Quality of U.S. soldiers

[SigmaAaron]

Something that has crossed my mind a lot, curious on other QPs thoughts and info, if topic has been discussed before feel free to move to delete....

After time spent with other foreign forces it has come to my attention of the so called 'babying' of our forces. My father (due to agent orange) R.I.P. never said much about Vietnam but he did speak of the days when drill sergeants were allowed to 'put their hands on you'. I know because of the ever expanding numbers of media and our countries infatuation with lawsuits, have helped diminish our quality of soldier in past decades.
I like to reference my 1st hand experience with British soldiers. Their infantry training towards the end they have a kind of crucible, dropped something like 30 KMs alone with no compass or map and have to find their way home. Stories like this give me a feeling of inferiority. I know I left OSUT wanting more thinking that was it?
All combat mos's have a certain level of arrogance to them yet the rest of the worlds military's can bring a humble sense. As SFs mission you know you have more experience with other countries training than your assets.
Is it foreseeable for our military ever going back to a more intensive training process? What are your thoughts on quality or quantity (have read some past posts on this subject here)? Do most of you feel you still need the CAV and INF or are we on the edge of obsolete?

[BMT (RIP)]

I was a DS from Oct '60's till Aug '64.
Never had to touch to a trainee.
I could put enough crap on a POS trainee they either straightened up or went AWOL.
Some POS started the rumor at the old 3d Army stockade in Atlanta, that I was the meanest DS AIT Inf. Ft. Gordon. :boohoo

BMT

[SigmaAaron]

I didn't think it would come off so literal. I was speaking more of things like the foot on the back during push ups, tossing people around into positions things like this. I wasn't really exacting on just physical aspects, more towards longer cycles, more in depth manuevers, more knowledgeable. I imagine if infantry just had 1/4 of what SO's learn, or introduce more ranger skills and obstacles;or if they could even match Marines 10 week program and a 5 week rifle Q. etc.

[Peregrino]

How tough does our military have to be? When you can't get anything else right, increase the suck factor? Is that it? Maybe the "suck factor" isn't as necessary as recidivists who can't lead/train today's Soldiers think it is. Our Soldiers/Army are getting the job done. In point of fact, some of our Soldiers/units are the most combat experienced assets the US has EVER had. 13 years of near continuous deployments to combat (for some Soldiers/units) will do that. None of our "allies" can say the same. While true that a large percentage have never deployed and a larger percentage have never heard a shot fired in anger, EVERYONE who signed up in the last 13 years faced the near certainty that they could be deployed to combat. None of our "allies" can say the same. Again - how hard does it have to be for the average US Soldier? I think on the whole (there are exceptions, but that's what they are - exceptions), they've proven their mettle and the "sneers" of "allies" about "coddling" has more than a touch of jealousy.

[SigmaAaron]

I follow....that's a good point.

[(1VB)compforce]

Interestingly, I experienced the end of the era that you are describing. In 1986, I remember being pulled into the laundry room in Sand Hill, Ft Benning and having a little wall to wall counseling, for which I was on the receiving end. In my first unit, I screwed up and dropped the ball on something stupid (picking up uniforms from the cleaners) and still carry the chipped teeth that were the result. At the end of the day, I never made those mistakes again and grew into a pretty reliable soldier.

I also got to experience today's Army, reenlisting in 2005 to join an SF Group as a Support Soldier. I had to go through AIT along the way and worked with soldiers that had never been through the "last hard class", only the current version. On my deployment to AFG, I worked with both SOF and conventional support soldiers and was able to view their contributions through the lens of experience. I did not work with combat arms outside of the Teams much, only once in fact, but I got to see a wide range of the CS and CSS soldiers in a war time, combat theatre, situation.


There are both positives and negatives to the way things have evolved. Today's (non-SOF) soldier is more technically proficient. The TTP's have evolved to take advantage of the latest and greatest techologies and we've raised the bar on being able to execute in the small unit tactics. Where I feel the negatives come in is on the leadership side. PC has invaded the services very effectively. Troops are being put into a constant state of minor paranoia that their smallest action is scrutinized looking for any fault that can be used to crucify them. Hell, back in my early years it was pretty much a requirement to have at least one Article 15 to be an NCO. Now one Article 15 becomes part of the paperwork trail in trying to get rid of the soldier. Back then, when you screwed up, you stood up and said "I screwed up" and you took your lumps, whether it was remedial PT, staff duty for a month or an Article 15. Now if you say "I screwed up" you're pretty much guaranteed a minimum of an Article 15 and you're lucky if you don't lose rank, pay and possibly your career. This is leading to an Army that evades responsibility in the big things, while still being successful at the little things.

