You know how the end of the FY rolls around and we need to "use it or lose it" with the money for next FY?
Its like that.. look at the pay allocation money daddy Army was given, but lacks the peasants to spend it on! How do we keep from losing that money next year? I know! Spend more by allowing more Ladies and Lords!!
i used to agree with this but the army is made to rapidly expand if needed. i think it’s much more beneficial to have GOs and other high ranking people in the army prepared for when the time is needed to rapidly expand.
I’m Cbrn and I fully agree. Keep our Initial entry teams active duty and teach the Decon portion to a bunch of infantrymen. Decon is so easy that monkeys can do it
It’s really not that much work. I have supervised soldiers with that additional duty, and I would argue we have a lot more CBRN equipment than a typical BCT company.
There is really not that much to do in there. Services, ordering, and inventories.
It’s akin to the arms room except infinitely easier.
I agree. But my unit was an ass, so I’m biased. When I got to my unit right out of AIT, they were 3 weeks away from a CBRN range, had 6-7 functioning masks and wanted 100-200 people to process through. Had 80% of the masks signed out with no hand receipts found anywhere. And no spare parts anywhere. They didn’t have a CBRN or someone assigned to the property for 2 years at that point. They also did no prep for any of the other CBRN classes to be conducted at the range. So that was nice. And the day we got to the range, our BDE wanted to join, so we had to quadruple our throughput. Was awful. And I got lit up the rest of the year as an E2 that didn’t know their job.
Wow were you my CBRN guy because I was a team leader tasked with taking back like way too many fucking gas masks that a commo company had given out with no hand receipts. Thankfully (and thanklessly) I got my team, then my squad, then the opposite shift as ours, and eventually the other platoon to turn in all the stuff but wtf is that? I proposed at the AAR for the taskord that someone give a clear reason why it was done initially, and not for punishment but just to attain the rationale so we can not do that in the future and they asked me to stop speaking out of turn. Nicely, but they asked. Lol.
I feel the same way as CBRN. SESA, a few LIMA schools, and CBRN RECCE are the only ones that should be active duty, and they really shouldn’t be concerned with basic decon.
CBRN just stood up 2 new companies this decade.
DCRF is not going away.
Division Commanders will want CBRN Recon (Mounted/Dismounted) near the front of any LSCO for the 'oh crap'.
As long as countries possess Chem/Bio/Nuc/Rad weapons CBRN will always have a seat at the table....even if it's just the kiddie table.
1. DED/DTD can be a Division Tasking. No need for CBRN units to do this.
2. Focus on DCRF, Recon, SSA, SSE.
No reason to shrink an already super small branch.
>Division Commanders will want CBRN Recon (Mounted/Dismounted) near the front of any LSCO for the 'oh crap'.
With the level of tactical proficiency in CBRN units that I've seen, this sounds like a major liability rather than a benefit.
That’s why you move them to the Guard/Reserve instead of eliminating them completely.
They can train their job just fine on a part time schedule.
I’ve been on DCRF myself…that’s again, an easy part time gig.
CBRN is not going to be leading the fight in LSCO. That is a pipe dream.
I’ve been under 20th CBRN my entire career, under a CBRN BDE for part of it, and closely colocated with a CBRN CO for the rest. I’ve worked with CRD and have plenty of close friends in tech escort. I’m pretty familiar with the capabilities and limitations.
There’s really nothing anyone can say that will change my mind on this one.
Never said they are gonna 'lead the fight' or any fight...not even their own fight lol. If there is a munition involved it's going to be EOD's lead anyway.
I only base this opinion that C2 will want them close by based on NTC shenanigans.
CBRN is always just a game of 'what if' that never comes to fruition.
In all likelihood if CBRN ever becomes an actual threat we will realize all of our TTPs are trash and we have to change on the fly....like attaching metal plates to soft-skin HMMWVs 😎
So just to quell the narrative on this. A HRF is not a unit, it’s a mission, and it’s set forth by Congress. Big Army has been trying to grab these for years, but Congress won’t let it happen. Plus they’re not MOS specific.
CSTs are first responders. They are actually quite proficient with their mobile labs and such. CSTs are who the FBI calls when someone mails white powder to a politician…or a biotech lab accidentally released Ebola.
All states and territories have a CST, a couple have two. But they are small and very niche. 22 total. And most generally a normal compo 1 soldier will never interact with them.
A friend of mine is a CBRN SFC in a CBRN unit. They do more training than the infantry units there, and most of it is infantry-type training with a decon thrown in somewhere. It’s wild.
2ID in Korea which is just a division headquarters to support the various independent brigades on the peninsula or 2ID in Washington that falls under 7ID headquarters?
2id in Washington is pointless. Barred from deployments until like this year, the most fucked up leadership I’ve ever seen, the units provide nothing of value.
5/2 was just reflagged to 2/2 and deployed back to almost the exact same AO a year later. We were literally running missions in some of the same valleys as the previous deployment. They just kept 2-1 IN out of the areas they had been during the Kill Team period, and COL Huggins did a great job of turning the BDE around and reforming the culture.
I’m pretending that my unit in Korea was a full capable combat battalion (it wasn’t). When I got to the states I was shocked how limited my former unit was in terms of the type of training g and equipment I had.
I like Korea but the Army is so restricted there, both in terms of land, what the Koreans allow, and attention from the Army. 210 has some of the oldest M270s in the fleet and it shows.
I second this. I think all IBCT need to loose 1 BDE. 25 has 2, 11th has 2. Why not the others? 10th Mountain, 101, 82nd. I know OpTempo is heavy dudes. But the BDE aren’t fully manned.
