Page 9 of 9 FirstFirst ... 56789
Results 161 to 174 of 174

Thread: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military

  1. #161
    Postman vector7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Where it's quiet, peaceful and everyone owns guns
    Posts
    21,172
    Thanks
    16
    Thanked 65 Times in 60 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military



    Meanwhile...










    Threat from Russian and Chinese warplanes mounts



    5998 CONNECTTWEET 157 LINKEDIN 746 COMMENTEMAILMORE

    WASHINGTON — Chinese and Russian warplanes have been increasingly aggressive intercepting U.S. military aircraft and patrolling near America’s West Coast, prompting the Air Force’s top combat officer to label their provocations one of his top worries.

    Air Force Gen. Herbert “Hawk” Carlisle, who leads Air Combat Command, said in an interview with USA TODAY that meeting the challenge from the Russian and Chinese to flights in international airspace is essential but dangerous.

    “Our concern is a resurgent Russia and a very, very aggressive China,” Carlisle said.

    Both countries are intent on expanding their spheres of influence — Russia in eastern Europe and the Pacific with China focusing much of its effort over the disputed South China Sea.

    “Their intent is to get us not to be there,” Carlisle said. “So that the influence in those international spaces is controlled only by them. My belief is that we cannot allow that to happen. We have to continue to operate legally in international airspace and international waterways. We have to continue to call them out when they are being aggressive and unsafe.”

    The stakes are high. Aggressive intercepts of U.S. patrol planes run the risk of mid-air collisions that would escalate tensions among nuclear powers.

    “Any accident that occurs while the U.S. military is playing cat and mouse with Russian or Chinese forces could escalate into a real fight,” said Loren Thompson, a defense industry consultant and military analyst at the Lexington Institute. “If it does, American victory is not assured, because U.S. forces are operating thousands of miles from home and the other side is near its main bases. Small confrontations can turn into big wars, and Russian military doctrine embraces the use of nuclear weapons to win local conflicts."

    An increasing number have occurred in recent months, Carlisle said, with fighters from Russia and China buzzing perilously close to American military aircraft.


    USA TODAY
    Chinese fighters buzz Navy patrol plane

    The Pentagon has denounced the hazardous intercepts for more than a year, although condemnation hasn’t halted the practice. On May 17, two Chinese fighter jets flew dangerously close to a U.S. Navy patrol plane over the South China Sea. China has been on a campaign to assert its sovereignty over the busy waterways, building artificial islands on reefs in the sea and establishing military bases. In late April, a Russian fighter pilot performed a “barrel roll” over the top of an Air Force RC-135 reconnaissance plane, Carlisle said, above the Black Sea.

    There has also been an uptick in long-range bomber activity from the Russians in Eastern Europe and extending to flights off the U.S. West Coast, Carlisle said.

    “We have seen an increase,” Carlisle said. “All the way down to the California coast. The number and frequency has increased.”
    For China, the goal appears to be establishing control of the international airspace over the South China Sea. There are conflicting territorial claims among countries in the region with China upping the ante by establishing a military bases on artificial islands around the Paracel and Spratley Islands chains.

    Carlisle expects that the Chinese will institute an Air Defense Identification Zone over a large portion of the South China Sea. Zones like these extend beyond a country’s borders in its national security interests. Aircraft entering such a zone are required them to identify and locate themselves. The United States has established them after consulting with neighboring countries.

    The Chinese unilaterally set up an identification zone in the East China Sea in 2013. Carlisle expects a similar action soon in the South China Sea.

    “Their expansion into the Paracels and the Spratleys is so they can declare it and then have the capability to enforce it, where they can do intercepts,” Carlisle said. “They are doing it outside of what could be consider the norms.”

    Maintaining communication with the Russian and Chinese military is key to avoiding mishaps, Carlisle said. Training pilots to deal with intercepts will continue.

    “As they become more aggressive, you run the risk of miscalculation,” he said. “You don’t know where that’s going to lead, or end.”

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


    Nikita Khrushchev: "We will bury you"
    "Your grandchildren will live under communism."
    “You Americans are so gullible.
    No, you won’t accept
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    outright, but we’ll keep feeding you small doses of
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you’ll finally wake up and find you already have communism.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    ."
    We’ll so weaken your
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you’ll
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    like overripe fruit into our hands."



  2. #162
    Expatriate American Patriot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A Banana Republic, Central America
    Posts
    48,597
    Thanks
    78
    Thanked 27 Times in 27 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military

    Seriously? Who's gonns stand there while a Chinese soldier holds your head steady and takes a few breaths and practice aims before killing you? LOL

    I can break bricks too.
    With a fucking hammer.
    A Big, fucking, fuckyouup hammer.
    And a gun from a distance.
    Libertatem Prius!


    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.




  3. #163
    Creepy Ass Cracka & Site Owner Ryan Ruck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    24,463
    Thanks
    46
    Thanked 61 Times in 60 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military


    US Marine Corps Removes The Word 'Man' From 19 Job Titles And Adopts Gender-Neutral Descriptions

    June 28, 2016

    The word 'man' is being taken out of 19 job titles with the United States Marine Corps, it was reported this week.

