And the remaining 5 are question marks.
Don't ask, don't tell. Don't.
Just ignore them. Maybe they will go away.
Jump to content
Posted 08 December 2014 - 06:15 AM
AMERICA'S MILITARY: A force adrift
After 13 years of war, troops feel burned out and without a sense of mission. More doubt their leaders and their job security.
A Military Times survey of 2,300 active-duty troops found morale indicators on the decline in nearly every aspect of military life. Troops report significantly lower overall job satisfaction, diminished respect for their superiors, and a declining interest in re-enlistment now compared to just five years ago.
Today's service members say they feel underpaid, under-equipped and under-appreciated, the survey data show. After 13 years of war, the all-volunteer military is entering an era fraught with uncertainty and a growing sense that the force has been left adrift.
One trend to emerge from the annual Military Times survey is "that the mission mattered more to the military than to the civilian," said Peter Feaver, a political science professor at Duke University who studies the military. "For the civilian world, it might have been easier to psychologically move on and say, 'Well, we are cutting our losses.' But the military feels very differently. Those losses have names and faces attached to [them]."
A Navy aviation machinist's mate first class based in El Centro, California, said operational budget cuts left him and fellow sailors cannibalizing working parts from other aircraft entering phased maintenance so they could repair higher-priority broken jets. Even uniforms are in short supply, he said, as the Navy embarks on what could be a decade of scrimping under sequestration.
"We are on the bare necessities and sometimes not even that. For example, I need new boots but they'll ask me, 'How long can you stretch that?'" he said.
Just 10 days after his visit to Minot, Hagel resigned under pressure from the White House. The given reasons were vague, leaving many to believe the move only reinforced the impression that the Obama administration had no clear vision for the post-war role for the military.
That's anything but reassuring to a force that, according to survey results, widely believe the Defense Department, Congress and the president do not have the troops' best interests at heart.
Posted 31 December 2014 - 02:02 AM
The Real Reason For The Poor State Of US Military Morale
Let's guess - could it be:
1. Obama sucks as commander in chief?
2. Long pointless wars without end?
3. No bonus for losing arms, legs, brains, and futures?
A military with poor morale is a military that fights poorly.
Recently, the Military Times published an article about the declining morale of the armed forces. It hit a big nerve, and rightfully so. A military with poor morale is a military that fights poorly. This should be a huge wake-up call to the senior uniformed and civilian military leadership.
There is a big danger that the wrong fixes will be applied to this problem. Oddly enough, the easiest problems to fix are the ones based on dollars and cents. Yes, the service chiefs will complain, but priorities can be shifted to reduce the hit on service members’ pocketbooks. But it’s not primarily the pay and benefit problems driving the downturn in morale.
According to the Military Times piece, satisfaction with pay and allowances declined from 87% to 44% from 2009 to 2014.
Military pay has kept up with inflation and then some for the past several years. That’s not to say that military pay is a princely fortune, though it stacks up pretty well against the civilian world. After several years of military pay gains, 2015’s pay increase is falling slightly below inflation and the basic allowance for housing formula has changed. Let’s be honest, it’s not as if compensation has suddenly been slashed to the bone. After several years of raises, service members are taking a year of losing slightly against inflation, just like the rest of the federal workforce. Some service members may feel that they aren’t being paid what they rate, but there likely isn’t any dollar amount that would fix that. The plain truth is that military paychecks have improved since most of the force joined.
The other ancillary benefits of the military, be that health care, commissaries, exchanges, or recreation facilities, may have had some small changes here and there. Some are for the worse, like commissary surcharges. Some are for the better: when I joined the Marine Corps, most gyms looked like old-school “iron churches.” Today, gyms and other military recreation facilities are clean and modern. On the whole, though, these sorts of things aren’t moving the needle very far one way or another.
For the most part, the recent downward turn in morale can’t be laid on deployment schedules, either. Some units still have intensive deployment schedules. On an individual basis, some service members also have very high operational tempos, but on the whole, the pace of deployments has declined since the days of the Iraq surge. Only a few years ago, leaders were worried that the pace of deployment would break the morale of the force. Now that deployments have decreased, the worry is that morale is suffering for want of a mission. Service members complain about deployments, but they also complain when they don’t deploy. Deployments are a factor in poor morale, but they aren’t the driving force behind today’s military anomie.