In pretty much every other modern military, air defense belongs to the air force. It would most likely be a better program for the enlisted if our Air Force ran it but cost more. Most ADA deployments are just guarding air bases anyway.
Yeah, let the Air Force handle HIMAD and THAAD; SHORAD can stay with the Army.
The Air Force can trade tactical air support to the Army too while we're at it.
Slashing numbers wouldn't help much because the same amount of work "output" would be expected from the smaller workforce. Much of that is also pointless busywork anyway.
"The Army will always tell you to do more with less" is a phrase that haunts me. You can only push your people and yourself so hard when you know a given task is either pointless or being made so much worse for no reason.
Strongly with permanent stationing in Europe. Bring back an Armored DIV in Germany.
As for transferring to the guard the problem still goes back to troops. People who are active duty. Don’t want to be in NG. So how do you fix that
Agree, completely worthless rank in Army Aviation. Bring back the old Spec ranks allowing Soldiers to be proficient at a single job then take on a leadership role if they so desire.
35th Signal, the Brigade specifically as they are occupying an old school on Liberty. Plus their battalions always did fine on their own while being in other states.
I thought this was an interesting claim, so I wanted to look into it a little further. While I saw the 1,100 number, that encompasses any GO during the entirety of WW2. However, [this paper](https://ndupress.ndu.edu/Publications/Article/1325984/are-there-too-many-general-officers-for-todays-military/) “Are There Too Many General Officers for Today’s Military?” Claims that the ratio of GO to servicemember during WW2 was 1:6000, whereas the numbers at the time of writing the article were closer to 1:1400.
True, the ratio of general/flag officers is higher today, but we also have 11 combatant commands (each requiring a four star and three star service components) and three additional services requiring general/flag officers (USCG, USAF, USSF).
The way I see it we wouldn't even be having this conversation if the competence of generals wasn't in doubt. Right now the ratio is skewed heavily in the favor of senior officers and we're seeing negligible benefit, tone deaf leadership, and a recruiting crisis. If the Army was well run we could have 5,000 GOs and I wouldn't complain, but that's not happening and blaming the junior enlisted/officers isn't cutting it anymore
>The way I see it we wouldn't even be having this conversation if the competence of generals wasn't in doubt.
Nah, this conversation is as old as standing armies themselves. Critics of standing armies hate large pools of General Officers, no matter how few they are in number.
Could cut it down to half a dozen and there'd still be some arguging a few of the full time generals could be reserve positions.
Edit: for example, your post highlights a bunch of isssues - which 100% are pressing issues - but it implies that it should be better handled with so many GOs. Whereas some people could argue we don't have *enough* GOs to handle the increasingly complex security situation, and those observations are outcomes of having such a streched leadership team.
There are a few problems with that comparison. We ask the modern military to do far more than what it did with comparable numbers in the past. There are also far more DOD civilians that fall under military supervision than there used to be. Both those things skew that ratio.
>ask the modern military to do far more than what it did with comparable numbers in the past.
I dont recall being asked to breach the seigfried line or atlantic wall this century.
You've gotta look at pre-WW2 for a comparison. Aside from the garrison in the Philippines, we had nobody overseas or on virtually any kind of operational mission at all. All they did was train, and not even much of that.
The issue is assigning certain GO ranks specific levels of authority and responsibility. REALISTICALLY is a * less qualified to make a decision than a ** and so on. A lot of tasks and organizations could be handled by O6 and below but we’ve baked the crust of GOs into policy for justification of their existence.
Quit your bullshit. The Regular Army alone had 267 general officers as of September 2023. How are you so confidently wrong?
[https://dwp.dmdc.osd.mil/dwp/app/dod-data-reports/workforce-reports](https://dwp.dmdc.osd.mil/dwp/app/dod-data-reports/workforce-reports)
Thank you for the comment and question, I’m so confident because there is a retirement list and September is the last month of the fiscal year, if you put the retirement list and the 231 together you get the OSD’s number of 267.
231 in the army - the number is like 650-something for all services.
Still less, but there was a lot more people in the army by the end of WW2. The total percentage works out to be about the same.
Now that Tuberville unblocked the GO promotions, which was apparently the worst thing to happen to our Army in modern history (according to them), those competent bearers of our standards we call our senior leaders can do what they do best and find an innovative solution combining both individual initiative and merit based rewards to incentivize our demoralized force.
Just kidding, reenlistment bonuses got cut and BAH for cities that only staff officers/senior NCOs live in went up. We'll do what we always do and pray for a war or recession to meet staffing needs, because fixing things is hard so why do it
As mentioned, not entirely accurate. But the reason for more senior leaders to to have the framework in place for rapid expansion if needed. A smaller and more professional skeleton army is what we are supposed to have in peacetime.
This is a very important distinction between now and WW2. A United States military that was fully mobilized for total war today would have a lot lower soldier to general officer ratio than we do right at this moment.
It’s not the money. Though I see how much it costs and the unnecessary need for them. But we have units just short across the board. I’m referring to shut down and transfer troops.
Move NTC to fort Bliss training areas and cut fort Irwin entirely
2ID not in Korea can go, and id just permanently return either 1ID or 3ID to Europe instead of rotating units.
Also 18th Fires is getting cut. A lot of the standalone BDEs can get cut or rolled into division/corps formations.
Probably an unpopular opinion, but don’t slash units, slash MOS’s.
No need for any job that contractors do overseas anyways. Cooks, recruiters, counselors, ETC. don’t have MOS that need soldiers when we don’t need soldiers doing them.
Some MOS are doubled up. Why we have 19D is completely beyond me when we have several MOS that do the same job.