    The word 'Marine' will instead take the spot of the word 'man' for 15 job titles, according to a report from The Washington Post.




    Marine rifleman Sgt. Geoff Heath told the Post: 'On one hand, the name changes from "man" to "person" or whatever they want to call it doesn't really matter.

    'They could call mortarmen bakers for all I care.

    'But on the other, it's a direct reflection on society's crybaby political correctness.'

    The official reveal will likely happen soon, the newspaper reported.

    Defense Secretary Ash Carter ordered the military in December to open all military jobs to women, including the Marine Corps and special operations forces like Navy SEALs and Army Green Berets.

    During a visit to Newport, Rhode Island, in late May, Carter was asked whether job titles that end in 'man' should change throughout the military.

    Carter spoke about the benefits of opening jobs to women to make 'full use of the wonderful talents of half of the population of the country'.

    'Signifying that in all appropriate ways is, I think, exactly that, very appropriate and needed,' he said.

    Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus called in January for a review of Navy and Marine titles.

    Mabus has said that he wants titles that more accurately convey who is doing the job and what the job is.

    He has said: 'In the overall scheme, it's a small thing, but I think it's important because it's what sailors and Marines call each other, and words do matter.'


    Former army intelligence specialist Kayla Williams told Stars and Stripes: 'All of these steps making job titles gender neutral, like the change from fireman to firefighter, are really important to help young girls understand they can grow up to tackle any challenge they are qualified to do.'

    Williams is the director of the Center for Women Veterans at the Department of Veterans Affairs and told the news outlet: 'This change, while it seems subtle, is part of a broader shift of inclusivity in our country and our military, which is important to today's women and tomorrow's girls.'

    A Navy review of 'gendered job names' continues, Stars and Stripes wrote.

  4. #164
    Postman vector7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Where it's quiet, peaceful and everyone owns guns
    Posts
    21,172
    Thanks
    16
    Thanked 65 Times in 60 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military

    US Marines To Accept Chubbier Women

    by Tyler Durden
    Jul 6, 2016 9:47 PM

    In an effort to maintain the new status quo of cutting standards everywhere in the name of equality and "progress", the Marine Corps announced major changes over the Fourth of July holiday weekend regarding how much it will allow service members to weigh, and the biggest shift comes for women: going forward "larger" ladies will be allowed to defend the country while also standards used within the physical fitness test will also be relaxed.

    In a document released by USMC Fitness division, the new height and weight standard took effect on July 1, 2016 and is relaxing regulations to increase the pool of potential parties. Think of it as a covenant lite loan in a way... only "heavy." Why would the US do this? One could be excused for understandably saying that the US is becoming more progressive and is accommodating those who have the heart to serve but not necessary the physical capability.



    We see a different reason for the US to be relaxing admission tests, which is this chart highlighting weak capacity from the Heritage US Military Strength Index:



    What's changing? According to the Washington Post, the Marine Corps will now allow chubbier women to, so to say, slip through the cracks.

    "Female Marines will be allowed to weigh five to seven pounds more than before for each inch of their height, according to new guidelines published by the service. A 5-foot-6 woman, for example, was previously allowed to weigh up to 155 pounds, but can now be 161. A 5-foot-9 woman was allowed to be up to 169 pounds, but can now be 176."

    The Corps is also relaxing the rules on pull-ups. The new rule will eliminate fixed-arm hanging as an alternative choice to pull-ups for women. In place of fixed-arm hanging women, and men, will have the option to choose push-ups instead. The incentive remains skewed toward the more demanding pull-up, as Military.com explains:

    "'Push-ups become an option on the PFT, but Marines are incentivized toward pull-ups, as these are a better test of functional, dynamic upper body strength and correlate stronger to physically demanding tasks,' Marine Corps Commandant Gen. Robert Neller said in an administrative message to the Corps released Friday. 'Push-ups are also a valid exercise and good test; however maximum points can only be earned by executing pull-ups.'"

    Explaining the new physical fitness test requirements, Military.com went on to say:
    "The hybrid pull-up option is the Marines' solution to a four-year conundrum of how to promote pull-ups for all Marines without making it impossible for women to succeed."
    As we march further into a state of "gender equality" there is nothing wrong with admitting rules need to be eased but when it comes to defending a nation, is the best answer really to just relax the standards? When we observe banking institutions do that with their prequalification requirements, the results are virtually always disastrous and in the last prominent case, led to a bailout of the entire financial system.

    Who will bailout the US military if pudgy push comes to shove.

    Either way, these are the new rules. We have reported extensively on robots replacing workers and as that trend spreads deeper into the workforce, expect the American military to relax admission requirements even further to "help" accomodate even greater enlistment numbers by those who have been recently displaced by a robotic "Johnny 5" barrista.
    Full message from Gen. Robert Neller:

    R 011230Z JUL 16
    ALMAR 022/16
    MSGID/GENADMIN/CMC WASHINGTON DC DMCS//
    SUBJ/CHANGES TO THE PHYSICAL FITNESS TEST (PFT), COMBAT FITNESS TEST (CFT), AND BODY COMPOSITION PROGRAM (BCP)//
    REF/A/ALMAR 030/15 REVIEW OF PHYSICAL FITNESS AND BODY COMPOSITION STANDARDS// GENTEXT/REMARKS/

    1. Last November we began a comprehensive review of physical fitness and body composition standards. Subsequent efforts focused on developing a physical fitness program that incentivizes behavior toward an end state of a healthy and fit force able to better answer the call in any clime and place. The review was a collaborative effort that drew from fitness experts and Marines, and provided wide-ranging options for consideration.

