General: Training for Citizen Soldiers Will Expand

[jamieooh]

Jul. 30, 2012 - 08:15PM |
By GREGG ZOROYA
The end of fighting in Iraq and the drawdown in Afghanistan will not mean a return to a peacetime schedule of drilling one weekend a month and two weeks a year for the 550,000 citizen soldiers of the Army's National Guard and Reserve, according to the Army’s top general.

Instead, they will keep preparing for war, with training periods away from home each year that would grow from a two-week block to up to seven weeks, Gen. Ray Odierno, Army chief of staff, said in an interview Monday with USA TODAY. Drilling one weekend a month would continue.

"As they go through it, their readiness will increase, the number of days training will increase," Odierno said.

Army Maj. Michael Moricas, a member of the Rhode Island National Guard who served in Afghanistan, predicted there might be push-back from employers eager for the previous minimalist approach. And he anticipated mixed reviews from soldiers. "You might have some guys who will be OK with that and some people who will part ways," Moricas said.

The change, which will take effect next year, is a far less demanding schedule than what's occurred after 9/11 when Guardsmen and reservists suddenly left jobs and families for a year or more, preceded at times with four- to six-month periods of training, the general said. But it will be more than the traditional peacetime commitment of drilling one weekend a month and two weeks a year.

"What it will mean for the families is that when they do have extra training, it will be very predictable and they should know very far in advance when it's going to happen," Odierno said. "That's key as we work with employers."

Select National Guard or Reserve units would be part of a five-year cycle of training, available for deployment the last year of that period probably for no more than 30 to 45 days, he said.

In the past decade, National Guard and Reserve soldiers were mobilized at record levels. During 2005, the full-time Army was bolstered by more than 100,000 National Guard soldiers.

Odierno said that National Guard members and reservists acquired combat skills the Army sorely needs now as it tries to save money by reducing its ranks of full-time soldiers from 570,000 to 490,000 by 2017, and cuts the number of combat brigades from 45 to 32.

"How do we sustain the readiness and experience that we've gained in the National Guard and Reserve component?" Odierno asked. "That's what we've been working on."

Current commitments to Afghanistan could mean a year of deployment for National Guard and Reserve troops will continue until the U.S. withdrawal of forces there concludes in 2014.

Joyce Raezer, executive director of the National Military Family Association, said the wars went on for so long, that fewer people remember the peacetime schedule. But she cautioned about adhering to the promised limitations on training.

"If families can plan during peacetime, they'll by OK," she said. "If the Army puts out the schedule and then doesn't stick to it, all bets are off.
http://www.defensenews.com/article/20120730/TSJ01/307300008/General-Training-Citizen-Soldiers-Will-Expand?odyssey=mod|newswell|text|FRONTPAGE|s

[BrendenF11]

Holy shit where to start.

First off there is a difference between the guard and the active duty components. Guard soldiers understand their responsibilities, adhere to them, and maintain a feasible sense of readiness (keep in mind they ARE a reserve component). Active duty members are just that, they are full time army. That is their job nothing more nothing less. I'm not going to get any more into it than that.


>>with training periods away from home each year that would grow from a two-week block to up to seven weeks<<

This will eliminate a high amount of experience from guard unit ranks. No matter how many laws you put in place, ensurances to the soldiers, threats to the employers, etc. it is not feasible for guard soldiers to comit that amount of time every year to the military and maintaining a reasonable relationship with an employer. As an electrician in MN I need 2000 hrs of work a year to qualify for my apprenticeship, and continueing education to maintain my license. So that is roughly 38.5 hrs a week, I need to work as an electrician, so with the seven weeks gone that leaves me 45 weeks I can work. At 40 hrs a week, that would be 1800 hrs. I would still need to make up 200 hrs, which equates to another 5 weeks (of presumable overtime, or my employer signing off on my hrs which if he doesn't then im fucked). How would I make up 5 weeks, get 2 weeks of vacation and still maintain the minimal requirements to legally hold my job, or progress in my job?

That was a rant. My appologies.

When we were at Fort Hood for premob, I noticed a lot of younger soldiers, and soldiers that had some signifigant rank that had not been deployed. In my conversations with them, they said they had a technical MOS or and admin MOS. If the army is going to be delving into the reserve components ranks the way they have been they should consider the basic training teachings of, "everyone is a soldier first" meaning everyone can pick up a rifle and hike out on a patrol. How is someone that does it, even though they have a combat MOS, once a month and two weeks a year more qualified than the soldiers who are active duty and are around it all everyday?


The rest of the article is just a reassurance to soldiers of how CIVILIAN employers will react to the militaries needs. This makes me happy and frusterates me.