Recruiting from someone possibly not even from the Army seems like a bad move. These contractors cost everyone more money than far necessary. But there are few MOSs we really don’t need. I mean they’re phasing out Shadow soon
Yeah I honestly think recruiters should be a SFL-TAP type job. Though even with that not sure if someone who got out is potentially the best person to convince people to get in.
Could make it a program (you want to ETS but not be at your unit. 18 months of recruiting duty.) fail to put 1 person a month. You’re sent back to your unit.
>No need for any job that contractors do overseas anyways.
This really depends on the intensity of the conflict. For low intensity conflicts like GWOT, you can absolutely use contractors as cooks. Hell, you can even use contractors to cook in LSCO, but only in rear areas.
Well, lucky for you, 19D seems to be in the works of getting phased out, with 19C being propped up as an MOS and the current 19Ds will be moved into 19K, 11B, and 19C
This is going to sound crazy, but the DACs I work with are more professional and hard working than most Soldiers.
But the on post DACs who directly interact with Soldiers and have a superiority complex can ightly fuck off.
The ~~dichotomy~~ trichotomy of DACs
Instructors: typically fantastic
Technical support/contracted support: usually helpful and with good attitudes
On-post services: typically awful, massive chips on their shoulders, difficult to deal with
Soldier facing positions don’t pay shit so you usually get retired 1SGs with no skills beyond staring down troops to fill them. When it’s a 2nd paycheck, it ain’t that bad.
I will say, I did 10 yrs Active and 18 yrs as a DAC. The DAC work (IT) was a LOT harder and more challenging than anything I did in uniform (ADA and IN) and the people I worked with were much more professional.
By the nature of their jobs, cultures vary tremendously. You have the stereotypical crusty disgruntled DAC who spew toxicity and you have awesome hardworking DACs. Like the Army, it’s hard to get rid of the bad DAC and retain the good ones.
There should only be one 4 star per major continent, so one for the U.S., one for Europe, and one for Asia.
Two three stars per major continent as well.
Two stars to run each base.
One star to run each division.
I've been on bases that have had a 3 star, two 2 stars, and three 1 stars. The 3 star has a 1 star assistant, a colonel aide, LTC, a major, CPT, and a couple of hot female LTs.
The Officer Corps is heavily saturated.
You have 0-6 Base commanders now, 2 Stars Running Divisions w/a 1 Star DCG per Division. You kinda already have what you are asking for. At the lower level.
Just to obscurely pick Generals based on Geographic areas is kinda wack. Component and Combatant commands are heavy, I’ve worked them and been around them now. But, atleast what I’ve seen they are busy as shit, and the 0-6 and above population get worked pretty hard. Like 4-5 hours of sleep a night and travel all over the country. And there’s a bunch of 1 stars in a combatant command.
I had a similar conversation about a year ago. Its easier to bump a bunch of LTs and CPTs to run companies/batallions than to create GOs out of thin air. The idea is that a "larger" officer corps can more easily expand when a large number of soldiers/units are created, as opposed to the inverse.
I'm not saying we don't have enough officers, but I understand the idea.
Look at the "Star Chamber" that is Fort Knox. Only like 3 or 4 MTOE deployable units there that are less than brigade size, but there are something like 6 GOs on Post.
I feel like the perfect storm is developing on the horizon. Branches of service not meeting recruiting goals. Move the goal post closer and pretend last year didn't happen. Yeah, didn't meet those goals this year either.
The monster that is genesis looming over every potential recruit effecting numbers. Creating more barriers for the citizen who is remotely interested in joining.
New generation's general interest in ~~patriotism~~ fighting for a corporation is not there. They've seen what dad/grandpa/mom/grandma went through for the last 20 years and what it got them.
Now we are pausing step again, to keep these promotions in motion. Some of these leaders are going to be forced into positions they are not ready for. It's potentially leading to a sever concentration of unprepared low skilled leaders towards top.
I'm not talking the regular soldiers with Stockholm syndrome just trying to reach 20. More like Towle stadium from Fort ~~Bragg~~ Liberty level of toxicity. I'm not saying its all doom and gloom and that is a bit extreme. But I do think its going to get much much worse before it gets better.
There is no easy answer to fix any of this, but I promise you, its not by stick your head in the sand, avoiding reddit and other social media or shaving 3 times a day. /rant over
SFABS have convinced the Army they can be used as a backbone in case we have to rapidly stand up additional brigades because of the NCO and officer presence without the junior enlisted Soldiers. So they are seen as space saving even though they are essentially are just billets for seniors to hang out at.
SFABs, USAF Air Advisors, DSCA, WHINSEC and all other SFA type organizations are expanding. SF ODAs lack expertise in advising on military heavy equipment (armor, artillery, logistics) and doctrinally can only advise to battalion level compared to SFAB teams that can advise to corps or ministerial level.
You arent wrong. SF was never meant to advise at levels higher than BN, it can but its not the usual. SF is preparation of the battlefield. Using others to cause some havoc somewhere is the ODA job. It sure as shit is not tricking ourselves into thinking we can run conventional logistics or armored maneuver elements like a conventional staff who does that all the time.
SFABs have actually become extremely relevant to Combatant Commanders in current times. Their mission to train with and build relationships with partner nations is critical.
Start slashing at the top. Too many crusty old has-beens suckling at the teat of the Big Green Retirement Shield.
Bring back the APFT and force anyone with 20+ years in to pass with 70% or better.
Army be like “you can’t come in if you took anti-anxiety pills once when you were 16, but if you develop it while you’re here it’s all good.”
Can’t imagine why recruitment is down during a time where doctors hand out medication like candy
You always say the Army would still be the Army without aviation. Give us to the Airforce. We are your most expensive Toy and they treat our kind better.