    2. As a result, a number of PFT and CFT changes are being implemented that ensure standards are relevant, challenging, and also allow for greater distinction between Marines of different fitness levels and age groups. There are significant adjustments to the PFT and CFT scoring tables, requiring most Marines to demonstrate greater performance to meet the new minimum and maximum standards. A major change to the PFT is the elimination of the Flexed Arm Hang for females and incorporation of a push-up / pull-up hybrid event for all Marines, recruits, and officer candidates. Push-ups become an option on the PFT, but Marines are incentivized toward pull-ups, as these are a better test of functional, dynamic upper body strength and correlate stronger to physically demanding tasks. Push-ups are also a valid exercise and good test; however maximum points can only be earned by executing pull-ups. These changes go into effect 1 Jan 2017.

    3. Performance on the PFT and CFT will also be a consideration in BCP decisions. Marines scoring 285 and higher on both the PFT and CFT will be exempt from weight and body fat (BF) limits. Marines scoring 250 and higher on both the PFT and CFT will be afforded an additional 1 percent BF. However, all Marines are still subject to the requirements of the Military Appearance Program. These changes also go into effect 1 Jan 2017.

    4. Other changes to BCP include modifying the maximum allowable weight limits for female Marines, use of more precise tape measuring devices and de-centralizing BCP waiver granting authority from Manpower and Reserve Affairs (Manpower Management) to the first General Officer in a Marine’s chain of command. These BCP changes go into effect immediately.

    5. Additional details, including the new PFT/CFT scoring tables, physical fitness training recommendations, and BCP adjustments are available at: httpsslash)(slash)fitness.usmc.mil. Follow-on MARADMINS will further address administrative details and the associated Marine Corps Orders will be updated accordingly.

    6. America expects its Marine Corps to be the most ready when the Nation is least ready. Collectively, these are the biggest changes to the PFT since 1972 and CFT since 2009. We will monitor the effects of these adjustments for two years and then adjust if required to ensure our standards continue to contribute to the effectiveness of our force and enhance our ability to respond when our Nation calls.

    7. Robert B. Neller, General, U.S. Marine Corps, Commandant of the Marine Corps.//

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


    Nikita Khrushchev: "We will bury you"
    "Your grandchildren will live under communism."
    “You Americans are so gullible.
    No, you won’t accept
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    outright, but we’ll keep feeding you small doses of
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you’ll finally wake up and find you already have communism.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    ."
    We’ll so weaken your
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you’ll
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    like overripe fruit into our hands."



  5. #165
    Expatriate American Patriot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A Banana Republic, Central America
    Posts
    48,597
    Thanks
    78
    Thanked 27 Times in 27 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military

    AF chicks have bigger boobs. The Marines can't compete there.....
    Libertatem Prius!


    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.




  6. #166
    Postman vector7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Where it's quiet, peaceful and everyone owns guns
    Posts
    21,172
    Thanks
    16
    Thanked 65 Times in 60 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military

    Army says 2-star general committed suicide on Alabama base

    Published October 29, 2016


    FILE - In this Nov. 7, 2009 file photo, then-Col. John Rossi speaks at a news conference at Fort Hood headquarters in Killeen, Texas. The Army says the death of a two-star general on a military base in Alabama has been ruled a suicide. Rossi was found dead July 31, 2106, in his home on Redstone Arsenal, and an investigation was undertaken. (AP Photo/Paul Sakuma, File) (The Associated Press)


    WASHINGTON – The Army said Friday it has determined that suicide was the cause of death of a two-star general who was found dead in his home on a military base in Alabama.

    Maj. Gen. John Rossi was found dead July 31 at Redstone Arsenal, two days before he was to assume command of Army Space and Missile Defense Command.

    He is the first Army general to commit suicide on active duty since record-keeping began in 2000, according to the Army. Military suicides soared earlier this decade and remain a major source of concern; they typically have affected lower-ranking military members.

    Rossi, a West Point academy graduate and an air defense artillery officer by training, had just moved onto Redstone Arsenal and was scheduled to be promoted to lieutenant general when he took command of Space and Missile Defense Command.

    A written statement by the Army on Friday made no mention of what might have prompted Rossi to take his own life.

    The Rossi family issued a statement through the Army expressing thanks for wide support and urging those who may need suicide-prevention help to seek it immediately.

    "To the Army, he was Maj. Gen. Rossi," it said. "To us, he was John -- husband, dad."