The key factor is senior leadership that has not kept faith with its troops. The rest of the force that doesn’t live within the Washington, D.C., beltway feels that it is being ridden hard and put back wet so that the generals and admirals can claim success before civilian leaders in Congress and the White House. They have come to believe that they are expendable.
There’s no such thing as a free lunch. Even after taking away the burden of operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, the security requirements of the United States have not decreased in proportion with the downsizing of the force. As recently retired Marine General James Amos said, “We will not do less with less. We will do the same with less.” As powerful as generals are, they can’t repeal mathematics. That difference isn’t coming out of nowhere. It’s coming at the expense of personnel, equipment, and training. Today, units have to swap equipment just to deploy; new personnel go forward with inadequate training; and stateside support units, such as depots and training facilities, have to support deploying units with people and equipment. The military is like a subsistence farmer who’s eating his seed corn — it works for awhile, but a reckoning is coming.
Service members aren’t blind to this. Those who’ve been around can sense that they are working harder, but accomplishing less. More work, but somehow, less training. And perhaps they could deal with the extra work. They did join to serve, after all. They just don’t feel as if their loyalty to the institution has been rewarded. They see what appears to be an increasingly capricious and arbitrary force-shaping process. From the Army giving pink slips to soldiers in Afghanistan, the Marines kicking out sergeants at ten years of service, to the Air Force enticing airman to apply for voluntary separation incentives and then revoking the offer, senior leadership has been making its mission, pleasing Congress, at the expense of the rank and file.
That mission of pleasing elected officials isn’t just about dollars and cents and military missions overseas. It’s about senior leaders so cowed by civilian authority that they will throw anyone under a bus to preserve the image of the military. To many, senior military leaders’ fawning obsequiousness in the face of civilian pressure has turned a bastion of warrior spirit into a Mormon ladies’ social. While the military has certainly needed some cultural rudder steers from time to time, events starting with the post-Tailhook witch hunts, and continuing through such initiatives as the 21st Century Sailor and Marine Program, have left service members thinking that they joined to be in the Sands of Iwo Jima but got stuck in a showing of The Sound of Music.
Life in the military has a lot of rewards, but also a lot of sacrifices and hardship. What has made soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines withstand those hardships throughout history is a sense of belonging and the knowledge that someone has their backs.
The source of the military’s discontent doesn’t lie in money, it’s in the fact that many in the military believe that loyalty currently only travels up, not down. Senior leadership can moan about not having the money to fix the morale problem, but there’s not enough money in the world to fix it unless the underlying problem is solved. If the military doesn’t have its peoples’ backs, it will soon be looking at their backs as they walk out the door.
Posted 09 February 2015 - 12:33 AM
US Military Upset Because Susan Rice Tells Generals How To Fight
Sunday on Fox News Channel’s “Fox News Sunday,” veteran journalist Bob Woodward said people in the military are complaining to him that the Obama administration has no strategy to defeat ISIS other then having people like Susan Rice “micromanage” military responses.
Woodward said, “If you talk to people in the White House and the military, I think there’s agreement and John McCain is right and General Flynn is right, there is no strategy. They have not sat down and said this is where we want to go and this is how we want to do it. And the measure of that, when you head into the weeds here, people from the White House are micromanaging the tactical situation on a daily and weekly basis. That’s not their job. They have to kind of do strategic planning and say what do we want to accomplish in the next year.”
When host Chris Wallace asked, “Wait a minute, are you saying that — forgive me, Susan Rice, is telling the generals what to do?” Woodard confirmed it by saying, “And they have got all these people in the White House. You talk to people in the military who are there and they say ‘we are being micromanaged and we’re not given a real plan to say what are we going to do here.’ And it’s not the way to run a war or try to win a war.”
Posted 25 February 2015 - 03:12 AM
Women don't belong in combat unless they are fighting other women.