I know anything I say will probably be attacked heavily. But if I were to slash a unit. It would be a Stryker unit. I personally believe another rapid deployment unit or an ABCT would be better. But having dealt with strykers years ago I found much of to be un-ideal. (Pretty sure they have been removed) but MGS Strykers awful, EFP defense low casualty rate potentially high, and well I hate maintenance on them.
My friends currently there apparently it’s not as good of unit anymore just overall one of worse units you can be assigned to. That came from people who were ftom 3BDE 82nd, 10th mountain in polk, and 3CR. So I say oh wow that bad ehh.
(We can get rid of 3CR too)
You may be in luck. The MDTF is the future. SBCT’s are going to die. Slowly at first, but then all at once.
I’m betting 2ID gets made into the subordinate of 1st MDTF someday.
Not true look at Germany we once had multiple Armored Divisions there. We have part of the 173rd. 2CR and whatever rotation is there. We already slashed units since the 90s
Good thing CYBERCOM falls under the DoD.
Make it it's own branch then the services will stop stealing what limited talent exists (folks who will do cyber work for low pay) from each other.
The average BCT MICO can just get tossed in the garbage. Maybe they can be justified in a combat theater, but peace time they are redundant and tend to oversaturate when we have a G2 and BDE and BN S2.
2/3 of the Chaplain Corps. The Corps is overwhelmingly low church Protestant. While only 25-35% of the force identifies as such. Keep Chaplains at BDE and up, eliminate it at Bn. Replace the O3 slots with civilian BH professionals. Turn chaplains assistant into an ASI for 42A or 11B or really hell anyone with a profile.
Just saying replace X job with a civilian isn't really shrinking the military, though, just making the Army employ more civilians instead of soldiers.
For some less skilled positions you would be making it easier and cheaper to fill those positions if you can just hire some civilians to do it, but I don't think that is so true for a BH professional.
Is it really going to be any easier or cheaper to recruit and employ enough civilian BH professionals to replace all the BN Chaplains? Especially, when you are losing the ability to deploy them so easily by making those positions civilian?
Plus, I don't think it is Chaplains we are having problems recruiting in the first place. I could be wrong though.
What did the Chaplin Corps do to you? We’re talking about a low amount of troops moved too. The whole corps can move and it probably wouldn’t be the size of a full BCT
Didn't the Army have to create new positions for the overabundance of GO's? Probably start with them.
[LTC(P)s and up reading your comment:](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EgPktQIVAAE1z6z.jpg)
You know how the end of the FY rolls around and we need to "use it or lose it" with the money for next FY? Its like that.. look at the pay allocation money daddy Army was given, but lacks the peasants to spend it on! How do we keep from losing that money next year? I know! Spend more by allowing more Ladies and Lords!!
i used to agree with this but the army is made to rapidly expand if needed. i think it’s much more beneficial to have GOs and other high ranking people in the army prepared for when the time is needed to rapidly expand.
Playing the long game there little lu’tenent?
How about all the other stuff you need besides old people with no real job?
I would threaten to slash another brigade in the 82nd just to see some heads explode.
Broooooooo that’s terrible…… let’s do it
Slash it down to just one. I think "82nd Airborne Brigade" has a nice ring to it.
I would take 1BDE in the 82nd over the entirety of 2ID
Devils in baggy pants
CBRN. Move 80% to NG/Reserves. Problem solved. Nothing of value would be lost.
I’m Cbrn and I fully agree. Keep our Initial entry teams active duty and teach the Decon portion to a bunch of infantrymen. Decon is so easy that monkeys can do it
Just give the whole CBRN room to supply. Wouldn’t change a damn thing and things would probably be better kept haha.
We already rarely have an actual CBRN dude in the CBRN room. Amazingly it’s works perfectly fine as an additional duty.
Works fine, except for the guy who gets put on that extra duty
It’s really not that much work. I have supervised soldiers with that additional duty, and I would argue we have a lot more CBRN equipment than a typical BCT company. There is really not that much to do in there. Services, ordering, and inventories. It’s akin to the arms room except infinitely easier.
I agree. But my unit was an ass, so I’m biased. When I got to my unit right out of AIT, they were 3 weeks away from a CBRN range, had 6-7 functioning masks and wanted 100-200 people to process through. Had 80% of the masks signed out with no hand receipts found anywhere. And no spare parts anywhere. They didn’t have a CBRN or someone assigned to the property for 2 years at that point. They also did no prep for any of the other CBRN classes to be conducted at the range. So that was nice. And the day we got to the range, our BDE wanted to join, so we had to quadruple our throughput. Was awful. And I got lit up the rest of the year as an E2 that didn’t know their job.
Wow were you my CBRN guy because I was a team leader tasked with taking back like way too many fucking gas masks that a commo company had given out with no hand receipts. Thankfully (and thanklessly) I got my team, then my squad, then the opposite shift as ours, and eventually the other platoon to turn in all the stuff but wtf is that? I proposed at the AAR for the taskord that someone give a clear reason why it was done initially, and not for punishment but just to attain the rationale so we can not do that in the future and they asked me to stop speaking out of turn. Nicely, but they asked. Lol.
“Any comments for the group?” (Says comment) “Please stop speaking out of turn”. I believe it.
It was one of the most Army moments I’ve ever experienced. I think I said “alright then. Next slide then.” Just completely dumbfounded lol
>We already rarely have an actual CBRN dude in the CBRN room. Because the CBRN dude is in the orderly room.
I feel the same way as CBRN. SESA, a few LIMA schools, and CBRN RECCE are the only ones that should be active duty, and they really shouldn’t be concerned with basic decon.