    "We ask for the time and space to grieve in private, and for the Army to continue to better understand suicide, and to help and treat those in need," the family statement added. "For our family, this has been an incredibly painful time, and we ask that you continue to keep us in your thoughts and prayers. To all the other families out there, to the man or woman who may be facing challenging times, please seek assistance immediately. Compassionate and confidential assistance is available."

    http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/10/29...bama-base.html

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


    Nikita Khrushchev: "We will bury you"
    "Your grandchildren will live under communism."
    “You Americans are so gullible.
    No, you won’t accept
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    outright, but we’ll keep feeding you small doses of
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you’ll finally wake up and find you already have communism.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    ."
    We’ll so weaken your
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you’ll
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    like overripe fruit into our hands."



  7. #167
    Postman vector7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Where it's quiet, peaceful and everyone owns guns
    Posts
    21,172
    Thanks
    16
    Thanked 65 Times in 60 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military

    Obama to Armed Forces: ‘Women Are at Least as Strong as Men’

    by Charlie Spiering
    4 Jan 2017



    President Barack Obama celebrated the social changes made in the military during his administration by allowing gays to serve openly in the Armed Forces and opening combat roles to women.

    “Joe Biden and I know that women are as least as strong as men,” he said. “We’re stronger for it.”

    During his speech, Obama called the American armed forces the greatest fighting force in the world and celebrated its new found committment to diversity.

    “We’re also the best because this military has come to welcome the talents of more of our fellow Americans,” he said. “Service members can now serve the country they love without hiding who are or who they love.”

    Obama made his remarks after attending the Armed Forces Full Honor Review Farewell Ceremony.

    He explained that the new social changes were part of the reason why the military was one of America’s most respected institutions, despite the “constant partisan haze” of political debates.

    “You remind us that we are united as one team,” he said. “At times of division you show what it means to pull together.”

    http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...strong-as-men/

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


    Nikita Khrushchev: "We will bury you"
    "Your grandchildren will live under communism."
    “You Americans are so gullible.
    No, you won’t accept
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    outright, but we’ll keep feeding you small doses of
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you’ll finally wake up and find you already have communism.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    ."
    We’ll so weaken your
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you’ll
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    like overripe fruit into our hands."



  8. #168
    Postman vector7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Where it's quiet, peaceful and everyone owns guns
    Posts
    21,172
    Thanks
    16
    Thanked 65 Times in 60 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military

    "Frightened" Democrats Propose Bill To Limit Trump's Ability To Launch A Nuclear Strike

    by Tyler Durden
    Jan 24, 2017

    "Frightened"
    Democrat lawmakers introduced a bill
    Tuesday that would prevent the president from launching a nuclear first strike without a congressional declaration of war. The bill - proposed by Rep. Ted W. Lieu and Sen. Edward J. Markey - follows through on a policy that was long debated - but never seriously pursued - during the Obama administration.

    As FP reports, this isn’t the first mention of such legislation - the idea of it has been mentioned on and off for years, advocated by groups such as the Global Security Program at the Union of Concerned Scientists. At a January event at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, former U.S. Vice President Joe Biden said he is “confident we can deter and defend ourselves and our allies against non-nuclear threats through other means,” adding that he “strongly believes” that “deterring and if necessary retaliating against a nuclear attack should be the sole purpose for the U.S. nuclear arsenal.”



    But now the idea is anything but academic as the bill overtly questions President Trump's judgment, with the lawmakers saying in a joint release:

    "the crucial issue of nuclear 'first use' is more urgent than ever now that President Donald Trump has the power to launch a nuclear war at a moment’s notice."

    Congresman Ted Lieu, who has a paper sign reading, "Alternative Fact Free Zone" outside his office, took aim at Trump’s ignorance...

    “It is a frightening reality that the U.S. now has a Commander-in-Chief who has demonstrated ignorance of the nuclear triad, stated his desire to be ‘unpredictable’ with nuclear weapons, and as President-elect was making sweeping statements about U.S. nuclear policy over Twitter. Congress must act to preserve global stability by restricting the circumstances under which the U.S. would be the first nation to use a nuclear weapon.

    Our Founders created a system of checks and balances, and it is essential for that standard to be applied to the potentially civilization-ending threat of nuclear war. I am proud to introduce the Restricting First Use of Nuclear Weapons Act of 2017 with Sen. Markey to realign our nation’s nuclear weapons launch policy with the Constitution and work towards a safer world.”

    Senator Edward J. Markey issued the following statement:

    “Nuclear war poses the gravest risk to human survival. Yet, President Trump has suggested that he would consider launching nuclear attacks against terrorists. Unfortunately, by maintaining the option of using nuclear weapons first in a conflict, U.S. policy provides him with that power. In a crisis with another nuclear-armed country, this policy drastically increases the risk of unintended nuclear escalation.

    Neither President Trump, nor any other president, should be allowed to use nuclear weapons except in response to a nuclear attack. By restricting the first use of nuclear weapons, this legislation enshrines that simple principle into law. I thank Rep. Lieu for his partnership on this common-sense bill during this critical time in our nation’s history.”

