of some conspiracy. This trend actually surprised me greatly, my original assumption was that the military is so big, that it would actually just be reflective of the normal population with no apparent differences. But nearly everywhere I look, those with military backgrounds seems to be more successful than those that don't have it. But that might just be Fortune 100 companies, not the real world. I'm sure non-military types do just fine at Starbucks. A few years ago I was on a USAF "Illinois Civic Leaders" tour, one of whom was the then president of McDonalds. At every stop the officers nearing retirement swarmed around him, but he largely ignored them. Finally we had lunch in the chief's mess at Scott AFB, ad he started collecting the cards of the senior chiefs. I asked him why this was and he said his organization didn't need officers, it needed chiefs - people that could actually get things done.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jcd11235 0 #208 November 7, 2006 Just my $.02: When I was in an Army cohort unit, for which only soldiers who had scored in the upper 50% on the ASVAB, my ASVAB score was in the top 3-5 of the battery (artillery company). My lowest line score was my GT score, which was only 125. Now that I am in a university, I seriously doubt I am anywhere near that close to the top with respect to other students. I have to take GQ's assessment with a grain of salt, since SF troops tend to be among the brightest available. I don't think his observable sample is representative of the entire Army. When I was in in the early to mid nineties, very few enlisted troops took college courses. There were also very few enlisted troops that entered the military with a significant amount of college credit. However, that was over a decade ago, and I am not qualified to say things are similar now. Honestly, I don't think Lucky is much more qualified, based on the info given in his posts. Can you two just agree to disagree?Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites matthewcline 0 #209 November 7, 2006 My post is not about a SOF unit but a good ole' regular set of Joe's in the 101st ABN DIV (AASLT). It is becoming more and more typical. The current system had to be lowered to allow what we call "cat 4's" in, lucky calls them College freshmen.An Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jcd11235 0 #210 November 7, 2006 QuoteMy post is not about a SOF unit but a good ole' regular set of Joe's in the 101st ABN DIV (AASLT). What is the predominate MOS of the unit? (Note that I'm not trying to prove you wrong.)Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites GQ_jumper 4 #211 November 7, 2006 I have to take GQ's assessment with a grain of salt, since SF troops tend to be among the brightest available. I don't think his observable sample is representative of the entire Army. Quote I have never said that SF was a representation of the entire military, I mentioned a few examples citing my team mates and selection class. Most of the stats in my argument as I mentioned earlier were taking from Army studies on the subject, the military conduts these every year and lists the stats about education among the ranks, I didn't give exact figures as I don't have those stats on hand, I am looking for them though, but to the best of my knowledge they were at a pretty good level. Please don't take my post as trying to attack you in any way, I was just restating where I got my info from. In recent years I have been pretty impressed with how we are seeing more and more people come in with, or pursue college during their time in. I love the program I'm in right now, I get a certain amount to spend on college every year that is 100 percent paid for, after that it goes to 50 percent assistance if I remember correctly.History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jcd11235 0 #212 November 7, 2006 Quote I have to take GQ's assessment with a grain of salt, since SF troops tend to be among the brightest available. I don't think his observable sample is representative of the entire Army. Quote I have never said that SF was a representation of the entire military, I mentioned a few examples citing my team mates and selection class. Most of the stats in my argument as I mentioned earlier were taking from Army studies on the subject, the military conduts these every year and lists the stats about education among the ranks, I didn't give exact figures as I don't have those stats on hand, I am looking for them though, but to the best of my knowledge they were at a pretty good level. Please don't take my post as trying to attack you in any way, I was just restating where I got my info from. In recent years I have been pretty impressed with how we are seeing more and more people come in with, or pursue college during their time in. I love the program I'm in right now, I get a certain amount to spend on college every year that is 100 percent paid for, after that it goes to 50 percent assistance if I remember correctly. I missed the part in your posts about the info coming from Army studies. Sorry about that. It can be pretty easy to get lost in an active thread sometimes. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites GQ_jumper 4 #213 November 7, 2006 Quick response of thoe initial forces is not dependent on the logistics resources short of those that get them to the theater. However, logistics resources determine the maintenance of those quick reaction forces. If the logistics pipeline can't be set up within a couple of days, then they are in trouble. Then the logistics pipeline needs to expand to support the not-so-quick reaction forces that will be arriving. Quote I agree with you completely on that matter, I was more gearing my argument towards the body/vehicle armor situation. My point was that you shouldn't wait until a crisis breaks out to start preparing your soldiers for war, if the Ranger Regiment has to up and jump into N. Korea tomorrow it doesn't do them any good if the logistical train shows up a day later with their body armor. My original argument was that Bush can't be totally blamed for soldiers not having body armor at the onset of the Iraq war when for the most part the same number of people had the armor from 93-99, there probably is more he could have done, but there is far more that the previous administration could have done as well. QuoteSo they pulled those Korean War vintage weapons (only a few lifer sergeants even knew how to use them) and trained with those. Hey now, don't forget us young buck SF guys I might not have been around when they were commonplace but I've gotten my trigger time on a 90History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites matthewcline 0 #214 November 7, 2006 About 30% Infantry, 20% Transportation, 10% Artillery, 10% Combat Engineer, 5% Personel, 10% Mechanics, 5 % Supply, 5% Med, 5% Riggers. These are rough figures, SWAG if you will. My Team is 9 Infantry and 1 Artillery. They combined have 12 Degrees. 3 more will graduate with 4 year degrees this spring (you college folks know how you can have multiple degrees at one time). Bringing the total to 15 Degrees in the Combat Arms Team alone (that is the bunch of mindless brain washed dumb asses referred to in a previous post). They are from the "line guys" of the 101st. They have done this additional schooling on there own time adding to what they had when they joined. I have a realtor (Infantry guy) with a degree in realestate law, PA (Infantry guy), PR/marketing (Infantry guy), Criminilist (SP) (Artillery guy), 2 History dudes (Infantry), 3 Business dudes. I think eclectic is a good definition. Back to the original post, 5 of them voted strait DEM today. 1 didn't vote and 3 did the REP deal. 1 voted half and half (me), depended on the state issues since all but 2 are absentee.An Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites GQ_jumper 4 #215 November 7, 2006 I missed the part in your posts about the info coming from Army studies. Sorry about that. It can be pretty easy to get lost in an active thread sometimes. Quote No worries, I know I pointed to my own peers as examples plenty of times. Let me see what I can't dig up for everyone for hard numbers real quick though. Gimme a few minutes if ya wouldHistory does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jcd11235 0 #216 November 7, 2006 QuoteAbout 30% Infantry, 20% Transportation, 10% Artillery, 10% Combat Engineer, 5% Personel, 10% Mechanics, 5 % Supply, 5% Med, 5% Riggers. That seems like a pretty broad sample. Thanks.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites juanesky 0 #217 November 7, 2006 You are describing the SOP's for AAR (After action reviews). Are you aware of this?"According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites matthewcline 0 #218 November 7, 2006 Yes, he is describing that to a "T". Since it has been an Army Standard since before I joined, it kind of shoots the "none analytical" idea down huh? (Law Rocket wasn't saying that, just to be clear)An Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites lawrocket 3 #219 November 8, 2006 QuoteYou are describing the SOP's for AAR (After action reviews). Are you aware of this? Yep. I will admit I DID take it further than that. I'd bring in lower enlisted to ask them about things for operational planning. Practicing convoys? Those privates and specialists were the FIRST to get put as convoy or serial commander. They knew what went into it, and those that had their shot at commanding it never dragged ass again. It was also to prove a point - (straight outta TC 25-20) - if the soliders were stupid, or lacked intelligence, the AAR process would not happen. (I guess my time as an Observer/Controller changed my outlook). The enlisted ranks would not be speaking their minds about issues and making suggestions. It is an inherent recognition of what I realized - that group of guys is smarter than I could ever imagine. p.s. - I DID get counseled and questioned frequently about having privates doing stuff privates shouldn't be doing, like convoy command, preparing operations orders, helping me with gathering information, etc. They thought officers and NCO's should do that. I never agreed with the counseling, never signed it, and stillnever got punished for it. Those troops knew something - they knew that I really knew my shit. And I still asked for their input. Always. My decision, their input. It worked. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites GQ_jumper 4 #220 November 8, 2006 Those troops knew something - they knew that I really knew my shit. And I still asked for their input. Always. My decision, their input. It worked.Quote my team works much the same way and I have to agree that it works. This is the best team i've ever been on, not just in terms of personality dynamics, but in the way we operate and make things happen. And just about any time a decision needs to be made that affects the entire team the team daddy asks for everyone's input, including those who haven't been around very long.History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites juanesky 0 #221 November 8, 2006 Yes he is, I just wanted to make sure. In my MP unit everyone get excercises in getting to know the job well, on patrols, convoys ETC> They even allow all non MP personnel, (Used to be one, now medic) qualify in all the unit's weapons as well, figures if something goes down in the end everyone should know the job, regardless of what happens. Good read pal, and am sorry for the problem you got into for making sure everyone knew the job."According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rehmwa 2 #222 November 8, 2006 Quote including those who haven't been around very long. really? but with them being "stuck" in the military with their "low IQs", isn't it kind of mean for you guys to just tease them with your shams of respect and comradship? maybe if they just apply themselves and get out of service and go to college...... ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites ExAFO 0 #223 November 8, 2006 Instead of poo-poo'ing their service, thank them for defending your country.Illinois needs a CCW Law. NOW. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 1,679 #224 November 8, 2006 QuoteInstead of poo-poo'ing their service, thank them for defending your country. I do indeed. I'm not so sure about invading someone else's country, although the CinC is responsible for that stupid decision.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites GQ_jumper 4 #225 November 8, 2006 Quotereally? but with them being "stuck" in the military with their "low IQs", isn't it kind of mean for you guys to just tease them with your shams of respect and comradship? it would be kind of mean, but luckily they are brainwashed dummies and really think they are the new leaders, especially when we give them a badge made of of construction paper and decorated with glitter that says "Leedr" Quotemaybe if they just apply themselves and get out of service and go to college...... don't forget that even if we go to college we still have less intellect than those who went straight out of high school and will end up taking ten years to complete a degree and then making crap for a living afterwards, or so i've heard that's how it works, i think i read it in a history book somewhere Go DenverHistory does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next Page 9 of 9 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing × Sign In Sign Up Forums Dropzones Classifieds Gear Indoor Articles Photos Videos Calendar Stolen Fatalities Leaderboard Activity Back Activity All Activity My Activity Streams Unread Content Content I Started
mnealtx 0 #203 November 7, 2006 QuoteQuoteQuote Under Clinton, you didn't need the body armor quite so much because he wasn't sending you into harm's way en masse. Blues, Dave I'll make sure to pass that along to the families of SFC Shughart and MSG Gordon, among others. I believe I included the phrase "en masse". No doubt Clinton sent some into harm's way, but not on the scale we've seen in Iraq, and we also didn't have so many casualties. Blues, Dave I know you did, Dave...there was no way to keep the other post from looking like a slam on Clinton, otherwise...Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #204 November 7, 2006 QuoteAnyway, back to the point/issue; enlisted GI's are < intelectual than their colleg student counterparts as an average. I bet Lawrocket would agree. I would disagree. I've come across some real idiots in college and the military - officer AND enlisted. I've also come across some really intelligent people in the military (officer and enlisted). I was somewhat of a rogue in the Army, having been counseled numerous times over my interactions with enlisted. I always made it a point to ask them their thoughts and opinions on: 1) What they thought was supposed to happen; 2) What did happen; 3) What went right; 4) Why it went right/How we can keep doing right; 5) What went wrong; and 6) how we can improve it. Those E-2 privates have eyes, ears and minds. Everybody sees things that nobody else does. When told about what others saw, they also may have a way of looking at it that makes sense of what I found unexplainable. They may have brilliant and workable suggestions for dealing with a problem that no REMF Batallion brass has the intellect or experience to fix. Why did my maintenance platoon with the award for best in the RSC? Because I left them alone to do it and let the CW3 in charge know that he was to leave them alone, draw fire from higher, and act as an advisor because those enlisted guys were doing just fine. It was the collective intellect, resourcefulness of those enlisted that got me my promotions. The only thing I did was replace ineffective NCOs with effective ones, tell the NCO's what I wanted, and leave them alone - unless I wanted to learn something from all of them. I never underestimate the intellect of anybody. I never underestimate the guile or cunning of anybody. I let them prove to me their abilities - Forrest Gump was not intelligent, but was resourceful and got everything he could out of what he had. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GQ_jumper 4 #205 November 7, 2006 That seems blatantly obvious to me. That's why wars cost more - they require more armor, more ammunition, more food, more fuel, more spare parts etc. When I worked for Grumman, their logistics pipelines operated VERY differently in peacetime vs wartime. Quote And all of the quick reaction forces we have in the military? those who are prepared to be on a plane within 18 hours of the call going out, I'm not arguing with you in any way that we can't just dump every penny we have into the latest and greatest so we can have it all at once. But there are instances when we don't have the reaction time needed to field new equipment at the last minute. And the fact that the same units who had body armor in Mogadishu were still the only units 7 years later who had such body armor says a lot. I won't argue with you about logistical channels working differnt in wartime, but we shouldn't be behind the power curve when the war kicks off, it is better to have and not need than need and not have.History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites lawrocket 3 #206 November 7, 2006 Quick response of thoe initial forces is not dependent on the logistics resources short of those that get them to the theater. However, logistics resources determine the maintenance of those quick reaction forces. If the logistics pipeline can't be set up within a couple of days, then they are in trouble. Then the logistics pipeline needs to expand to support the not-so-quick reaction forces that will be arriving. You are right - the quick ones don't have time to field the new equipment. From a military standpoint, they are THE LAST people you would want fielding that new equipment. New equipment is subject to breakdown while kinks are worn out. New equipment also requires new training. Finally, new equipment often is so new that they don't know how to utilize it. Take the F-117 in the Gulf War. It wasn't until they started trying it that they realized how to best use it. Another example? In Panama, the Rangers pulled the 90mm recoilless rifle out of mothballs. It turned out that in Panama City's MOUT terrain, the modern rocket-powered weapons did not have sufficient arming distances. So they pulled those Korean War vintage weapons (only a few lifer sergeants even knew how to use them) and trained with those. You need proven technologies for those forces. Only when you have a foothold do you want to use experimental technologies. That's when the price starts to skyrocket. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 1,679 #207 November 7, 2006 QuoteYep - military people are below average. I guess all those companies that actively recruit ex-enlisted and ex-officers into their ranks at much higher rates than college grads are wrong. I'm assuming that my own company which has a much higher retention, promotion and success rate with employees hired from the military over those from the private sector is part of some conspiracy. This trend actually surprised me greatly, my original assumption was that the military is so big, that it would actually just be reflective of the normal population with no apparent differences. But nearly everywhere I look, those with military backgrounds seems to be more successful than those that don't have it. But that might just be Fortune 100 companies, not the real world. I'm sure non-military types do just fine at Starbucks. A few years ago I was on a USAF "Illinois Civic Leaders" tour, one of whom was the then president of McDonalds. At every stop the officers nearing retirement swarmed around him, but he largely ignored them. Finally we had lunch in the chief's mess at Scott AFB, ad he started collecting the cards of the senior chiefs. I asked him why this was and he said his organization didn't need officers, it needed chiefs - people that could actually get things done.