- Reaction score
- 146
- Points
- 710
Not unrelated subjects. From William Arkin, Washington Post:
Hollow Army, Hollow Patriotism
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/earlywarning/2008/01/our_new_hollow_army_comes_from.html
I'm not sure about that last para. Certainly most of the middle and upper classes (in Canada too) have not been volunteering for military careers for long time, if they ever did. Just look at avoiding Vietnam through college, or the reserves.
As for tours:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2004140449_webarmy23.html
Mark
Ottawa
Hollow Army, Hollow Patriotism
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/earlywarning/2008/01/our_new_hollow_army_comes_from.html
The United States has a national security crisis on its hands.
The Army once again missed its benchmarks for recruiting in 2007. And, as it struggles to fill the ranks in wartime, it's lowering the "quality" of recruits it will accept.
That sets our Armed Forces up for long-term problems on the battlefield. But it also speaks to a far greater question about our country's willingness to truly support our troops.
A new study from the National Priorities Project, a Massachusetts-based research organization, found that the percentage of recruits entering the Army with a high school diploma dropped to a new low in 2007 and was nearly 20 percentage points shy of the Army's goal. The study additionally found that average scores on the army qualification test are dropping.
The Army responds that "we're not putting anyone in the Army that we don't feel is qualified to serve as a soldier."
But its answer to the recruiting problem -- lowering standards, loosening age restrictions and increasing bonuses and other economic incentives -- can only be a short-term fix. Less qualified recruits are known to drop out more and reenlist less than soldiers with more education and higher aptitudes. They are less able to perform their missions. And they are less capable of surviving on the battlefields of an extremely complicated world.
Perhaps the end of the polarizing Bush administration, as well as an exit from Iraq, will encourage more qualified and motivated young people to join the military.
But I think the crisis goes beyond Iraq and Bush.
The National Priorities study underscored that lower and middle-income families are supplying the lion's share of recruits. Our military is increasingly less representative of our society. And I think one of the drivers behind that trend is that Americans are fundamentally uncomfortable with the tenor of the war against terrorism.
The flag waiving and the slogans and the eye-watering reverence for the troops is still on display. But the patriotism is mostly hollow. The country is clearly not behind the kinds of wars being waged to defeat terrorism. And increasing the size of the Army or throwing more money at the Pentagon is not going to address this fundamental problem.
I'm not sure about that last para. Certainly most of the middle and upper classes (in Canada too) have not been volunteering for military careers for long time, if they ever did. Just look at avoiding Vietnam through college, or the reserves.
As for tours:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2004140449_webarmy23.html
The Army is considering a proposal to cut soldiers' battlefield tours from 15 months to 12 months beginning in August, in a sweeping effort to reduce the stress on a force battered by more than six years at war.
The proposal, recommended by U.S. Army Forces Command, is currently being reviewed by senior Army and Pentagon leaders, and would be contingent on the changing needs for troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.
"Our top priority is going to be meeting the combatant commanders' requirements, so there may be no decision until we get more clarity on that," Army Col. Edward Gibbons, chief of the plans division for Forces Command, said Wednesday. He said the goal was to meet those demands while still reducing soldiers' deployments and increasing their time at home between tours.
Gen. George Casey, chief of staff of the Army, has been pushing to move back to one-year deployments, citing the heavy burden that the 15-month stays put on troops and their families. Just last week he hinted that the shorter tours could begin this summer.
But defense officials have been reluctant to talk much about the shift because it will depend heavily on what Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, recommends when he gives his assessment on the war to Congress in March or April.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates ordered the move to 15-month deployments about a year ago, as the Pentagon struggled to fight wars on two fronts.
Mark
Ottawa