The TRASHING of the Guard!

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title Newest to Oldest

Pages: 1 2

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

1 2