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jcd11235 0 #208 November 7, 2006 Just my $.02: When I was in an Army cohort unit, for which only soldiers who had scored in the upper 50% on the ASVAB, my ASVAB score was in the top 3-5 of the battery (artillery company). My lowest line score was my GT score, which was only 125. Now that I am in a university, I seriously doubt I am anywhere near that close to the top with respect to other students. I have to take GQ's assessment with a grain of salt, since SF troops tend to be among the brightest available. I don't think his observable sample is representative of the entire Army. When I was in in the early to mid nineties, very few enlisted troops took college courses. There were also very few enlisted troops that entered the military with a significant amount of college credit. However, that was over a decade ago, and I am not qualified to say things are similar now. Honestly, I don't think Lucky is much more qualified, based on the info given in his posts. Can you two just agree to disagree?Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites matthewcline 0 #209 November 7, 2006 My post is not about a SOF unit but a good ole' regular set of Joe's in the 101st ABN DIV (AASLT). It is becoming more and more typical. The current system had to be lowered to allow what we call "cat 4's" in, lucky calls them College freshmen.An Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jcd11235 0 #210 November 7, 2006 QuoteMy post is not about a SOF unit but a good ole' regular set of Joe's in the 101st ABN DIV (AASLT). What is the predominate MOS of the unit? (Note that I'm not trying to prove you wrong.)Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites GQ_jumper 4 #211 November 7, 2006 I have to take GQ's assessment with a grain of salt, since SF troops tend to be among the brightest available. I don't think his observable sample is representative of the entire Army. Quote I have never said that SF was a representation of the entire military, I mentioned a few examples citing my team mates and selection class. Most of the stats in my argument as I mentioned earlier were taking from Army studies on the subject, the military conduts these every year and lists the stats about education among the ranks, I didn't give exact figures as I don't have those stats on hand, I am looking for them though, but to the best of my knowledge they were at a pretty good level. Please don't take my post as trying to attack you in any way, I was just restating where I got my info from. In recent years I have been pretty impressed with how we are seeing more and more people come in with, or pursue college during their time in. I love the program I'm in right now, I get a certain amount to spend on college every year that is 100 percent paid for, after that it goes to 50 percent assistance if I remember correctly.History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jcd11235 0 #212 November 7, 2006 Quote I have to take GQ's assessment with a grain of salt, since SF troops tend to be among the brightest available. I don't think his observable sample is representative of the entire Army. Quote I have never said that SF was a representation of the entire military, I mentioned a few examples citing my team mates and selection class. Most of the stats in my argument as I mentioned earlier were taking from Army studies on the subject, the military conduts these every year and lists the stats about education among the ranks, I didn't give exact figures as I don't have those stats on hand, I am looking for them though, but to the best of my knowledge they were at a pretty good level. Please don't take my post as trying to attack you in any way, I was just restating where I got my info from. In recent years I have been pretty impressed with how we are seeing more and more people come in with, or pursue college during their time in. I love the program I'm in right now, I get a certain amount to spend on college every year that is 100 percent paid for, after that it goes to 50 percent assistance if I remember correctly. I missed the part in your posts about the info coming from Army studies. Sorry about that. It can be pretty easy to get lost in an active thread sometimes. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites GQ_jumper 4 #213 November 7, 2006 Quick response of thoe initial forces is not dependent on the logistics resources short of those that get them to the theater. However, logistics resources determine the maintenance of those quick reaction forces. If the logistics pipeline can't be set up within a couple of days, then they are in trouble. Then the logistics pipeline needs to expand to support the not-so-quick reaction forces that will be arriving. Quote I agree with you completely on that matter, I was more gearing my argument towards the body/vehicle armor situation. My point was that you shouldn't wait until a crisis breaks out to start preparing your soldiers for war, if the Ranger Regiment has to up and jump into N. Korea tomorrow it doesn't do them any good if the logistical train shows up a day later with their body armor. My original argument was that Bush can't be totally blamed for soldiers not having body armor at the onset of the Iraq war when for the most part the same number of people had the armor from 93-99, there probably is more he could have done, but there is far more that the previous administration could have done as well. QuoteSo they pulled those Korean War vintage weapons (only a few lifer sergeants even knew how to use them) and trained with those. Hey now, don't forget us young buck SF guys I might not have been around when they were commonplace but I've gotten my trigger time on a 90History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites matthewcline 0 #214 November 7, 2006 About 30% Infantry, 20% Transportation, 10% Artillery, 10% Combat Engineer, 5% Personel, 10% Mechanics, 5 % Supply, 5% Med, 5% Riggers. These are rough figures, SWAG if you will. My Team is 9 Infantry and 1 Artillery. They combined have 12 Degrees. 3 more will graduate with 4 year degrees this spring (you college folks know how you can have multiple degrees at one time). Bringing the total to 15 Degrees in the Combat Arms Team alone (that is the bunch of mindless brain washed dumb asses referred to in a previous post). They are from the "line guys" of the 101st. They have done this additional schooling on there own time adding to what they had when they joined. I have a realtor (Infantry guy) with a degree in realestate law, PA (Infantry guy), PR/marketing (Infantry guy), Criminilist (SP) (Artillery guy), 2 History dudes (Infantry), 3 Business dudes. I think eclectic is a good definition. Back to the original post, 5 of them voted strait DEM today. 1 didn't vote and 3 did the REP deal. 1 voted half and half (me), depended on the state issues since all but 2 are absentee.An Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites GQ_jumper 4 #215 November 7, 2006 I missed the part in your posts about the info coming from Army studies. Sorry about that. It can be pretty easy to get lost in an active thread sometimes. Quote No worries, I know I pointed to my own peers as examples plenty of times. Let me see what I can't dig up for everyone for hard numbers real quick though. Gimme a few minutes if ya wouldHistory does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jcd11235 0 #216 November 7, 2006 QuoteAbout 30% Infantry, 20% Transportation, 10% Artillery, 10% Combat Engineer, 5% Personel, 10% Mechanics, 5 % Supply, 5% Med, 5% Riggers. That seems like a pretty broad sample. Thanks.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites juanesky 0 #217 November 7, 2006 You are describing the SOP's for AAR (After action reviews). Are you aware of this?"According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites matthewcline 0 #218 November 7, 2006 Yes, he is describing that to a "T". Since it has been an Army Standard since before I joined, it kind of shoots the "none analytical" idea down huh? (Law Rocket wasn't saying that, just to be clear)An Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites lawrocket 3 #219 November 8, 2006 QuoteYou are describing the SOP's for AAR (After action reviews). Are you aware of this? Yep. I will admit I DID take it further than that. I'd bring in lower enlisted to ask them about things for operational planning. Practicing convoys? Those privates and specialists were the FIRST to get put as convoy or serial commander. They knew what went into it, and those that had their shot at commanding it never dragged ass again. It was also to prove a point - (straight outta TC 25-20) - if the soliders were stupid, or lacked intelligence, the AAR process would not happen. (I guess my time as an Observer/Controller changed my outlook). The enlisted ranks would not be speaking their minds about issues and making suggestions. It is an inherent recognition of what I realized - that group of guys is smarter than I could ever imagine. p.s. - I DID get counseled and questioned frequently about having privates doing stuff privates shouldn't be doing, like convoy command, preparing operations orders, helping me with gathering information, etc. They thought officers and NCO's should do that. I never agreed with the counseling, never signed it, and stillnever got punished for it. Those troops knew something - they knew that I really knew my shit. And I still asked for their input. Always. My decision, their input. It worked. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites GQ_jumper 4 #220 November 8, 2006 Those troops knew something - they knew that I really knew my shit. And I still asked for their input. Always. My decision, their input. It worked.Quote my team works much the same way and I have to agree that it works. This is the best team i've ever been on, not just in terms of personality dynamics, but in the way we operate and make things happen. And just about any time a decision needs to be made that affects the entire team the team daddy asks for everyone's input, including those who haven't been around very long.History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites juanesky 0 #221 November 8, 2006 Yes he is, I just wanted to make sure. In my MP unit everyone get excercises in getting to know the job well, on patrols, convoys ETC> They even allow all non MP personnel, (Used to be one, now medic) qualify in all the unit's weapons as well, figures if something goes down in the end everyone should know the job, regardless of what happens. Good read pal, and am sorry for the problem you got into for making sure everyone knew the job."According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rehmwa 2 #222 November 8, 2006 Quote including those who haven't been around very long. really? but with them being "stuck" in the military with their "low IQs", isn't it kind of mean for you guys to just tease them with your shams of respect and comradship? maybe if they just apply themselves and get out of service and go to college...... ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites ExAFO 0 #223 November 8, 2006 Instead of poo-poo'ing their service, thank them for defending your country.Illinois needs a CCW Law. NOW. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 1,679 #224 November 8, 2006 QuoteInstead of poo-poo'ing their service, thank them for defending your country. I do indeed. I'm not so sure about invading someone else's country, although the CinC is responsible for that stupid decision.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites GQ_jumper 4 #225 November 8, 2006 Quotereally? but with them being "stuck" in the military with their "low IQs", isn't it kind of mean for you guys to just tease them with your shams of respect and comradship? it would be kind of mean, but luckily they are brainwashed dummies and really think they are the new leaders, especially when we give them a badge made of of construction paper and decorated with glitter that says "Leedr" Quotemaybe if they just apply themselves and get out of service and go to college...... don't forget that even if we go to college we still have less intellect than those who went straight out of high school and will end up taking ten years to complete a degree and then making crap for a living afterwards, or so i've heard that's how it works, i think i read it in a history book somewhere Go DenverHistory does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next Page 9 of 9 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing × Sign In Sign Up Forums Dropzones Classifieds Gear Indoor Articles Photos Videos Calendar Stolen Fatalities Leaderboard Activity Back Activity All Activity My Activity Streams Unread Content Content I Started
lawrocket 3 #206 November 7, 2006 Quick response of thoe initial forces is not dependent on the logistics resources short of those that get them to the theater. However, logistics resources determine the maintenance of those quick reaction forces. If the logistics pipeline can't be set up within a couple of days, then they are in trouble. Then the logistics pipeline needs to expand to support the not-so-quick reaction forces that will be arriving. You are right - the quick ones don't have time to field the new equipment. From a military standpoint, they are THE LAST people you would want fielding that new equipment. New equipment is subject to breakdown while kinks are worn out. New equipment also requires new training. Finally, new equipment often is so new that they don't know how to utilize it. Take the F-117 in the Gulf War. It wasn't until they started trying it that they realized how to best use it. Another example? In Panama, the Rangers pulled the 90mm recoilless rifle out of mothballs. It turned out that in Panama City's MOUT terrain, the modern rocket-powered weapons did not have sufficient arming distances. So they pulled those Korean War vintage weapons (only a few lifer sergeants even knew how to use them) and trained with those. You need proven technologies for those forces. Only when you have a foothold do you want to use experimental technologies. That's when the price starts to skyrocket. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,679 #207 November 7, 2006 QuoteYep - military people are below average. I guess all those companies that actively recruit ex-enlisted and ex-officers into their ranks at much higher rates than college grads are wrong. I'm assuming that my own company which has a much higher retention, promotion and success rate with employees hired from the military over those from the private sector is part of some conspiracy. This trend actually surprised me greatly, my original assumption was that the military is so big, that it would actually just be reflective of the normal population with no apparent differences. But nearly everywhere I look, those with military backgrounds seems to be more successful than those that don't have it. But that might just be Fortune 100 companies, not the real world. I'm sure non-military types do just fine at Starbucks. A few years ago I was on a USAF "Illinois Civic Leaders" tour, one of whom was the then president of McDonalds. At every stop the officers nearing retirement swarmed around him, but he largely ignored them. Finally we had lunch in the chief's mess at Scott AFB, ad he started collecting the cards of the senior chiefs. I asked him why this was and he said his organization didn't need officers, it needed chiefs - people that could actually get things done.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #208 November 7, 2006 Just my $.02: When I was in an Army cohort unit, for which only soldiers who had scored in the upper 50% on the ASVAB, my ASVAB score was in the top 3-5 of the battery (artillery company). My lowest line score was my GT score, which was only 125. Now that I am in a university, I seriously doubt I am anywhere near that close to the top with respect to other students. I have to take GQ's assessment with a grain of salt, since SF troops tend to be among the brightest available. I don't think his observable sample is representative of the entire Army. When I was in in the early to mid nineties, very few enlisted troops took college courses. There were also very few enlisted troops that entered the military with a significant amount of college credit. However, that was over a decade ago, and I am not qualified to say things are similar now. Honestly, I don't think Lucky is much more qualified, based on the info given in his posts. Can you two just agree to disagree?Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
matthewcline 0 #209 November 7, 2006 My post is not about a SOF unit but a good ole' regular set of Joe's in the 101st ABN DIV (AASLT). It is becoming more and more typical. The current system had to be lowered to allow what we call "cat 4's" in, lucky calls them College freshmen.An Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #210 November 7, 2006 QuoteMy post is not about a SOF unit but a good ole' regular set of Joe's in the 101st ABN DIV (AASLT). What is the predominate MOS of the unit? (Note that I'm not trying to prove you wrong.)Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GQ_jumper 4 #211 November 7, 2006 I have to take GQ's assessment with a grain of salt, since SF troops tend to be among the brightest available. I don't think his observable sample is representative of the entire Army. Quote I have never said that SF was a representation of the entire military, I mentioned a few examples citing my team mates and selection class. Most of the stats in my argument as I mentioned earlier were taking from Army studies on the subject, the military conduts these every year and lists the stats about education among the ranks, I didn't give exact figures as I don't have those stats on hand, I am looking for them though, but to the best of my knowledge they were at a pretty good level. Please don't take my post as trying to attack you in any way, I was just restating where I got my info from. In recent years I have been pretty impressed with how we are seeing more and more people come in with, or pursue college during their time in. I love the program I'm in right now, I get a certain amount to spend on college every year that is 100 percent paid for, after that it goes to 50 percent assistance if I remember correctly.History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jcd11235 0 #212 November 7, 2006 Quote I have to take GQ's assessment with a grain of salt, since SF troops tend to be among the brightest available. I don't think his observable sample is representative of the entire Army. Quote I have never said that SF was a representation of the entire military, I mentioned a few examples citing my team mates and selection class. Most of the stats in my argument as I mentioned earlier were taking from Army studies on the subject, the military conduts these every year and lists the stats about education among the ranks, I didn't give exact figures as I don't have those stats on hand, I am looking for them though, but to the best of my knowledge they were at a pretty good level. Please don't take my post as trying to attack you in any way, I was just restating where I got my info from. In recent years I have been pretty impressed with how we are seeing more and more people come in with, or pursue college during their time in. I love the program I'm in right now, I get a certain amount to spend on college every year that is 100 percent paid for, after that it goes to 50 percent assistance if I remember correctly. I missed the part in your posts about the info coming from Army studies. Sorry about that. It can be pretty easy to get lost in an active thread sometimes. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites GQ_jumper 4 #213 November 7, 2006 Quick response of thoe initial forces is not dependent on the logistics resources short of those that get them to the theater. However, logistics resources determine the maintenance of those quick reaction forces. If the logistics pipeline can't be set up within a couple of days, then they are in trouble. Then the logistics pipeline needs to expand to support the not-so-quick reaction forces that will be arriving. Quote I agree with you completely on that matter, I was more gearing my argument towards the body/vehicle armor situation. My point was that you shouldn't wait until a crisis breaks out to start preparing your soldiers for war, if the Ranger Regiment has to up and jump into N. Korea tomorrow it doesn't do them any good if the logistical train shows up a day later with their body armor. My original argument was that Bush can't be totally blamed for soldiers not having body armor at the onset of the Iraq war when for the most part the same number of people had the armor from 93-99, there probably is more he could have done, but there is far more that the previous administration could have done as well. QuoteSo they pulled those Korean War vintage weapons (only a few lifer sergeants even knew how to use them) and trained with those. Hey now, don't forget us young buck SF guys I might not have been around when they were commonplace but I've gotten my trigger time on a 90History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites matthewcline 0 #214 November 7, 2006 About 30% Infantry, 20% Transportation, 10% Artillery, 10% Combat Engineer, 5% Personel, 10% Mechanics, 5 % Supply, 5% Med, 5% Riggers. These are rough figures, SWAG if you will. My Team is 9 Infantry and 1 Artillery. They combined have 12 Degrees. 3 more will graduate with 4 year degrees this spring (you college folks know how you can have multiple degrees at one time). Bringing the total to 15 Degrees in the Combat Arms Team alone (that is the bunch of mindless brain washed dumb asses referred to in a previous post). They are from the "line guys" of the 101st. They have done this additional schooling on there own time adding to what they had when they joined. I have a realtor (Infantry guy) with a degree in realestate law, PA (Infantry guy), PR/marketing (Infantry guy), Criminilist (SP) (Artillery guy), 2 History dudes (Infantry), 3 Business dudes. I think eclectic is a good definition. Back to the original post, 5 of them voted strait DEM today. 1 didn't vote and 3 did the REP deal. 1 voted half and half (me), depended on the state issues since all but 2 are absentee.An Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites GQ_jumper 4 #215 November 7, 2006 I missed the part in your posts about the info coming from Army studies. Sorry about that. It can be pretty easy to get lost in an active thread sometimes. Quote No worries, I know I pointed to my own peers as examples plenty of times. Let me see what I can't dig up for everyone for hard numbers real quick though. Gimme a few minutes if ya wouldHistory does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jcd11235 0 #216 November 7, 2006 QuoteAbout 30% Infantry, 20% Transportation, 10% Artillery, 10% Combat Engineer, 5% Personel, 10% Mechanics, 5 % Supply, 5% Med, 5% Riggers. That seems like a pretty broad sample. Thanks.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites juanesky 0 #217 November 7, 2006 You are describing the SOP's for AAR (After action reviews). Are you aware of this?"According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites matthewcline 0 #218 November 7, 2006 Yes, he is describing that to a "T". Since it has been an Army Standard since before I joined, it kind of shoots the "none analytical" idea down huh? (Law Rocket wasn't saying that, just to be clear)An Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites lawrocket 3 #219 November 8, 2006 QuoteYou are describing the SOP's for AAR (After action reviews). Are you aware of this? Yep. I will admit I DID take it further than that. I'd bring in lower enlisted to ask them about things for operational planning. Practicing convoys? Those privates and specialists were the FIRST to get put as convoy or serial commander. They knew what went into it, and those that had their shot at commanding it never dragged ass again. It was also to prove a point - (straight outta TC 25-20) - if the soliders were stupid, or lacked intelligence, the AAR process would not happen. (I guess my time as an Observer/Controller changed my outlook). The enlisted ranks would not be speaking their minds about issues and making suggestions. It is an inherent recognition of what I realized - that group of guys is smarter than I could ever imagine. p.s. - I DID get counseled and questioned frequently about having privates doing stuff privates shouldn't be doing, like convoy command, preparing operations orders, helping me with gathering information, etc. They thought officers and NCO's should do that. I never agreed with the counseling, never signed it, and stillnever got punished for it. Those troops knew something - they knew that I really knew my shit. And I still asked for their input. Always. My decision, their input. It worked. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites GQ_jumper 4 #220 November 8, 2006 Those troops knew something - they knew that I really knew my shit. And I still asked for their input. Always. My decision, their input. It worked.Quote my team works much the same way and I have to agree that it works. This is the best team i've ever been on, not just in terms of personality dynamics, but in the way we operate and make things happen. And just about any time a decision needs to be made that affects the entire team the team daddy asks for everyone's input, including those who haven't been around very long.History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites juanesky 0 #221 November 8, 2006 Yes he is, I just wanted to make sure. In my MP unit everyone get excercises in getting to know the job well, on patrols, convoys ETC> They even allow all non MP personnel, (Used to be one, now medic) qualify in all the unit's weapons as well, figures if something goes down in the end everyone should know the job, regardless of what happens. Good read pal, and am sorry for the problem you got into for making sure everyone knew the job."According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rehmwa 2 #222 November 8, 2006 Quote including those who haven't been around very long. really? but with them being "stuck" in the military with their "low IQs", isn't it kind of mean for you guys to just tease them with your shams of respect and comradship? maybe if they just apply themselves and get out of service and go to college...... ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites ExAFO 0 #223 November 8, 2006 Instead of poo-poo'ing their service, thank them for defending your country.Illinois needs a CCW Law. NOW. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 1,679 #224 November 8, 2006 QuoteInstead of poo-poo'ing their service, thank them for defending your country. I do indeed. I'm not so sure about invading someone else's country, although the CinC is responsible for that stupid decision.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites GQ_jumper 4 #225 November 8, 2006 Quotereally? but with them being "stuck" in the military with their "low IQs", isn't it kind of mean for you guys to just tease them with your shams of respect and comradship? it would be kind of mean, but luckily they are brainwashed dummies and really think they are the new leaders, especially when we give them a badge made of of construction paper and decorated with glitter that says "Leedr" Quotemaybe if they just apply themselves and get out of service and go to college...... don't forget that even if we go to college we still have less intellect than those who went straight out of high school and will end up taking ten years to complete a degree and then making crap for a living afterwards, or so i've heard that's how it works, i think i read it in a history book somewhere Go DenverHistory does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next Page 9 of 9 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
jcd11235 0 #212 November 7, 2006 Quote I have to take GQ's assessment with a grain of salt, since SF troops tend to be among the brightest available. I don't think his observable sample is representative of the entire Army. Quote I have never said that SF was a representation of the entire military, I mentioned a few examples citing my team mates and selection class. Most of the stats in my argument as I mentioned earlier were taking from Army studies on the subject, the military conduts these every year and lists the stats about education among the ranks, I didn't give exact figures as I don't have those stats on hand, I am looking for them though, but to the best of my knowledge they were at a pretty good level. Please don't take my post as trying to attack you in any way, I was just restating where I got my info from. In recent years I have been pretty impressed with how we are seeing more and more people come in with, or pursue college during their time in. I love the program I'm in right now, I get a certain amount to spend on college every year that is 100 percent paid for, after that it goes to 50 percent assistance if I remember correctly. I missed the part in your posts about the info coming from Army studies. Sorry about that. It can be pretty easy to get lost in an active thread sometimes. Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites GQ_jumper 4 #213 November 7, 2006 Quick response of thoe initial forces is not dependent on the logistics resources short of those that get them to the theater. However, logistics resources determine the maintenance of those quick reaction forces. If the logistics pipeline can't be set up within a couple of days, then they are in trouble. Then the logistics pipeline needs to expand to support the not-so-quick reaction forces that will be arriving. Quote I agree with you completely on that matter, I was more gearing my argument towards the body/vehicle armor situation. My point was that you shouldn't wait until a crisis breaks out to start preparing your soldiers for war, if the Ranger Regiment has to up and jump into N. Korea tomorrow it doesn't do them any good if the logistical train shows up a day later with their body armor. My original argument was that Bush can't be totally blamed for soldiers not having body armor at the onset of the Iraq war when for the most part the same number of people had the armor from 93-99, there probably is more he could have done, but there is far more that the previous administration could have done as well. QuoteSo they pulled those Korean War vintage weapons (only a few lifer sergeants even knew how to use them) and trained with those. Hey now, don't forget us young buck SF guys I might not have been around when they were commonplace but I've gotten my trigger time on a 90History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites matthewcline 0 #214 November 7, 2006 About 30% Infantry, 20% Transportation, 10% Artillery, 10% Combat Engineer, 5% Personel, 10% Mechanics, 5 % Supply, 5% Med, 5% Riggers. These are rough figures, SWAG if you will. My Team is 9 Infantry and 1 Artillery. They combined have 12 Degrees. 3 more will graduate with 4 year degrees this spring (you college folks know how you can have multiple degrees at one time). Bringing the total to 15 Degrees in the Combat Arms Team alone (that is the bunch of mindless brain washed dumb asses referred to in a previous post). They are from the "line guys" of the 101st. They have done this additional schooling on there own time adding to what they had when they joined. I have a realtor (Infantry guy) with a degree in realestate law, PA (Infantry guy), PR/marketing (Infantry guy), Criminilist (SP) (Artillery guy), 2 History dudes (Infantry), 3 Business dudes. I think eclectic is a good definition. Back to the original post, 5 of them voted strait DEM today. 1 didn't vote and 3 did the REP deal. 1 voted half and half (me), depended on the state issues since all but 2 are absentee.An Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites GQ_jumper 4 #215 November 7, 2006 I missed the part in your posts about the info coming from Army studies. Sorry about that. It can be pretty easy to get lost in an active thread sometimes. Quote No worries, I know I pointed to my own peers as examples plenty of times. Let me see what I can't dig up for everyone for hard numbers real quick though. Gimme a few minutes if ya wouldHistory does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jcd11235 0 #216 November 7, 2006 QuoteAbout 30% Infantry, 20% Transportation, 10% Artillery, 10% Combat Engineer, 5% Personel, 10% Mechanics, 5 % Supply, 5% Med, 5% Riggers. That seems like a pretty broad sample. Thanks.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites juanesky 0 #217 November 7, 2006 You are describing the SOP's for AAR (After action reviews). Are you aware of this?"According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites matthewcline 0 #218 November 7, 2006 Yes, he is describing that to a "T". Since it has been an Army Standard since before I joined, it kind of shoots the "none analytical" idea down huh? (Law Rocket wasn't saying that, just to be clear)An Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites lawrocket 3 #219 November 8, 2006 QuoteYou are describing the SOP's for AAR (After action reviews). Are you aware of this? Yep. I will admit I DID take it further than that. I'd bring in lower enlisted to ask them about things for operational planning. Practicing convoys? Those privates and specialists were the FIRST to get put as convoy or serial commander. They knew what went into it, and those that had their shot at commanding it never dragged ass again. It was also to prove a point - (straight outta TC 25-20) - if the soliders were stupid, or lacked intelligence, the AAR process would not happen. (I guess my time as an Observer/Controller changed my outlook). The enlisted ranks would not be speaking their minds about issues and making suggestions. It is an inherent recognition of what I realized - that group of guys is smarter than I could ever imagine. p.s. - I DID get counseled and questioned frequently about having privates doing stuff privates shouldn't be doing, like convoy command, preparing operations orders, helping me with gathering information, etc. They thought officers and NCO's should do that. I never agreed with the counseling, never signed it, and stillnever got punished for it. Those troops knew something - they knew that I really knew my shit. And I still asked for their input. Always. My decision, their input. It worked. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites GQ_jumper 4 #220 November 8, 2006 Those troops knew something - they knew that I really knew my shit. And I still asked for their input. Always. My decision, their input. It worked.Quote my team works much the same way and I have to agree that it works. This is the best team i've ever been on, not just in terms of personality dynamics, but in the way we operate and make things happen. And just about any time a decision needs to be made that affects the entire team the team daddy asks for everyone's input, including those who haven't been around very long.History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites juanesky 0 #221 November 8, 2006 Yes he is, I just wanted to make sure. In my MP unit everyone get excercises in getting to know the job well, on patrols, convoys ETC> They even allow all non MP personnel, (Used to be one, now medic) qualify in all the unit's weapons as well, figures if something goes down in the end everyone should know the job, regardless of what happens. Good read pal, and am sorry for the problem you got into for making sure everyone knew the job."According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rehmwa 2 #222 November 8, 2006 Quote including those who haven't been around very long. really? but with them being "stuck" in the military with their "low IQs", isn't it kind of mean for you guys to just tease them with your shams of respect and comradship? maybe if they just apply themselves and get out of service and go to college...... ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites ExAFO 0 #223 November 8, 2006 Instead of poo-poo'ing their service, thank them for defending your country.Illinois needs a CCW Law. NOW. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 1,679 #224 November 8, 2006 QuoteInstead of poo-poo'ing their service, thank them for defending your country. I do indeed. I'm not so sure about invading someone else's country, although the CinC is responsible for that stupid decision.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites GQ_jumper 4 #225 November 8, 2006 Quotereally? but with them being "stuck" in the military with their "low IQs", isn't it kind of mean for you guys to just tease them with your shams of respect and comradship? it would be kind of mean, but luckily they are brainwashed dummies and really think they are the new leaders, especially when we give them a badge made of of construction paper and decorated with glitter that says "Leedr" Quotemaybe if they just apply themselves and get out of service and go to college...... don't forget that even if we go to college we still have less intellect than those who went straight out of high school and will end up taking ten years to complete a degree and then making crap for a living afterwards, or so i've heard that's how it works, i think i read it in a history book somewhere Go DenverHistory does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next Page 9 of 9 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
GQ_jumper 4 #213 November 7, 2006 Quick response of thoe initial forces is not dependent on the logistics resources short of those that get them to the theater. However, logistics resources determine the maintenance of those quick reaction forces. If the logistics pipeline can't be set up within a couple of days, then they are in trouble. Then the logistics pipeline needs to expand to support the not-so-quick reaction forces that will be arriving. Quote I agree with you completely on that matter, I was more gearing my argument towards the body/vehicle armor situation. My point was that you shouldn't wait until a crisis breaks out to start preparing your soldiers for war, if the Ranger Regiment has to up and jump into N. Korea tomorrow it doesn't do them any good if the logistical train shows up a day later with their body armor. My original argument was that Bush can't be totally blamed for soldiers not having body armor at the onset of the Iraq war when for the most part the same number of people had the armor from 93-99, there probably is more he could have done, but there is far more that the previous administration could have done as well. QuoteSo they pulled those Korean War vintage weapons (only a few lifer sergeants even knew how to use them) and trained with those. Hey now, don't forget us young buck SF guys I might not have been around when they were commonplace but I've gotten my trigger time on a 90History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites matthewcline 0 #214 November 7, 2006 About 30% Infantry, 20% Transportation, 10% Artillery, 10% Combat Engineer, 5% Personel, 10% Mechanics, 5 % Supply, 5% Med, 5% Riggers. These are rough figures, SWAG if you will. My Team is 9 Infantry and 1 Artillery. They combined have 12 Degrees. 3 more will graduate with 4 year degrees this spring (you college folks know how you can have multiple degrees at one time). Bringing the total to 15 Degrees in the Combat Arms Team alone (that is the bunch of mindless brain washed dumb asses referred to in a previous post). They are from the "line guys" of the 101st. They have done this additional schooling on there own time adding to what they had when they joined. I have a realtor (Infantry guy) with a degree in realestate law, PA (Infantry guy), PR/marketing (Infantry guy), Criminilist (SP) (Artillery guy), 2 History dudes (Infantry), 3 Business dudes. I think eclectic is a good definition. Back to the original post, 5 of them voted strait DEM today. 