A. The army is trying to maintain a solid force by keeping soldiers with a hell of a lot of experience withint the ranks to ensure, in the event of another major conflict, they are ready to fight and have experience to feed off of. They will try to continue to maintain the same readiness and effectiveness of combat units that can be called up along with active components. That is what the Guard is, the combat units on the reserve side. There is a hell of a lot of experience that needs to be retained to maintain an effective fighting force in the guard, in light of the budget cut backs the guard is a very viable option. Pay them less, train them more maintain a relatively same stance of readiness. Economically it makes sense.


B. Reality. Employers, other than walmart, burger king or extremely patriotic small businesses, will not be happy with the amount of work loss. If you work at the Mayo, or as an electrician, or as a teacher, or as a stock broker, you will not be kept on long. 7 weeks a year equates to a hell of a lot of money loss. Anyone that is a small business owner want to tell me how much money they would lose from the loss of a good employee for 7 weeks a year, plus a possible 2 or 3 weeks in vacation?

The concept of the National Guard, it's actually exactly as the name suggests. We are National Guard, I have no problem with my deployment to Iraq I am not putting in 20 years for retirement either, it is a service who many do to serve their community and their state. Now things have obviously changed over the past 10 years, but the concept should remain the same. Why? The Posse Comitatus Act is why. This almost equates to federalizing National Guard soldiers, I say again ALMOST. The National Guard has transformed from what it was to something, it should have never intended to be.

Floods, hurricanes, tornados, wildfires, civil unrest, protection of civilian structures etc. It's hard for a neighbor to shoot a neighbor when their concept of holding the weapon is to ensure their neighbors are safe. Minnesota has a small population, 7 million I think, and we only have 13000, roughly, National Guard members. IF something massive happens where they are needed it would be great to have them here, ie last year 2500 of those soldiers were deployed to Kuwait/Iraq that leaves 10500. If the government wants to go ahead with this plan they should just federalize the guard, strip them of their actual duties and pay for every National Guard unit in each state. It will still save them money.

Personally. The past 4 or 5 years have been well for the guard. They get warning orders far in advance, a year or so, can prepare for their deployments deploy for a year total, come home then wait another 3 or 4 years, then go again. Inbetween the reintegrate, practice their actual jobs in the military and civilian world, then get ready for the next one. It works, and works well why change it?

Increasing the time spent on active duty during peace time in the reserves will not increase the reserve side military readiness, it will simply get rid of soldiers who hold solid jobs, are intelligent, active in their communities, and able to perform and replace them with a group that is less ambitious dependent on the guard paychecks, and doesn't want/ can't hold a steady job. 2 months a year is a high demand on an already stressed force, which will get even further stressed. Also a stress on state budgets unless the feds come through with a lot of money.

Were you trying to piss me off tonight Jamie or what?





:D

[goinloco1]

all I can say is thank god I'm retired from that crap.
I was active 10 yrs and reserve 12yrs. The reserves got to being alot of bs in the last 10 or so years. do nothing but sit in mandatory classes during drill and rarely get to train in their mos. hell, I went to school for ammo as my last mos as well as specialized training on the computer system for it... and never touch anything after the computer training
I held 3 mos's and many other jobs that were thrown at me which I learned by myself from the ground up. I can tell you for fact that the caliber of soldiers and their training today is how shall i say... poor. you aquire skills through school and if not maintained they are lost quickly.
what ever happened to the yearly mosq testing we did back in the 80's and 90's? where you got a couple chances to pass it and if not your tit was in a ringer.
Hell, give one of the young soldiers today a compass and map and see what happens, you want to talk about getting stupid looks.
the army itself is training idiots. spend a boatload of money on training, then make them do nothing but sit through eo classes and such when they should be honing their skills.
my last tour I was called and requested to go with another unit by a csm. reason being was he knows me and knows I know my shit with generators. he also knows I can have most any task thrown at me and it will get accomplished, plain and simple. And yes we are good friends and trust each other to the fullest no matter the situation. That kind of trust is rare in todays military.

As far as the 7 week training they are talking about now. I can see alot of unemployed soldiers. as was said, its a huge hardship on employers and some jobs flat out cant afford to try and cover for you for that amount of time. I do construction observation, qa/qc. I nor the company i work for could afford that amount of time off, especially during the summer. training and 3 weeks vacation would pretty much kill the summer off, although I usually take vacation in january (my slow time). I could plainly see how this would not only hurt employers but families also.

the military (mainly guard and reserve)just needs to get back to training to fight and training in jobs.

I could go on and on... any old soldiers will know what I'm talking about.