[cat in the hat]

Originally Posted by JimP

$Bill Clinton, when he "reduced the size government," did so on the backs of cutting the active force. He put the combat power of the Army into the Guard, and the CS,CSS into the Reserves. Smart in one way in that if we ever MOB for a "war," the hometown goes and gets immediate support. That was part and parcel of his militant adventurism around the world with Madelain Albright (half-bright). Many of these places we are still stuck, a generation later.

It's unfair to the Guard as they have to complete the individual, common, and collective tasks in 29 days for the year, wherein our active forces barely can get them done in 365 days. We can do EO/SHARP/suicide prevention/and security awareness training like crazy, but running a range or getting out and practicing killing our enemies..?? Not so much.

Not sure about the arming status of the Guard, but when we discussed it down here, if they are federalized (Title 10), the decision was made NOT to arm them (allow rounds). As usual, I think that a stupid decision. If it is dangerous enough to have the guard and require them to have weapons, they should have the rounds for the weapons. If the Brass doesn't "trust" their troops with live rounds, then the Brass should be relieved for failure to train their forces adequately.

Another issue with the guard is the politics from state level. Many senior leaders get their positions based in something besides their competency.

And that leads to the sort of leader who puts troops in full battle rattle at attention so a politician can address them for a photo op.