1 didn't vote and 3 did the REP deal. 1 voted half and half (me), depended on the state issues since all but 2 are absentee.An Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites GQ_jumper 4 #215 November 7, 2006 I missed the part in your posts about the info coming from Army studies. Sorry about that. It can be pretty easy to get lost in an active thread sometimes. Quote No worries, I know I pointed to my own peers as examples plenty of times. Let me see what I can't dig up for everyone for hard numbers real quick though. Gimme a few minutes if ya wouldHistory does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jcd11235 0 #216 November 7, 2006 QuoteAbout 30% Infantry, 20% Transportation, 10% Artillery, 10% Combat Engineer, 5% Personel, 10% Mechanics, 5 % Supply, 5% Med, 5% Riggers. That seems like a pretty broad sample. Thanks.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites juanesky 0 #217 November 7, 2006 You are describing the SOP's for AAR (After action reviews). Are you aware of this?"According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites matthewcline 0 #218 November 7, 2006 Yes, he is describing that to a "T". Since it has been an Army Standard since before I joined, it kind of shoots the "none analytical" idea down huh? (Law Rocket wasn't saying that, just to be clear)An Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites lawrocket 3 #219 November 8, 2006 QuoteYou are describing the SOP's for AAR (After action reviews). Are you aware of this? Yep. I will admit I DID take it further than that. I'd bring in lower enlisted to ask them about things for operational planning. Practicing convoys? Those privates and specialists were the FIRST to get put as convoy or serial commander. They knew what went into it, and those that had their shot at commanding it never dragged ass again. It was also to prove a point - (straight outta TC 25-20) - if the soliders were stupid, or lacked intelligence, the AAR process would not happen. (I guess my time as an Observer/Controller changed my outlook). The enlisted ranks would not be speaking their minds about issues and making suggestions. It is an inherent recognition of what I realized - that group of guys is smarter than I could ever imagine. p.s. - I DID get counseled and questioned frequently about having privates doing stuff privates shouldn't be doing, like convoy command, preparing operations orders, helping me with gathering information, etc. They thought officers and NCO's should do that. I never agreed with the counseling, never signed it, and stillnever got punished for it. Those troops knew something - they knew that I really knew my shit. And I still asked for their input. Always. My decision, their input. It worked. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites GQ_jumper 4 #220 November 8, 2006 Those troops knew something - they knew that I really knew my shit. And I still asked for their input. Always. My decision, their input. It worked.Quote my team works much the same way and I have to agree that it works. This is the best team i've ever been on, not just in terms of personality dynamics, but in the way we operate and make things happen. And just about any time a decision needs to be made that affects the entire team the team daddy asks for everyone's input, including those who haven't been around very long.History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites juanesky 0 #221 November 8, 2006 Yes he is, I just wanted to make sure. In my MP unit everyone get excercises in getting to know the job well, on patrols, convoys ETC> They even allow all non MP personnel, (Used to be one, now medic) qualify in all the unit's weapons as well, figures if something goes down in the end everyone should know the job, regardless of what happens. Good read pal, and am sorry for the problem you got into for making sure everyone knew the job."According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rehmwa 2 #222 November 8, 2006 Quote including those who haven't been around very long. really? but with them being "stuck" in the military with their "low IQs", isn't it kind of mean for you guys to just tease them with your shams of respect and comradship? maybe if they just apply themselves and get out of service and go to college...... ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites ExAFO 0 #223 November 8, 2006 Instead of poo-poo'ing their service, thank them for defending your country.Illinois needs a CCW Law. NOW. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 1,679 #224 November 8, 2006 QuoteInstead of poo-poo'ing their service, thank them for defending your country. I do indeed. I'm not so sure about invading someone else's country, although the CinC is responsible for that stupid decision.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites GQ_jumper 4 #225 November 8, 2006 Quotereally? but with them being "stuck" in the military with their "low IQs", isn't it kind of mean for you guys to just tease them with your shams of respect and comradship? it would be kind of mean, but luckily they are brainwashed dummies and really think they are the new leaders, especially when we give them a badge made of of construction paper and decorated with glitter that says "Leedr" Quotemaybe if they just apply themselves and get out of service and go to college...... don't forget that even if we go to college we still have less intellect than those who went straight out of high school and will end up taking ten years to complete a degree and then making crap for a living afterwards, or so i've heard that's how it works, i think i read it in a history book somewhere Go DenverHistory does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next Page 9 of 9 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
matthewcline 0 #214 November 7, 2006 About 30% Infantry, 20% Transportation, 10% Artillery, 10% Combat Engineer, 5% Personel, 10% Mechanics, 5 % Supply, 5% Med, 5% Riggers. These are rough figures, SWAG if you will. My Team is 9 Infantry and 1 Artillery. They combined have 12 Degrees. 3 more will graduate with 4 year degrees this spring (you college folks know how you can have multiple degrees at one time). Bringing the total to 15 Degrees in the Combat Arms Team alone (that is the bunch of mindless brain washed dumb asses referred to in a previous post). They are from the "line guys" of the 101st. They have done this additional schooling on there own time adding to what they had when they joined. I have a realtor (Infantry guy) with a degree in realestate law, PA (Infantry guy), PR/marketing (Infantry guy), Criminilist (SP) (Artillery guy), 2 History dudes (Infantry), 3 Business dudes. I think eclectic is a good definition. Back to the original post, 5 of them voted strait DEM today. 1 didn't vote and 3 did the REP deal. 1 voted half and half (me), depended on the state issues since all but 2 are absentee.An Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GQ_jumper 4 #215 November 7, 2006 I missed the part in your posts about the info coming from Army studies. Sorry about that. It can be pretty easy to get lost in an active thread sometimes. Quote No worries, I know I pointed to my own peers as examples plenty of times. Let me see what I can't dig up for everyone for hard numbers real quick though. Gimme a few minutes if ya wouldHistory does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jcd11235 0 #216 November 7, 2006 QuoteAbout 30% Infantry, 20% Transportation, 10% Artillery, 10% Combat Engineer, 5% Personel, 10% Mechanics, 5 % Supply, 5% Med, 5% Riggers. That seems like a pretty broad sample. Thanks.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites juanesky 0 #217 November 7, 2006 You are describing the SOP's for AAR (After action reviews). Are you aware of this?"According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites matthewcline 0 #218 November 7, 2006 Yes, he is describing that to a "T". Since it has been an Army Standard since before I joined, it kind of shoots the "none analytical" idea down huh? (Law Rocket wasn't saying that, just to be clear)An Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites lawrocket 3 #219 November 8, 2006 QuoteYou are describing the SOP's for AAR (After action reviews). Are you aware of this? Yep. I will admit I DID take it further than that. I'd bring in lower enlisted to ask them about things for operational planning. Practicing convoys? Those privates and specialists were the FIRST to get put as convoy or serial commander. They knew what went into it, and those that had their shot at commanding it never dragged ass again. It was also to prove a point - (straight outta TC 25-20) - if the soliders were stupid, or lacked intelligence, the AAR process would not happen. (I guess my time as an Observer/Controller changed my outlook). The enlisted ranks would not be speaking their minds about issues and making suggestions. It is an inherent recognition of what I realized - that group of guys is smarter than I could ever imagine. p.s. - I DID get counseled and questioned frequently about having privates doing stuff privates shouldn't be doing, like convoy command, preparing operations orders, helping me with gathering information, etc. They thought officers and NCO's should do that. I never agreed with the counseling, never signed it, and stillnever got punished for it. Those troops knew something - they knew that I really knew my shit. And I still asked for their input. Always. My decision, their input. It worked. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites GQ_jumper 4 #220 November 8, 2006 Those troops knew something - they knew that I really knew my shit. And I still asked for their input. Always. My decision, their input. It worked.Quote my team works much the same way and I have to agree that it works. This is the best team i've ever been on, not just in terms of personality dynamics, but in the way we operate and make things happen. And just about any time a decision needs to be made that affects the entire team the team daddy asks for everyone's input, including those who haven't been around very long.History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites juanesky 0 #221 November 8, 2006 Yes he is, I just wanted to make sure. In my MP unit everyone get excercises in getting to know the job well, on patrols, convoys ETC> They even allow all non MP personnel, (Used to be one, now medic) qualify in all the unit's weapons as well, figures if something goes down in the end everyone should know the job, regardless of what happens. Good read pal, and am sorry for the problem you got into for making sure everyone knew the job."According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rehmwa 2 #222 November 8, 2006 Quote including those who haven't been around very long. really? but with them being "stuck" in the military with their "low IQs", isn't it kind of mean for you guys to just tease them with your shams of respect and comradship? maybe if they just apply themselves and get out of service and go to college...... ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites ExAFO 0 #223 November 8, 2006 Instead of poo-poo'ing their service, thank them for defending your country.Illinois needs a CCW Law. NOW. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 1,679 #224 November 8, 2006 QuoteInstead of poo-poo'ing their service, thank them for defending your country. I do indeed. I'm not so sure about invading someone else's country, although the CinC is responsible for that stupid decision.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites GQ_jumper 4 #225 November 8, 2006 Quotereally? but with them being "stuck" in the military with their "low IQs", isn't it kind of mean for you guys to just tease them with your shams of respect and comradship? it would be kind of mean, but luckily they are brainwashed dummies and really think they are the new leaders, especially when we give them a badge made of of construction paper and decorated with glitter that says "Leedr" Quotemaybe if they just apply themselves and get out of service and go to college...... don't forget that even if we go to college we still have less intellect than those who went straight out of high school and will end up taking ten years to complete a degree and then making crap for a living afterwards, or so i've heard that's how it works, i think i read it in a history book somewhere Go DenverHistory does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next Page 9 of 9 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
jcd11235 0 #216 November 7, 2006 QuoteAbout 30% Infantry, 20% Transportation, 10% Artillery, 10% Combat Engineer, 5% Personel, 10% Mechanics, 5 % Supply, 5% Med, 5% Riggers. That seems like a pretty broad sample. Thanks.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
juanesky 0 #217 November 7, 2006 You are describing the SOP's for AAR (After action reviews). Are you aware of this?"According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
matthewcline 0 #218 November 7, 2006 Yes, he is describing that to a "T". Since it has been an Army Standard since before I joined, it kind of shoots the "none analytical" idea down huh? (Law Rocket wasn't saying that, just to be clear)An Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #219 November 8, 2006 QuoteYou are describing the SOP's for AAR (After action reviews). Are you aware of this? Yep. I will admit I DID take it further than that. I'd bring in lower enlisted to ask them about things for operational planning. Practicing convoys? Those privates and specialists were the FIRST to get put as convoy or serial commander. They knew what went into it, and those that had their shot at commanding it never dragged ass again. It was also to prove a point - (straight outta TC 25-20) - if the soliders were stupid, or lacked intelligence, the AAR process would not happen. (I guess my time as an Observer/Controller changed my outlook). The enlisted ranks would not be speaking their minds about issues and making suggestions. It is an inherent recognition of what I realized - that group of guys is smarter than I could ever imagine. p.s. - I DID get counseled and questioned frequently about having privates doing stuff privates shouldn't be doing, like convoy command, preparing operations orders, helping me with gathering information, etc. They thought officers and NCO's should do that. I never agreed with the counseling, never signed it, and stillnever got punished for it. Those troops knew something - they knew that I really knew my shit. And I still asked for their input. Always. My decision, their input. It worked. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GQ_jumper 4 #220 November 8, 2006 Those troops knew something - they knew that I really knew my shit. And I still asked for their input. Always. My decision, their input. It worked.Quote my team works much the same way and I have to agree that it works. This is the best team i've ever been on, not just in terms of personality dynamics, but in the way we operate and make things happen. And just about any time a decision needs to be made that affects the entire team the team daddy asks for everyone's input, including those who haven't been around very long.History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites juanesky 0 #221 November 8, 2006 Yes he is, I just wanted to make sure. In my MP unit everyone get excercises in getting to know the job well, on patrols, convoys ETC> They even allow all non MP personnel, (Used to be one, now medic) qualify in all the unit's weapons as well, figures if something goes down in the end everyone should know the job, regardless of what happens. Good read pal, and am sorry for the problem you got into for making sure everyone knew the job."According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rehmwa 2 #222 November 8, 2006 Quote including those who haven't been around very long. really? but with them being "stuck" in the military with their "low IQs", isn't it kind of mean for you guys to just tease them with your shams of respect and comradship? maybe if they just apply themselves and get out of service and go to college...... ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites ExAFO 0 #223 November 8, 2006 Instead of poo-poo'ing their service, thank them for defending your country.Illinois needs a CCW Law. NOW. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 1,679 #224 November 8, 2006 QuoteInstead of poo-poo'ing their service, thank them for defending your country. I do indeed. I'm not so sure about invading someone else's country, although the CinC is responsible for that stupid decision.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites GQ_jumper 4 #225 November 8, 2006 Quotereally? but with them being "stuck" in the military with their "low IQs", isn't it kind of mean for you guys to just tease them with your shams of respect and comradship? it would be kind of mean, but luckily they are brainwashed dummies and really think they are the new leaders, especially when we give them a badge made of of construction paper and decorated with glitter that says "Leedr" Quotemaybe if they just apply themselves and get out of service and go to college...... don't forget that even if we go to college we still have less intellect than those who went straight out of high school and will end up taking ten years to complete a degree and then making crap for a living afterwards, or so i've heard that's how it works, i think i read it in a history book somewhere Go DenverHistory does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next Page 9 of 9 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
juanesky 0 #221 November 8, 2006 Yes he is, I just wanted to make sure. In my MP unit everyone get excercises in getting to know the job well, on patrols, convoys ETC> They even allow all non MP personnel, (Used to be one, now medic) qualify in all the unit's weapons as well, figures if something goes down in the end everyone should know the job, regardless of what happens. Good read pal, and am sorry for the problem you got into for making sure everyone knew the job."According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #222 November 8, 2006 Quote including those who haven't been around very long. really? but with them being "stuck" in the military with their "low IQs", isn't it kind of mean for you guys to just tease them with your shams of respect and comradship? maybe if they just apply themselves and get out of service and go to college...... ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ExAFO 0 #223 November 8, 2006 Instead of poo-poo'ing their service, thank them for defending your country.Illinois needs a CCW Law. NOW. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,679 #224 November 8, 2006 QuoteInstead of poo-poo'ing their service, thank them for defending your country. I do indeed. I'm not so sure about invading someone else's country, although the CinC is responsible for that stupid decision.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GQ_jumper 4 #225 November 8, 2006 Quotereally? but with them being "stuck" in the military with their "low IQs", isn't it kind of mean for you guys to just tease them with your shams of respect and comradship? it would be kind of mean, but luckily they are brainwashed dummies and really think they are the new leaders, especially when we give them a badge made of of construction paper and decorated with glitter that says "Leedr" Quotemaybe if they just apply themselves and get out of service and go to college...... don't forget that even if we go to college we still have less intellect than those who went straight out of high school and will end up taking ten years to complete a degree and then making crap for a living afterwards, or so i've heard that's how it works, i think i read it in a history book somewhere Go DenverHistory does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. --Dwight D. Eisenhower Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
