I found out about this study by watching the news this morning.
I went to the Official Army Website (
www.army.mil) to see the Army's report on the study. However, the MSNBC news report had added that there was a perception of poor officer leadership, at battalion-level, that the Army link did not show. I found the statement here, however, as well as on some other links:
Washington Post
Edited: Must register to site for link. Scroll down to next post to see the Washington Post report.
Quote:
|
From the Washinton Post report"A slim majority of Army soldiers in Iraq -- 52 percent -- reported that their morale was low, and three-fourths of them said they felt poorly led by their officers, according to a survey taken at the end of the summer and released yesterday by the Army. "
|
Some months ago, a trusted friend who enlisted into the Army to serve his country in this crisis, echoed the same feelings to me in a letter. I'll have to add that he comes from a wealthy New York family and also has a master's degree from a well respected university. He didn't join to
escape a bad set of circumstances. He joined out of a sense of patriotism and still wants to make the service a career. "It seems that they [the officers] don't care about what is going on here anymore", he wrote, "as long as it briefs well."
What is driving this perception among soldiers in regular units? Generally, it seems, that the elite units bypass these issues. Better leadership (officer and NCO), better training, tight cohesion, and more of a sense of purpose might be the distinction between the elite units and most conventional units. Or, I might be totally wrong. Well, let's discuss it.