    Markey and Lieu introduced their bill immediately following those September remarks, but brought it up again in the first week of Trump becoming president, receiving more press coverage.
    The bill has support from former Defense Secretary William Perry as well as five other prominent pro-disarmament groups.:

    William J. Perry, Former Secretary of Defense – “During my period as Secretary of Defense, I never confronted a situation, or could even imagine a situation, in which I would recommend that the President make a first strike with nuclear weapons—understanding that such an action, whatever the provocation, would likely bring about the end of civilization. I believe that the legislation proposed by Congressman Lieu and Senator Markey recognizes that terrible reality. Certainly a decision that momentous for all of civilization should have the kind of checks and balances on Executive powers called for by our Constitution.”

    Tom Z. Collina, Policy Director of Ploughshares Fund – “President Trump now has the keys to the nuclear arsenal, the most deadly killing machine ever created. Within minutes, President Trump could unleash up to 1,000 nuclear weapons, each one many times more powerful than the Hiroshima bomb. Yet Congress has no voice in the most important decision the United States government can make. As it stands now, Congress has a larger role in deciding on the number of military bands than in preventing nuclear catastrophe.”

    Derek Johnson, Executive Director of Global Zero – “One modern nuclear weapon is more destructive than all of the bombs detonated in World War II combined. Yet there is no check on a president’s ability to launch the thousands of nuclear weapons at his command. In the wake of the election, the American people are more concerned than ever about the terrible prospect of nuclear war — and what the next commander-in-chief will do with the proverbial ‘red button.’ That such devastating power is concentrated in one person is an affront to our democracy's founding principles. The proposed legislation is an important first step to reining in this autocratic system and making the world safer from a nuclear catastrophe.”

    Megan Amundson, Executive Director of Women’s Action for New Directions (WAND) – “Rep. Lieu and Sen. Markey have rightly called out the dangers of only one person having his or her finger on the nuclear button. The potential misuse of this power in the current global climate has only magnified this concern. It is time to make real progress toward lowering the risk that nuclear weapons are ever used again, and this legislation is a good start.”

    Jeff Carter, Executive Director of Physicians for Social Responsibility – "Nuclear weapons pose an unacceptable risk to our national security. Even a “limited” use of nuclear weapons would cause catastrophic climate disruption around the world, including here in the United States. They are simply too profoundly dangerous for one person to be trusted with the power to introduce them into a conflict. Grounded in the fundamental constitutional provision that only Congress has the power to declare war, the Restricting First Use of Nuclear Weapons Act of 2017 is a wise and necessary step to lessen the chance these weapons will ever be used.”

    Diane Randall, Executive Secretary of the Friends Committee on National Legislation (Quakers) – “Restricting first-use of nuclear weapons is an urgent priority. Congress should support the Markey-Lieu legislation.”
    Well if you weren't terrified before, you sure are now. But of course, the Congressman and Senator are just doing this to ensure your safety... because to them, with all that is going on, the decision to reintroduce this bill and gain more press coverage is the highest priority.
    Ironically, Trump tweeted this afternoon that tomorrow is a big day for national security...




    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


    Nikita Khrushchev: "We will bury you"
    "Your grandchildren will live under communism."
    “You Americans are so gullible.
    No, you won’t accept
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    outright, but we’ll keep feeding you small doses of
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you’ll finally wake up and find you already have communism.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    ."
    We’ll so weaken your
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you’ll
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    like overripe fruit into our hands."



  9. #169
    Creepy Ass Cracka & Site Owner Ryan Ruck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    24,463
    Thanks
    46
    Thanked 61 Times in 60 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military

    It looks like there are some serious problems within the Special Warfare community...

    Careerism, Cronyism, And Malfeasance In The Special Warfare Center

    November 27, 2017

    The following email titled “Careerism, Cronyism, and Malfeasance in SWCS: The End of SF Capability” was sent via a mass blast through Special Operations Command (SOCOM) yesterday. The email was penned by a Special Forces instructor at Fort Bragg who is dismayed by slipping standards and careerism, providing a damning critique of what has been an ongoing issue as the Special Warfare Center and School for over a decade.

    In the past SOFREP has published other anonymous (but verified) emails written by active duty Green Berets and Navy SEALs. We will continue to do so as SOFREP is founded by two former Non-Commissioned Officers who strongly believe that the senior enlisted men of the Special Operations community need to have their voices heard above the careerism and cronyism that infects our community. As soldiers, we tend to get weepy over power point slides detailing service members who commit suicide or fall into substance abuse issues but if we want to know what the root cause is, we should look no further than the below email. Our young men and women need strong leaders, not hand holding or kid gloves as we prepare them for war.

    SOFREP reached out to USASOC for their comment regarding this email but they did not reply prior to this article being published.

    This is a long read but you should read it and be concerned about how the "Tip Of The Spear" is being blunted.

    To our fellow Active Duty and Veteran Green Berets,

    Our Regiment has a cancer, and it is destroying the SF legacy, its capability, and its credibility.