With few exceptions, women are not good at fighting, and they distract the men when they are wounded or killed.
Putting women on front lines of battle is how wars are lost, and that's why the Pentagon had continuously resisted the idea.
Posted 06 April 2015 - 04:06 PM
If there is a military conflict, how will it turn out?
The US spends three times more than China on “defense.” Advantage: Pentagon. But as the Persians discovered in their wars with the Greeks, having the biggest, best-funded army does not necessarily give you an edge. Instead, it can invite sluggishness, complacency and overreaching.
The US military is the fattest, most zombie-infested bureaucracy in the world. It suffers from an overabundance of resources. It supports troops (at a cost of $1 million per soldier per year) all over the globe.
It builds weapons systems that are often obsolete before they are put into service. It coddles armies of lobbyists, contractors, consultants, retirees, hangers-on and malingerers.
Like all bureaucracies, it looks out first and foremost for itself. Looking out for the security of the nation is a distant second.
America’s 10 huge aircraft carriers, for example, may be marvelous ways to generate contracts, fees and expenses. They may also be great ways to throw US military muscle into two-bit conflicts around the world.
But put them up against a modern, electronically sophisticated enemy… Then what?
We will probably find out…
Posted 04 May 2015 - 07:27 PM
Just like every other bastion of tradition and masculinity, the military is under attack by the forces of progressivism. The military is by its very nature masculine, hierarchical, and undemocratic, as it must be to succeed in its core business of engaging with and killing the enemy. This also makes it a target.
Of all our institutions, the military is the one which has best resisted progressivism, in large part because of the nature of the job. One does not simply turn up and demand equality in the military. Incoming does not discriminate.
However the military is ultimately a servant of the political classes, and this is where the pressure to bow to feminism originates. Everywhere they go women moan, demand special treatment, and undermine hierarchy. This has happened to the military and sadly there is not enough will remaining today to resist it, as we have seen with the recent humiliating sight of soldiers walking in high heels.
Unless there is some change in leadership this can only get worse.
The Obvious Problems
Sensible, sane women take one of the many other options they have in life before they pursue a career in the military. We have to question what sort of women our society is creating that they would seriously consider a career in combat, and what sort of a society we are that allows them to follow through such a bizarre and catastrophic decision.
What would make a woman want a low paid job they cannot physically do, while surrounded twenty-four hours a day by dangerous jerks that treat them like shit? Unsurprisingly, for those who know the nature of women it is exactly that. Most of them have daddy issues, are mentally damaged, or the losers of the sexual market who cannot secure a man and have no other career options to fall back on.
The most obvious problem with women in the military is that they are simply not good enough. Even with the reduced physical requirements for the non-combat roles they are eligible for now, many of them still fail to make the grade. They cannot even meet their own specially lowered standards for a job stacking blankets but still draw the same pay as real soldiers who have to work even harder to pick up the slack.
The Human Cost
Jessica Lynch became famous and scored a book deal after she was captured in Iraq in 2003. Her supply convoy, being driven by another female soldier, got lost and was ambushed in Nasiriyah, a militia stronghold that they were ordered to avoid. Lynch was heralded as a hero at the time by the media, portrayed as fighting to the last bullet.
In reality she had not fired a single round from her weapon. She had only joined the Army to save up money for college. The driver of the lead vehicle, Shoshana Johnson, joined the Army but never intended to go into combat. Like most women she just wanted the fun, fun, fun parts of being in the military, but not the actual, you know, military part of it. The oath they take means nothing to them.
Marines who were supposed to be securing bridges across the Euphrates for the invasion now had to be re-tasked to rescue this clusterfuck. Eleven soldiers died in the ambush. Six more, like Jessica Lynch, were captured. Another eighteen Marines died whilst desperately fighting through entrenched enemy positions in a hostile city to get to them in time.
Men, real men, real soldiers, then had to go in and rescue a scared nineteen-year-old girl from behind enemy lines because of progressives’ insistence that we are all the same and that women should be in the military despite all the obvious evidence that they shouldn’t.