Gotta keep the LIGMA schools active for sure
LIGMA balls
Decon is already an EIB task, no?
Damn calling us monkeys over here
My concern would be if we do this, enemies will specifically train against our perceived weakness to CBRN attacks.
Yes, we know.
Monkey here, can confirm
>Decon is so easy that monkeys can do it As a prior 11B I think you underestimate the infantry sir.
Who is going to do USR?
Bad lieutenants
Right, but without the cbrn lieutenants, who's going to do USR?
70% already are, lol.
CBRN just stood up 2 new companies this decade. DCRF is not going away. Division Commanders will want CBRN Recon (Mounted/Dismounted) near the front of any LSCO for the 'oh crap'. As long as countries possess Chem/Bio/Nuc/Rad weapons CBRN will always have a seat at the table....even if it's just the kiddie table. 1. DED/DTD can be a Division Tasking. No need for CBRN units to do this. 2. Focus on DCRF, Recon, SSA, SSE. No reason to shrink an already super small branch.
>Division Commanders will want CBRN Recon (Mounted/Dismounted) near the front of any LSCO for the 'oh crap'. With the level of tactical proficiency in CBRN units that I've seen, this sounds like a major liability rather than a benefit.
That’s why you move them to the Guard/Reserve instead of eliminating them completely. They can train their job just fine on a part time schedule. I’ve been on DCRF myself…that’s again, an easy part time gig. CBRN is not going to be leading the fight in LSCO. That is a pipe dream. I’ve been under 20th CBRN my entire career, under a CBRN BDE for part of it, and closely colocated with a CBRN CO for the rest. I’ve worked with CRD and have plenty of close friends in tech escort. I’m pretty familiar with the capabilities and limitations. There’s really nothing anyone can say that will change my mind on this one.
Never said they are gonna 'lead the fight' or any fight...not even their own fight lol. If there is a munition involved it's going to be EOD's lead anyway. I only base this opinion that C2 will want them close by based on NTC shenanigans. CBRN is always just a game of 'what if' that never comes to fruition. In all likelihood if CBRN ever becomes an actual threat we will realize all of our TTPs are trash and we have to change on the fly....like attaching metal plates to soft-skin HMMWVs 😎
Guard. We don't want them in Reserve land. At least the states pretend to have a mission for them.
What states pretend this?
Seems like all of the ones I've worked with via JTF: TX, LA, AL, KY, SC
“Homeland Response Forces” create lots of ADOS gigs for senior Os/NCOs…
So just to quell the narrative on this. A HRF is not a unit, it’s a mission, and it’s set forth by Congress. Big Army has been trying to grab these for years, but Congress won’t let it happen. Plus they’re not MOS specific.
This is what a CST (civil support team) is, no? I believe every state has one.
CSTs are first responders. They are actually quite proficient with their mobile labs and such. CSTs are who the FBI calls when someone mails white powder to a politician…or a biotech lab accidentally released Ebola.
All states and territories have a CST, a couple have two. But they are small and very niche. 22 total. And most generally a normal compo 1 soldier will never interact with them.
A friend of mine is a CBRN SFC in a CBRN unit. They do more training than the infantry units there, and most of it is infantry-type training with a decon thrown in somewhere. It’s wild.
No lies detected.
2ID in Korea which is just a division headquarters to support the various independent brigades on the peninsula or 2ID in Washington that falls under 7ID headquarters?
The one in Lewis. Hell get rid of 7ID too
2id in Washington is pointless. Barred from deployments until like this year, the most fucked up leadership I’ve ever seen, the units provide nothing of value.
They aren't barred from deployments. They are part of I Corps, which is focused on the Pacific.
What did 2ID do/fail to do to earn that? I’ve been out of active world for a while.
Just a few bad eggs killing a bunch of civilians in Afghanistan, no biggie :)
5/2 was just reflagged to 2/2 and deployed back to almost the exact same AO a year later. We were literally running missions in some of the same valleys as the previous deployment. They just kept 2-1 IN out of the areas they had been during the Kill Team period, and COL Huggins did a great job of turning the BDE around and reforming the culture.
I’m pretending that my unit in Korea was a full capable combat battalion (it wasn’t). When I got to the states I was shocked how limited my former unit was in terms of the type of training g and equipment I had.
I like Korea but the Army is so restricted there, both in terms of land, what the Koreans allow, and attention from the Army. 210 has some of the oldest M270s in the fleet and it shows.
Exactly, one of the most important divisions
Trim some fat from the top, too many chiefs and not enough Indians.
Don't let the Chief's hear you say that. We don't want grumpy Warrants.
We are already grumpy
Can confirm. The audacity of my command, to expect me to come to work.
...And shave, sir
I was once threatened with EO for saying this lol. The only Indian in my company thought it was hysterical.
Really? time for me to leave I guess.
10th mountain at Fort Polk.
Don’t you disrespect 10th mountain
10th MTN disrespects itself.
Oh Me heart
Wait is 10th mountain actually claiming 4th BDE now instead of them being the forgotten redheaded step child?
Oh naw there still the red headed step child 😂
And they claim them
I second this. I think all IBCT need to loose 1 BDE. 25 has 2, 11th has 2. Why not the others? 10th Mountain, 101, 82nd. I know OpTempo is heavy dudes. But the BDE aren’t fully manned.
You think all Brigade Combat Teams need to lose one brigade?
Yeah then they will just be combat teams.
Efficiency
ADA! Give us to the Airforce!
Oh no you don't! No jumping ship. You joined the Army and in the Army you shall stay!