    SWCS has devolved into a cesspool of toxic, exploitive, biased and self-serving senior Officers who are bolstered by submissive, sycophantic, and just-as-culpable enlisted leaders. They have doggedly succeeded in two things; furthering their careers, and ensuring that Special Forces more prolific, but dangerously less capable than ever before. Shameless and immodest careerism has, in no uncertain terms, effectively destroyed our ability to assess, train, and prepare students, or to identify those students that pose very real risk to Operational Detachments. I cannot stress how systematic and severe the effects on the force will be if the standards, recently implemented here in the Special Forces Qualification Course, remain in place.

    We consistently and concretely identify dozens of graduates every year who are incapable of ever being ‘value-added’ to ODA’s yet are pushed forward to you. THAT NUMBER IS SET TO RISE DRAMATICALLY in the very near future. To clarify, we instructors recognize that none of us graduating the Q-Course were fully competent Green Berets when we first arrived to our teams. We are also acutely aware that senior generations derisively judging their juniors is a tradition as old as humanity. So this address is not being written because ‘cherries are so much more cherry than we were when we were cherries’. We do not expect them to be assets yet, we only expect that they possess the basic qualities necessary to become assets. I am asking for 20 minutes of your time because many students graduating the Q-course now do not possess those qualities and, from this moment forward, determining if ANY students possess them is not possible. The actions of SWCS leadership have created a new era of Special Forces that are; increasingly incapable of actualizing SOF attributes; markedly and demonstrably weaker; and quantifiably projecting measurable risk and liability onto the teammates with which they serve. Before this paradigm shift, cadre due diligence was capable of some risk mitigation in these aspects. We could, did, and often still do reach back to teams and prepare them for those [inevitable] outliers that slip through the course unimpeded due to cronysim, nepotism, or malfeasance. But the recent systematic dismissal of course standards and continous violation of regulations at the Training Group and SWCS echelons makes student failure nigh impossible. Assessing, Identifying, and mitigating prolonged individual performance has historically been a cornerstone of the pipleline. That has been provably replaced with willful mediocrity. This climate has been empowered by a feckless, selfish, and recreant command ideology, set into motion by MG Linder and COL Lock, and actualized by MG Sonntag, CSM Arrowsmith, COL Kornburger, and CSM Berkibile.

    In the last 24 months, Commanders and/or Sergeants Major at the Group and SWCS level have systematically removed numerous fundamental SF standards, lowered and undermined the grading metrics for others, all while simultaneously ensuring that a gagged cadre population was expressly prohibited from holding students accountable for their academic, physical, and character performance. Obviously, this concerns those of us whom are returning to Group. We have an understandably vested interest in developing the best new teammates we possibly can, for we will be serving alongside them. The issue is that career-focused leaders, far removed from team life, have no ‘skin in the game’ and thus do not concern themselves with the problems inherent in employing subpar soldiers in a no-fail environment: where individual limitation creates team-wide catastrophe, often with international repercussions. Their responsibilities involve ensuring that yearly graduation quotas are met and that political agendas are enforced. They do not concern themselves with ensuring that students are capable of surviving the rigors of combat, and in all fairness they shouldn’t. That is the cadre’s mantle to bear. Ignorance of their interference in this endeavor might be forgivable, but they have been told by the operational force numerous times what issues these policies would create, and chose career progression instead. As you will read, this moral cowardice started in the preceding command, and is shared by every current Commander and Sergeant Major at the Group and SWCS level. When one of our cadre addressed these concerns (with examples) directly to the SWCS leadership in an open forum, CSM David Gibb’s (at the time the SWCS CSM) response was verbatim:

    “We push some of these issues forward [to the Regiment] because we believe that the Groups can succeed in fixing those problem graduates when they arrive. That is an amount of risk we willingly accept, because after all it’s much easier to get a tab removed at Group if he doesn’t pan out, than to risk relieving what’s basically a fully qualified student who might have been able to fix himself and become a solid Green Beret.”

    Specifically, he was defending the decision to graduate a student that had failed the final graduation SFPA (Special Forces Physical Assessment) five times on the 40-minute 5-mile run. He finally passed on the 6th attempt: coming in 12 seconds under time, and 4 attempts past the mandatory 1-year relief dictated by regulation. Over 100 of your current teammates heard this exchange during at SLC in 2016, and can bear witness. A senior E-9, with approximately 20 years in SF, unashamedly acknowledged that reducing, and then ignoring course standards is a perfectly acceptable philosophy to embrace in pursuit of graduation numbers. His response embodied everything that is wrong with SF leadership today. Standards are being drastically reduced, and they are being done so to achieve a very acute goal, one that does not benefit or enhance the force.

    So here we are, the trainers, hoping to illuminate to you, the operational force, the severity of this issue. Below, we’ve illustrated a variety of truths to fully encompass the selfish and careerist nature of the leadership that is injecting poison into the SF foundation. This does not capture everything, only the most recent events, and should sufficiently capture the essence of the systematically detrimental change and malfeasance occurring in the SFQC. Deducing their impact on the unit is easy to the operational soldier. Unfortunately it is not to Senior leaders. So, help us to affect change. This plea is on behalf of a clear majority of your brothers who have no real power to affect change on their own. Cadre hands are increasingly tied, and yet they are regularly, randomly castrated as scapegoats for a command that often confuses blind, knee-jerk reactions with due process. SF legitimacy is fading at the hands of self-serving careerism. Commanders truly want to be recognized and rewarded for the milestones they are achieving. Please accommodate them. Spread this message, publish it, share it online, go to the press, and send it to congress. If these “leaders” so desire the recognition for what they are doing, then let us ensure they receive all of it.

