The TRASHING of the Guard!

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title Sort in Reverse Order Posted

macawman RE:The TRASHING of the Guard! 11/10/2003 1:54:42 AM

>>>No officer above the rank of Captain may deploy. Not the Battalion Commander, not the CSM, not even the CHAPLAIN!!!<<

Quote Reply

sapperfox RE:The TRASHING of the Guard! 11/10/2003 9:02:02 AM

Good Point! I already knew that answer. It is just so sad in so many ways. Again, why even bother to have Guard/Reserve officers like myself. Why bother to spend the money? Why the pretense? It is all just one big joke!!!!!!!!!!!

Quote Reply

macawman RE:The TRASHING of the Guard! 11/10/2003 12:41:08 PM

I think you know this answer as well. It is POLITICAL. The Guard provides a lot of familes extra income some their only income. These Guard familes vote their pocket book that is why this NG officer shame continues. BUT without Guard troop support the continuing occupation mission(SASO)in Iraq could not be sustained with our present level of active combat arms soldiers.

Quote Reply

joe6pack RE:The TRASHING of the Guard! 11/13/2003 12:35:18 PM

Devils advocate on this... How fair would it be to take a command slot away from an active duty officer who has devoted his full time to the Army? Also having served both active duty and guard.. I can honestly say there are some active duty officers that would serve the army better as privates in the guard. However, on the whole, I'd have much rather gone into combat with my active duty unit than the guard unit I was in or any that I interacted with.

Quote Reply

ChdNorm RE:The TRASHING of the Guard! 11/13/2003 9:23:56 PM

How are these NG units being deployed? split up as companies to reinforce active battalions? Or will they operate as whole battalions with new active CO's? It sounds to me like they may be parceled out as companies which would mean that there would be no need for the NG battalion staff. No offence intended, but I would think its better to spread the reservists out with the actives to better their on the job training theyre going to have to have. In my opinion the root of the whole problem is the active component is just too small to accomplish its missions.

Quote Reply

Thomas RE:The TRASHING of the Guard! 11/24/2003 2:37:34 AM

Why train units, when you have no intension of using them?

Quote Reply

macawman RE:The TRASHING of the Guard! 11/24/2003 11:00:20 PM

Thomas: >>>Why train units, when you have no intension of using them <<< Because of State politics, and the anachronist tradition of State militias going back to colonial times are major reasons. But without a national draft system in use, the Guard is getting a real work out in Iraq. It is just a shame that most of them are NOT prepared or equipped for this tour of duty as indicated by Guardsmen complaints filtering back to the States. The US has 'muddled through' this Guard 'situation' through two major wars in the last century by replacing deficient Guard leadership and by the individual WILL of the majority of Guard soldiers in combat. Most of today's NGs did not sign up for combat, but for education benefits and extra income. They usually stay in because it becomes something like an extended family that meets one weekend a month and two weeks every Summer. This extended kinship is a Guard strength and a weakness when it comes to military discipline. Former Guardsmen 36th Bde, Texas NG

Quote Reply

Penta RE:The TRASHING of the Guard! 11/30/2003 8:38:56 PM

There's a thought there, but I'm afraid that the Guard supporters are missing one very key fact. The reason that Guardsmen, more than USAR soldiers, are looked down on...is because they are widely believed to be incompetent. And that is one belief which does have far more than merely a kernel of truth. Most Guard units are political creatures, no more, no less. They're not intended to be operationally-useful troops...Not by the troops within them, not by the state legislatures, not by the officer corps in them. The only people who have ever intended that are the Pentagon and the taxpayer not affiliated with the Guard. In the guard, officers (particularly field-grade and above) are often appointed with regard to political connections. They need have virtually none of the qualifications required of active soldiers; If you want a brilliant example of this, look at the (patently ridiculous) example of the state Adjutant Generals (TAGs). They are given two stars. In New Jersey, at least, the pay is about $158k. In no state do they need to have ANY of the qualifications of their AC counterparts. None. In some states, they are elected, same as the governor or state legislators. That attitude goes all the way down. Guardsmen may be plenty when the balloon goes up and they're gettin shot at...but otherwise? It's a waste of time.