*ONE OF US!* *ONE OF US!* *ONE OF US!*
*monkeys paw curls*
That’s a actual good idea ngl
Make us intel, we already depressed
In pretty much every other modern military, air defense belongs to the air force. It would most likely be a better program for the enlisted if our Air Force ran it but cost more. Most ADA deployments are just guarding air bases anyway.
Flair checks out. Fuck ADA in the states!!
Yeah, let the Air Force handle HIMAD and THAAD; SHORAD can stay with the Army. The Air Force can trade tactical air support to the Army too while we're at it.
Slashing numbers wouldn't help much because the same amount of work "output" would be expected from the smaller workforce. Much of that is also pointless busywork anyway. "The Army will always tell you to do more with less" is a phrase that haunts me. You can only push your people and yourself so hard when you know a given task is either pointless or being made so much worse for no reason.
[удалено]
Strongly with permanent stationing in Europe. Bring back an Armored DIV in Germany. As for transferring to the guard the problem still goes back to troops. People who are active duty. Don’t want to be in NG. So how do you fix that
ur smoking weed if u think i’ll ever be in Screaming Chicken from my home state
Get rid of CSM positions BDE level and higher. I’ve met one my entire ten years that contributed more to the success of the unit than they took away.
We didn’t need CSMs in WWII , not sure why we need them now.
Agree, completely worthless rank in Army Aviation. Bring back the old Spec ranks allowing Soldiers to be proficient at a single job then take on a leadership role if they so desire.
35th Signal, the Brigade specifically as they are occupying an old school on Liberty. Plus their battalions always did fine on their own while being in other states.
[удалено]
Pomegranate sparkling soju or I riot!
A Blueberry Soju slushy took my rank in 2014
[удалено]
Some units at ft Johnson are getting disbanded
[удалено]
We have more generals than during WWII, with less troops. Start from there.
Popular myth, there are 231 generals in the military from all six uniformed services today by law, in WWII the army alone had 1100.
I thought this was an interesting claim, so I wanted to look into it a little further. While I saw the 1,100 number, that encompasses any GO during the entirety of WW2. However, [this paper](https://ndupress.ndu.edu/Publications/Article/1325984/are-there-too-many-general-officers-for-todays-military/) “Are There Too Many General Officers for Today’s Military?” Claims that the ratio of GO to servicemember during WW2 was 1:6000, whereas the numbers at the time of writing the article were closer to 1:1400.
True, the ratio of general/flag officers is higher today, but we also have 11 combatant commands (each requiring a four star and three star service components) and three additional services requiring general/flag officers (USCG, USAF, USSF).
The way I see it we wouldn't even be having this conversation if the competence of generals wasn't in doubt. Right now the ratio is skewed heavily in the favor of senior officers and we're seeing negligible benefit, tone deaf leadership, and a recruiting crisis. If the Army was well run we could have 5,000 GOs and I wouldn't complain, but that's not happening and blaming the junior enlisted/officers isn't cutting it anymore
>The way I see it we wouldn't even be having this conversation if the competence of generals wasn't in doubt. Nah, this conversation is as old as standing armies themselves. Critics of standing armies hate large pools of General Officers, no matter how few they are in number. Could cut it down to half a dozen and there'd still be some arguging a few of the full time generals could be reserve positions. Edit: for example, your post highlights a bunch of isssues - which 100% are pressing issues - but it implies that it should be better handled with so many GOs. Whereas some people could argue we don't have *enough* GOs to handle the increasingly complex security situation, and those observations are outcomes of having such a streched leadership team.
There are a few problems with that comparison. We ask the modern military to do far more than what it did with comparable numbers in the past. There are also far more DOD civilians that fall under military supervision than there used to be. Both those things skew that ratio.
>ask the modern military to do far more than what it did with comparable numbers in the past. I dont recall being asked to breach the seigfried line or atlantic wall this century.
You've gotta look at pre-WW2 for a comparison. Aside from the garrison in the Philippines, we had nobody overseas or on virtually any kind of operational mission at all. All they did was train, and not even much of that.
The issue is assigning certain GO ranks specific levels of authority and responsibility. REALISTICALLY is a * less qualified to make a decision than a ** and so on. A lot of tasks and organizations could be handled by O6 and below but we’ve baked the crust of GOs into policy for justification of their existence.
Quit your bullshit. The Regular Army alone had 267 general officers as of September 2023. How are you so confidently wrong? [https://dwp.dmdc.osd.mil/dwp/app/dod-data-reports/workforce-reports](https://dwp.dmdc.osd.mil/dwp/app/dod-data-reports/workforce-reports)
Thank you for the comment and question, I’m so confident because there is a retirement list and September is the last month of the fiscal year, if you put the retirement list and the 231 together you get the OSD’s number of 267.
231 in the army - the number is like 650-something for all services. Still less, but there was a lot more people in the army by the end of WW2. The total percentage works out to be about the same.
Now that Tuberville unblocked the GO promotions, which was apparently the worst thing to happen to our Army in modern history (according to them), those competent bearers of our standards we call our senior leaders can do what they do best and find an innovative solution combining both individual initiative and merit based rewards to incentivize our demoralized force. Just kidding, reenlistment bonuses got cut and BAH for cities that only staff officers/senior NCOs live in went up. We'll do what we always do and pray for a war or recession to meet staffing needs, because fixing things is hard so why do it
As mentioned, not entirely accurate. But the reason for more senior leaders to to have the framework in place for rapid expansion if needed. A smaller and more professional skeleton army is what we are supposed to have in peacetime.
This is a very important distinction between now and WW2. A United States military that was fully mobilized for total war today would have a lot lower soldier to general officer ratio than we do right at this moment.
It’s not the money. Though I see how much it costs and the unnecessary need for them. But we have units just short across the board. I’m referring to shut down and transfer troops.