    I completely understand that some of those reading up to this point may be skeptical. It sounds overly dramatic, tinged with emotion, and can easily be brushed off as the ranting of some scorned, disgruntled has-been who had a bad run-in with a senior leader too many times. Here are the facts, so you can make that decision for yourself. Every single one of you out there in Group knows a brother-in-arms or 2 doing time in SWCS, if your don’t believe me, give any one of us a ring…

    THE SPECIAL FORCES QUALIFICATION COURSE

    We work in 1st SWTG(A) at USAJFKSWCS. There are currently about 900 GB’s on the roster, and we account for and/or train every single one of the (roughly) 2200 students currently in the Q-course. As a refresher for those of you who have been away for a while, here is a breakdown of what were (key word) the major training requirements that students were were to pass to graduate each phase of the SFQC after getting selected.

    o CLT: Graduate to move into the pipeline

    o Special Forces Orientation Course (SFOC): Pass Phase 1
    -Pass Land Navigation
    -Pass Swim test
    -Pass 12-mile ruck march (55 lbs dry in under 3 hours)
    -Pass SFPA(57 push-ups, 66 sit-ups, 5-mile run in under 40 minutes, 1 rope climb w/25lbs vest)

    o Small Unit Tactics (SUT)/SERE Pass phase 2

    o MOS Pass phase 3
    o ROBIN SAGE Pass phase 4
    o LANGUAGE Pass phase 5

    -Earn a 1+/1+ OPI in target language
    -Pass graduation SFPA

    o GRADUATE

    Notes:

    o The SFOC SFPA and the LANGUAGE SFPA are the only physical requirements enforced in the SFQC, as in they are the only PT events they can be relieved for.

    o Failure of any 1 event on the SFPA is a recycle of that phase. Failure on any retest is by-regulation at least an automatic 1-year relief from the SFQC.

    o Relief boards are held for all academic or attribute failures in all phases. Even if a relief is mandated by regulation, every instructor must justify why a student warrants relief or retention (e.g. 3x UXO failure, 6x late to formation, any SOF attribute violation, etc.). At the relief board, 15+ instructors and the Battalion Command team review every case, and debate what the punishment should be, and after everyone says their piece, the Battalion Commander makes his decision. Any appeals go directly to the Group Commander, and ALL NTR’s go to the Group Commander.

    o Keep in mind, the SFQC goal for graduating Special Forces Green Berets is 550 Active Duty Enlisted (ADE) every year. More importantly, the SFQC produces on-average between 400-470 ADE annually. This is…very important to say the least.


    PAVING THE WAY FOR THE FIRST FEMALE GREEN BERET

    I hesitate to begin on this axis, but it warrants the most illumination. To be clear, this is in no way a commentary on the debate concerning the efficacy of women serving in Special Forces. The Regiment’s attitude is clear, the debate is a heated one, and both sides of the aisle have documented numerous credible arguments. That is a separate discussion entirely. Regardless of one’s opinion on the topic, a universally accepted truth recognized by all parties is that if women yearn to join the force, they should meet the same standards achieved by those men they wish to serve with. This is where no reasonable person disagrees. No one has said “If they want to join, give them a lower standard so they can join.” Yet this is exactly where the current leadership has taken it upon themselves to inject an end state no one wants, to achieve personal endeavors that benefit no one. They have stated through continuous action and policy implementation that they do not want women to meet the standard. What they want, is to markedly lower the standards enough to ensure that any woman attempting this path will have absolutely no issue achieving it. They have said time and again that they want to maintain the standards, but have continuously lowered, and now eliminated them. Consider the time-line of events:

    o June 2015: SFOC has unanimous support at every level of command. Land nav, 12-mile, Swim, and SFPA all in full effect and standards are enforced. Historically all incoming command teams visit each phase of the course to get a capabilities brief. All sections spend time briefing.

    o July 2015: Incoming upper-echelon command teams conduct first walk through of 4th Battalion, 3 hours is spent with SFOC cadre determining the ‘viability and value’ of training provided there: A discussion never before tabled. No other phases are visited or brief.

    o February 2016: DoD Directive for SOF to integrate women into SOF is mandated down to the lowest levels.

    o July 2016: Incoming Group/SWCS command teams conduct first walk-through of 4th BN. Entire time is spent with SFOC cadre determining the ‘viability and value’ of training provided. No other phases brief.

    o August 2016: All phases are command directed to provide student critiques of training. Guidance from A Co 1SG is that they are for “leadership input”.

    o January 2017: The first female attends SFAS. She is medically dropped during land nav (severe injury during prolonged rucking event).

    o January 2017: SFOC student critiques are requested at the SWCS command level, the first time in history.

    o February 2017-forward: SWCS level command request only negative feedback critiques from SFOC.

    o June 2017: Incoming SWCS command team conducts first walk-through of unit. No phases brief.

    o July 2017: 13 SFOC students transported to hospital for training related injuries, five are admitted (injuries during SFOC range from 7-25). ALL SFQC units put on a safety stand-down to “reassess training”.

    o July 2017: MG Sonntag dismisses all SFOC testable events. Students will take the physical tests, but they can no longer be relieved for them as they are considered diagnostics. Students can no longer fail SFOC except for Voluntarily Withdrawing or getting injured.