I can’t tell this story without mentioning the real hero of that convoy. Sergeant Donald Walters was the blonde-haired American whose actions were misattributed to Jessica Lynch. Sergeant Walters’ vehicle became bogged down in sand. While the rest of his convoy made their escape, evidence suggests that he provided covering fire from his stranded vehicle.
He was abandoned alone, fifteen miles behind enemy lines and surrounded. He never made it out. He fought until he ran out of ammunition, and then he fought hand to hand. Eventually he was overcome, captured and then executed by the Shiite militia. While everybody has heard of Jessica Lynch, you have probably never heard of Sergeant Walters. If anybody deserves to be remembered from that day, it is him.
I don’t blame the women. They don’t know what they want. I blame the system that lies to women that they can be soldiers when it should be protecting them from themselves and their childish decisions. They should have been told, politely but firmly, no thanks—for their own safety and for that of the men serving alongside them. We do not allow children to serve in the military, so why would we allow women?
Women don’t actually want to be in combat. Their silly demands to be included are like a girl wanting to ride your motorcycle. It’s dangerous, exciting and looks fun so they want it, but when they get there they find they can’t handle it and they drop it. Women just like to push boundaries. The correct response is to pat these girls on the head, tell them to leave this to the grown ups and ride off.
Women In The Military Are Not Patriots
There is a more serious problem than women being too feeble, fat and slow, and generally the worst soldiers known to mankind. It is more serious than them sleeping with senior ranks and subverting hierarchy. It is more serious than them getting pregnant on deployments or spreading diseases on base.
It is even more serious than women fucking up and getting good men killed. Even if we lived in the fantasy world of feminists where women really were just as capable as men, there are more deadly consequences of sending women to war.
We can afford to lose men in war. As long as there are healthy women back home having children the nation will live to fight another day. The presence of women in the military foreshadows a society’s downfall.
Look at the Peshmerga in Iraq, or the final days of Nazi Germany. These were not strong, independent women or an exercise in equality, they were the last, desperate gasps of a dying society. The Islamic State are marrying off their women and having as many children as possible. The Kurds are sending their women to the front line. Guess what the long term consequences of this is.
The biggest existential threat to the US and Western countries is not rogue states or Islamic terrorists. It is the loss of our individual identities as nations. Every woman that is lured away from the role of wife, mother and homemaker by the modern world leaves behind her a hole which must be filled. If our people cannot or will not fill those holes then they will be filled for us by immigration. A nation must grow or die. A population that cannot sustain itself will be replaced.
If our women are too busy playing soldiers or “leaning in” then the next generation will come from elsewhere and will not be like us. Men’s sacrifice for society was dying in wars and the dangerous jobs. Women’s sacrifice was bearing the next generation. The tradition of the pedestal arose because women carried within themselves the future of our nation.
With the encouragement of government and media they abdicated their responsibilities and with it, their pedestal. Their talk of patriotism is bullshit. If women truly wanted to serve their nation then they would get married, stay married, and have children.
Edited by Zharkov, 04 May 2015 - 09:09 PM.
Posted 14 July 2015 - 12:39 PM
Some deserters face court-martial but the majority are discharged on less-than-honorable terms. Army officials said more than 20,000 soldiers have deserted since 2006.
Cops Arrest Woman, 57, For Battering Female Domestic Partner With Dildo
A Florida woman is facing a domestic battery charge after allegedly using a dildo to batter her female domestic partner during a fight in the couple’s residence, police allege.
Posted 15 July 2015 - 04:46 PM
It helps being a soldier if the government you are defending is worth your time and trouble. The Obama regime is not worth anything.
Many soldiers fighting for the Nazis were later ashamed of their government when they learned what they had been doing in the camps. The same is true of the US military today, as soldiers learn how corrupt the government has become, possibly the most corrupt government in human history.
Drone murders, torture of prisoners, assassinations of journalists and dissenters, bribery, drug running, gun running, telling lies to the people - it all adds to the burden carried by today's soldier in America. Why any man or woman would want to support all of that and become part of the problem by military service is explained only by ignorance. The younger the soldier, the less informed he or she is.