Quote Reply

2 Ways RE:The TRASHING of the Guard! 12/22/2003 11:42:51 AM

Been Active, Been Guard. Worked for every type of Officer, and you want to know the differance. The Guard Officers never pretend to know how poitics in the Active side work. This is not true about the Active Guys. Just ask one and with no knowledge or experience he will begin a hour long discussion on how the Guard Officer isn't at the standard of his Active duty counterpart. Its jealousy. If we went and did the same job the active did in Iraq or anywhere else then why would we need such a large standing Army. Keep giving us substandard equipment and time to train and we will still get the job done.

Quote Reply

RE:The TRASHING of the Guard! 12/25/2003 6:42:39 PM

Hey Folks, I think it simple? The lower the rank the less they need to know, and easier it is to train for a mission. It is not an afront in my opinion. NG officers will likely come in slowly for my afforementioned reason. Sincerely, Keith

Quote Reply

Thomas RE:The TRASHING of the Guard! 2/17/2004 8:08:36 AM

With a formation like the National Guard you are basically looking at a volunteer force. Volunteers are different, either they don't care and want a nice weekend of from the inlaws or they are enthusiastic. The results differ widely. this means that there is no such thing as a standard National Guard unit. Their quality is more spread out than a regular unit. this means, whatever you say about the National Guard, then it is true - of some unit. There is one type of Force that through experience good and bad can really only be performed by part time volunteers: Aircraft spotting and reporting - and I don't quite know why.

Quote Reply

Horsesoldier RE:The TRASHING of the Guard! 2/29/2004 4:53:17 PM

>>After over 20 years of service I am sick to death of how the regular army treats the AMERICAN soldiers of the Army National Guard as TRASH!!!<< I'd guess there are two theories at work here: First, there is a conspiracy against the National Guard on the part of the Regular Army. Other posts have touched on this -- "they fear us, because if Congress knew how good we were, they'd reduce the size of the active component," etc. I don't know anything about the people posting these sorts of thoughts here, but when I've encountered this argument in the real world, it is usually coming out of the mouth of a 'Guard officer or NCO whose % body fat far exceeds his competence as a leader or commander. Usually, the opinion is offered with a beer in hand, sometimes with hotwings, a hamburger, or something similar in the other. You don't tend to hear it at the gym or out on the track. The other theory is that the 'Guard, especially the combat units, can't do the job safely or reliably. Sadly, having nearly eleven years in the National Guard, I'm of the second opinion. There are some excellent soldiers, NCOs, and officers in the National Guard, but there are also plenty of guys whom I would not trust to guard the doughnut display at a Walmart Supercenter, much less serve beside me on a battlefield. My personal favorite anecdote in this respect being a PT test I took when mobilized back in '02. So there I am in the lane to do push-ups with a First Sergeant in the lane next to mine. This guy is the senior NCO for a tank company -- should be up there in front of the troops setting and enforcing the standard, etc. Plus he's AGR, so it's not like his 60 hour a week job at the factory or office interferes with getting out to do some PT. The graders say 'go,' we start knocking out push ups, and the First Sergeant next to me gets just about immediately told to stop and get up. Turns out that he cannot break the plane and do a push up to standard without his gut resting on the ground. Don't even ask about how sit ups or the two mile run went for this winner. With guys like this in the force -- and, in fact, in key leadership positions within the force -- who has any right to think we'll get any respect from the active component? My experience with the regular army has been that they tend to know what I said above -- there are some good troops in the guard, but also some horrible ones, and because the 'Guard focuses on maintaining numbers, not quality, it is very hard to reliably get a good unit out of the 'Guard. This, sadly, seems to end up alienating a lot of the good troops -- the bad ones could care less, so long as they get their drill check (or, these days, a full-time check while mobilized for federal or state duty). Some of those very good soldiers I mentioned above will remain in the 'Guard at least until they get their twenty years, but I've seen a lot of guys move on after getting sick to death of the corruption, incompetence, and lack of opportunities for advancement, quality training, etc.

Quote Reply

	News As History - November 23, 2009
	Home News How to Make War Wars Around the World Austin Bay's On Point Dirty Little Secrets Features Al Nofi's CIC Prediction Market Wargames Measure of Respect On War and Warfare Videos Photos Jokes Community Military Discussion Boards Military Jokes Military Photos Military Book Reviews Military Movie Reviews Military Links Wargame Store StrategyPage Subscribe Login Feedback About Us Search Account Manager Advertise With Us