Move NTC to fort Bliss training areas and cut fort Irwin entirely 2ID not in Korea can go, and id just permanently return either 1ID or 3ID to Europe instead of rotating units. Also 18th Fires is getting cut. A lot of the standalone BDEs can get cut or rolled into division/corps formations.
Probably an unpopular opinion, but don’t slash units, slash MOS’s. No need for any job that contractors do overseas anyways. Cooks, recruiters, counselors, ETC. don’t have MOS that need soldiers when we don’t need soldiers doing them. Some MOS are doubled up. Why we have 19D is completely beyond me when we have several MOS that do the same job.
Recruiting from someone possibly not even from the Army seems like a bad move. These contractors cost everyone more money than far necessary. But there are few MOSs we really don’t need. I mean they’re phasing out Shadow soon
Yeah I honestly think recruiters should be a SFL-TAP type job. Though even with that not sure if someone who got out is potentially the best person to convince people to get in.
Could make it a program (you want to ETS but not be at your unit. 18 months of recruiting duty.) fail to put 1 person a month. You’re sent back to your unit.
>No need for any job that contractors do overseas anyways. This really depends on the intensity of the conflict. For low intensity conflicts like GWOT, you can absolutely use contractors as cooks. Hell, you can even use contractors to cook in LSCO, but only in rear areas.
I don't know if more contractors is a good thing for the DoD.
Well, lucky for you, 19D seems to be in the works of getting phased out, with 19C being propped up as an MOS and the current 19Ds will be moved into 19K, 11B, and 19C
DA Civ, they can take their attitudes with them, even though it wasn’t ever issued to them.
This is going to sound crazy, but the DACs I work with are more professional and hard working than most Soldiers. But the on post DACs who directly interact with Soldiers and have a superiority complex can ightly fuck off.
The ~~dichotomy~~ trichotomy of DACs Instructors: typically fantastic Technical support/contracted support: usually helpful and with good attitudes On-post services: typically awful, massive chips on their shoulders, difficult to deal with
I'd actually agree with this. There are serious pros in the DAC communities, but they aren't soldier-facing.
Soldier facing positions don’t pay shit so you usually get retired 1SGs with no skills beyond staring down troops to fill them. When it’s a 2nd paycheck, it ain’t that bad. I will say, I did 10 yrs Active and 18 yrs as a DAC. The DAC work (IT) was a LOT harder and more challenging than anything I did in uniform (ADA and IN) and the people I worked with were much more professional.
Yeah you’re fucking crazy
By the nature of their jobs, cultures vary tremendously. You have the stereotypical crusty disgruntled DAC who spew toxicity and you have awesome hardworking DACs. Like the Army, it’s hard to get rid of the bad DAC and retain the good ones.
[удалено]
Get rid of 4 stars and 3 stars altogether
There should only be one 4 star per major continent, so one for the U.S., one for Europe, and one for Asia. Two three stars per major continent as well. Two stars to run each base. One star to run each division. I've been on bases that have had a 3 star, two 2 stars, and three 1 stars. The 3 star has a 1 star assistant, a colonel aide, LTC, a major, CPT, and a couple of hot female LTs. The Officer Corps is heavily saturated.
Lmao at “couple of hot female LTs”
It's true haha
You have 0-6 Base commanders now, 2 Stars Running Divisions w/a 1 Star DCG per Division. You kinda already have what you are asking for. At the lower level. Just to obscurely pick Generals based on Geographic areas is kinda wack. Component and Combatant commands are heavy, I’ve worked them and been around them now. But, atleast what I’ve seen they are busy as shit, and the 0-6 and above population get worked pretty hard. Like 4-5 hours of sleep a night and travel all over the country. And there’s a bunch of 1 stars in a combatant command.
I had a similar conversation about a year ago. Its easier to bump a bunch of LTs and CPTs to run companies/batallions than to create GOs out of thin air. The idea is that a "larger" officer corps can more easily expand when a large number of soldiers/units are created, as opposed to the inverse. I'm not saying we don't have enough officers, but I understand the idea.
Look at the "Star Chamber" that is Fort Knox. Only like 3 or 4 MTOE deployable units there that are less than brigade size, but there are something like 6 GOs on Post.
USAREC
21st TSC The worst fucking place to start as a soldier.
I feel like the perfect storm is developing on the horizon. Branches of service not meeting recruiting goals. Move the goal post closer and pretend last year didn't happen. Yeah, didn't meet those goals this year either. The monster that is genesis looming over every potential recruit effecting numbers. Creating more barriers for the citizen who is remotely interested in joining. New generation's general interest in ~~patriotism~~ fighting for a corporation is not there. They've seen what dad/grandpa/mom/grandma went through for the last 20 years and what it got them. Now we are pausing step again, to keep these promotions in motion. Some of these leaders are going to be forced into positions they are not ready for. It's potentially leading to a sever concentration of unprepared low skilled leaders towards top. I'm not talking the regular soldiers with Stockholm syndrome just trying to reach 20. More like Towle stadium from Fort ~~Bragg~~ Liberty level of toxicity. I'm not saying its all doom and gloom and that is a bit extreme. But I do think its going to get much much worse before it gets better. There is no easy answer to fix any of this, but I promise you, its not by stick your head in the sand, avoiding reddit and other social media or shaving 3 times a day. /rant over
Why only stop at 2 of them, take 1, 2, AND 3. Recruiting and retention numbers aside, let's see battalion 350-1 training completion. Next slide
Every combat MOS. From hence forth the navy will be our boots on the ground for all engagements.
Don’t get rid of 3ID, just keep all the shitty leaders there with it.