Posted 19 July 2015 - 01:03 AM
Я ел с большим аппетитом, так как почти умирал от голода. Боюсь, ты это себе не совсем верно представляешь, не слишком уверенно произнесла Бесс. Место это благодаря своему великолепию всегда поражало воображение. А там будет видно! , Я воспитывался у тетки, вместе с геранями, фуксиями и мопсами. Завопил я вне себя от ярости. Если вы продадите нас людоедам мы сделаем себе горькое мясо. Спросил гасконец, забывшись от радости и бросаясь Филиппу Красивому в ноги. Неужто вы покидаете нас, как другие? Послушай, ты мне надоел!
Брошу все и уйду туда, где солнце, воздух и зеленая травка. Как понятны эти колебания в юной девушке, попавшей в такое положение! Когда я шагнул им навстречу, услышал справа от себя такой рев, что меня бросило в дрожь. К берегу, к берегу! Когда я заговорил, он поднял на меня глаза и спокойно ждал конца моей вспышки. Случилось это на ЛангаЛанга, искусственном острове, которого даже не видно под домами. Мачты и гики, перепутавшись с вантами и разодранными парусами, свисали с его борта. tya2 раскраски жасминов select comfort sleep number 5000 eastern king mattress sgs9 алоэ вера форевер регистрация , Они знают, где там сортир. Эссен перед походом лично осматривал свой корабль, заглядывая во все щели и углы.
Только сейчас охотники заметили, что Виллема нет рядом. Воскликнул Лабу и опрокинул еще рюмку коньяка. Снова засмеялась Вега, с легкостью серны опережая сестру. И, наполнив стакан водой, она торопливо сделала несколько глотков. Я обязан составить предварительный протокол. coaster size template dzg0 описание фиалка ле-царь салтан xni7 виноград подмосковья продажа Сайт петербургская орхидея уход fkj Пластер plaster-русеан 30 кг iuz , Мучительно долго карабкались мы по скользкому руслу ручья, куда наконец спустились из дебрей. Алф, ступайка играть на улицу.
Он отошел, шатаясь, к главной мачте. Нужно немедленно чтото делать. На этой неделе, не то. Спускайтесь, ваше высочество, сказал человек во рву, тут не будет и пятнадцати футов, и мягко трава! Быть может, тебя первого! Очень жаль, граф, что вы оставили службу, произнес принц Конде. , , С избавлением от смерти, ребятушки, и тебя, Степан Елисеевич, поклонясь, сказал он.
Posted 19 August 2015 - 04:21 PM
There were many brave women that laid their lives down for freedom in the battle against fascism in The partizans of Russia and many other countries. Countless women have suffered in Nazi and Israeli prisons and never yielded an inch. I have known such women and take my hat off to them.Iraqi women have suffered beatings and endless rapes in Abu Ghraib from their Israeli and US captors, and today captive women of ISIS (which is a US Israeli affiliate) suffer enormous hardships and torture. Lets respect their contribution to freedom also. Even American black servicewomen have suffered rapes and torture from their fellow servicemen, they need our sympathy and respect
Edited by Shura, 19 August 2015 - 04:23 PM.
Posted 19 August 2015 - 11:39 PM
Glad you are so concerned about gender.
It's more about national security and the lack of it for the past 3 presidents.
Clinton, Bush, and Obama have done everything possible to humiliate the military, the American people, the country, and everything it means to be an American. The addition of transgender soldiers to the military is more of the same. It really doesn't help to turn a fighting force into a circus of clowns.
Women have their place in the military but it's not in ground combat operations except as medics and other non-combatant roles. They are not psychologically or physically adapted to the necessities of combat, and every Pentagon general who knew that has been dismissed by Obama.
The whole point of making military men wear women's shoes is not to sensitive them to women's issues but to make them appear weak and ridiculous to the entire world. For the same reason of humiliation, Obama refuses to return the military salute.
It's the US government mocking America and Americans again. That's what women in the military is all about, not equality - for there is no equality in combat. They can dress women up in military uniform, provide helmets and rifles and back packs, but they are still women and they are not equal to men in combat.
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users