There's another trend on the support level that is crippling the service. The use of contractors. Back in the day, a soldier had an MOS and their job was to perform all the duties of that MOS. They got good at it and as they rose through the ranks, they really learned what they were doing. Today, that same support soldier is receiving solid training on their job, then when they get to their duty station, they aren't allowed to perform the functions of the job leading to skill atrophy. I'll give an example. There is a CW3 that I know that is in the IT field, my personal specialty (and MOS until I got out). Now most of you know that the WO corps is supposed to be the technical experts in their field. This CW3 is currently performing help desk activities. That means he answers the phone and takes down the information on the problem that the caller has. Once he gets the information, he generates a ticket for the local contractor to solve the problem. If you were to call his help desk, this CW3 is NOT ALLOWED TO EVEN RESET YOUR PASSWORD. Great use of a ton of training, no? Is he capable of acting on a high level, yes. Is he allowed to actually do the job he was trained for? no. What an incredible waste of time and money. Even more important, what do you think the odds of him reenlisting are?

My point is that it is not the soldier that is any better or worse than they were in the past. The current soldiers have more tools, but on an individual level I think both groups are just as capable. It's when you add in the bureaucracy of today's Army/Services/Government, the soldier is not being put in a position to be successful, let alone to be exceptional. I will add that, to a degree, the latitude given to SOF soldiers changes the playing field. Most of the differences I am citing are on the conventional and SOF Support sides of the house, as that is where I served.

[Flagg]

Something that has crossed my mind a lot, curious on other QPs thoughts and info, if topic has been discussed before feel free to move to delete....

After time spent with other foreign forces it has come to my attention of the so called 'babying' of our forces. My father (due to agent orange) R.I.P. never said much about Vietnam but he did speak of the days when drill sergeants were allowed to 'put their hands on you'. I know because of the ever expanding numbers of media and our countries infatuation with lawsuits, have helped diminish our quality of soldier in past decades.
I like to reference my 1st hand experience with British soldiers. Their infantry training towards the end they have a kind of crucible, dropped something like 30 KMs alone with no compass or map and have to find their way home. Stories like this give me a feeling of inferiority. I know I left OSUT wanting more thinking that was it?
All combat mos's have a certain level of arrogance to them yet the rest of the worlds military's can bring a humble sense. As SFs mission you know you have more experience with other countries training than your assets.
Is it foreseeable for our military ever going back to a more intensive training process? What are your thoughts on quality or quantity (have read some past posts on this subject here)? Do most of you feel you still need the CAV and INF or are we on the edge of obsolete?

About a month ago I had the chance to meet and spend time with a bunch of current service US Army Airborne, Ranger, and SF folks and some UK Forces Paras while I was in Normandy for the 70th.

What a great bunch of fellas(as well as one really switched on young female West Point grad with a fantastic attitude towards her soldiers).

The amount of operational and combat experience the folks I met possessed left me feeling a bit embarrassed(and I've done a bit of gang green overseas travel) actually.

I was impressed not just by the obvious big things(fitness, bearing, discipline, experience, maturity, professionalism) but the subtle little things(diplomacy, people skills, humor).

You mentioned arrogance. I certainly didn't see any.

The worst I personally saw was the odd person in ACU's without a Red, Green, or Tan beret(ACU brimmed cap, not sure what it's called) who could stand to lose a few KGs.

Very professional...and that includes before, during, and after a whole lot of alcohol was consumed in uniform and in public.

I can only assume there were some First Sergeants and Company Sergeant Majors that offered some verbal guidance on the consequences of mistakes in the public eye on such an occasion. ;)

[blacksmoke]

As a first generation American of British decent, and having the experience of working with British contractors for about 7 months, I would say don't believe everything you hear. While the UK certainly has a professional military, some of their attitudes and stories are on par with the dumbest of guys here I the states. Capability-wise, I'm not jealous.