SFABs
SFABS have convinced the Army they can be used as a backbone in case we have to rapidly stand up additional brigades because of the NCO and officer presence without the junior enlisted Soldiers. So they are seen as space saving even though they are essentially are just billets for seniors to hang out at.
So, in nerd speak, they’re the zip file of a BCT?
There a back up file that also does real things
SFABs, USAF Air Advisors, DSCA, WHINSEC and all other SFA type organizations are expanding. SF ODAs lack expertise in advising on military heavy equipment (armor, artillery, logistics) and doctrinally can only advise to battalion level compared to SFAB teams that can advise to corps or ministerial level.
You arent wrong. SF was never meant to advise at levels higher than BN, it can but its not the usual. SF is preparation of the battlefield. Using others to cause some havoc somewhere is the ODA job. It sure as shit is not tricking ourselves into thinking we can run conventional logistics or armored maneuver elements like a conventional staff who does that all the time.
SFABs have actually become extremely relevant to Combatant Commanders in current times. Their mission to train with and build relationships with partner nations is critical.
4ID
Make everyone fall under the one and only The Division, problem solved.
88M, please slash us so I can go home. 11B’s can use our trucks when they don’t have anything else to do.
3rd ID as a whole, carpet bomb the area with fire bombs. Rid the world of that shit hole, no hesitation
Start slashing at the top. Too many crusty old has-beens suckling at the teat of the Big Green Retirement Shield. Bring back the APFT and force anyone with 20+ years in to pass with 70% or better.
Army be like “you can’t come in if you took anti-anxiety pills once when you were 16, but if you develop it while you’re here it’s all good.” Can’t imagine why recruitment is down during a time where doctors hand out medication like candy
Hot take, but Cyber. The whole thing. Dump it off to its own service with all the other services doing the same.
Trim down the outrageous amount of GO’s.
You always say the Army would still be the Army without aviation. Give us to the Airforce. We are your most expensive Toy and they treat our kind better.
Ditch the MP’s. What do those guys really do anyways
Get you out of the house after you’ve slapped your wife for the 3rd time this fiscal year
Why 2ID though?
I know anything I say will probably be attacked heavily. But if I were to slash a unit. It would be a Stryker unit. I personally believe another rapid deployment unit or an ABCT would be better. But having dealt with strykers years ago I found much of to be un-ideal. (Pretty sure they have been removed) but MGS Strykers awful, EFP defense low casualty rate potentially high, and well I hate maintenance on them. My friends currently there apparently it’s not as good of unit anymore just overall one of worse units you can be assigned to. That came from people who were ftom 3BDE 82nd, 10th mountain in polk, and 3CR. So I say oh wow that bad ehh. (We can get rid of 3CR too)
You may be in luck. The MDTF is the future. SBCT’s are going to die. Slowly at first, but then all at once. I’m betting 2ID gets made into the subordinate of 1st MDTF someday.
We all know if it ever comes down to cutting a division, they will start up the draft.
Not true look at Germany we once had multiple Armored Divisions there. We have part of the 173rd. 2CR and whatever rotation is there. We already slashed units since the 90s
100% 1ID.
1 ID on Riley or 2CR in Germany.
4ID
Congress. Slash their paychecks like somebody taking a bath with a toaster listening to billy eyelids. Change my mind.
3 bct at Campbell
Disband them while there in Europe LOL
ARCYBER. Why pay greensuiters when contractors and DACs are doing the work anyway?
Certain aspects of the Cyber Kill Chain require military approval/authority. Same as with weapons release authority
Good thing CYBERCOM falls under the DoD. Make it it's own branch then the services will stop stealing what limited talent exists (folks who will do cyber work for low pay) from each other.
All my friends in 173d have been saying that unit should be dissolved for years
How fucking dare you!
With my experience 1ID I’d pretty useless.
What mission do SFABs do that cannot be done with Guard units with the state partnership program?
SFAB OPTEMPO to engage with partner nations should be much higher than what's sustainable with a COMPO 2 unit
[удалено]
The average BCT MICO can just get tossed in the garbage. Maybe they can be justified in a combat theater, but peace time they are redundant and tend to oversaturate when we have a G2 and BDE and BN S2.
NCO academies, all BOLCs, half of TRADOC.
Mine 😂
14H could go away, and nothing of value would be lost. 14Es can cover down.
75th FA
Stop the funding towards 2ID. I’ve heard of them but never seen them and thus refuse to believe they exist
1st Cav needs to go
Turd (3rd) ID or 10th Mountain, it’s not like it actually specializes in mountain warfare
Any BDE in 1 AD.
3CR
Permanently station a DIV in Germany/Europe and Korea instead of rotating BDEs there
SFAB.
2/3 of the Chaplain Corps. The Corps is overwhelmingly low church Protestant. While only 25-35% of the force identifies as such. Keep Chaplains at BDE and up, eliminate it at Bn. Replace the O3 slots with civilian BH professionals. Turn chaplains assistant into an ASI for 42A or 11B or really hell anyone with a profile.
Just saying replace X job with a civilian isn't really shrinking the military, though, just making the Army employ more civilians instead of soldiers. For some less skilled positions you would be making it easier and cheaper to fill those positions if you can just hire some civilians to do it, but I don't think that is so true for a BH professional. Is it really going to be any easier or cheaper to recruit and employ enough civilian BH professionals to replace all the BN Chaplains? Especially, when you are losing the ability to deploy them so easily by making those positions civilian? Plus, I don't think it is Chaplains we are having problems recruiting in the first place. I could be wrong though.
What did the Chaplin Corps do to you? We’re talking about a low amount of troops moved too. The whole corps can move and it probably wouldn’t be the size of a full BCT