    -SUT can only accommodate 120 students so company leadership introduces a point system for the above events to determine the top 120 students who will move forward from SFOC to SUT.

    -MG Sonntag conducts an all-command-teams meeting to discuss the way ahead. The point system is disregarded. Instead, SUT is command directed to now accommodate 240 students. The typical SFOC class starts with 160-250 students, so this ensures all students that start SFOC can move on to SUT without isssue now that there are no standards set in place to fail them.

    o September 2017: All graded SFQC PT events including the SFPA, APFT, diagnostic APFT’s, and Diagnostic SFPA’s still banned from being conducted.

    -Revision introduced that there will be ZERO graded physical events in the SFQC between the months of June and August.

    o October 2017: Town hall meeting with cadre: CSM Arrowsmith assures every single cadre present that the standards are not going to be changed, and that the standards will not be lowered. Cadre bring up the issue that removing the gates in SFOC effectively eliminates all standards. He insist that those standards will be moved to language phase. Although there was massive outcry, some semblance of peace was restored when it was insisted that, although the gates had been moved to language and effectively cut the amount of graded events in half, the students would have to pass them AT LEAST ONCE in order to graduate the Q- course. “Standards did still exist.”

    o October 2017: A follow up Town hall meeting is called last minute: MG Sonntag used is face time with the cadre to repeat exactly what CSM Arrowsmith said in the previous town hall. He assured the cadre that standards would remain in place.

    o November 2017: An ordeal occurs with students in language phase. They are forced to show up for an additional PT formation due to numerous absences (discussed below). After this, a command directive is put out across SWCS: there will no longer be remedial training or physical punishment for student infractions. Only counseling or UCMJ action is to be taken.

    o November 2017: The culmination: It has just been announced that graduation for students will be held immediately after they graduate Robin Sage. Language phase is no longer a requirement for graduation. Aside from passing selection, there are LITERALLY no physical gates or standards required of students in order for them to graduate the Special Forces Qualification Course.

    This is the state of the entire SFQC as it stands today. Students do not need to be able to pass a 2-mile run at an 80% standard. They do not need to pass a 5-mile run in under 40 minutes. They do not need to be able to pass a 12-mile ruck march in under 3 hours. They are not required to find ANY points during their land nav training and assessment. They do not need to be able to perform 8 pull-ups. They do not need to be able to perform 57 push-ups, or 66 sit-ups. They no longer need to be able to climb a 15 foot rope with weight on. Students are no longer administered any form of physical or administrative punishment. After passing a 19-ish day selection process, there are no physical barriers to earning the coveted Green Beret. These all were standards for EVERY Green Beret in modern history prior to this month. To say that standards have not been eliminated would be laughable, were it not so tragic.

    MG Sonntag and COL Kornburger have been transparent in their motivations. The moment they took command, their primary motivation for making changes to the SFQC was to acquire ‘Multi-star Potential’ on their OERs, They pursued this by, first, ensuring that the Q-course graduation rate was raised so they could lay claim to making the Q course more efficient and, second, ensuring that the standards were lowered so as to make certain that the first women able to pass selection would have the best possible chance of making it through the grueling 14 month (at it’s quickest) pipeline practically unimpeded. Being able to say they graduated the first female Green Beret is a milestone no officer (devoid of principles, that is) can possibly pass up. SFOC had the strictest requirements and the highest attrition rate, almost entirely physical in nature. They practically did away with it. They placated cadre, and the force as a whole, with promises of enforcing those standards in language. They assured instructors and battalion leaders that the relief decisions at the board would be supported. But in 85% of all NTR’s or 2 year relief appeals sent to them, they reversed the decision and put them back into training. They set the stage for mediocrity well before they made it official, pulling the rug out from under the force only once all the pieces set in motion 2 years ago were finally in place. There is not a single operator at the battalion level or below in all of SF that thinks this move is a forward one for the Regiment. But those concerns fall on deaf ears.

    Although spineless, cowards are smart. They have learned from Ranger School’s previous ordeal. They won’t have to defend (real or perceived, I have no first-hand knowledge of how the female ranger graduates were treated) accusations of “ad hoc” lowering of standards or preferential treatment for women who brave SF training. No, the standards will have been lowered well beforehand. All accusations of preferential treatment or double standards will fall by the wayside when these ‘standards’ set forth have already been deemed the “status quo” well before their arrival. The cruelty of the situation is that any woman with the fortitude to attempt this training would most definitely have wanted the standards to remain the same. It is reasonable to assume they would have wanted to test their metal against the historical standards and ensured they were every bit as capable as the men they aspire to serve next to. It is a point of pride to know you are every bit as capable as the best of the best, IF you can do it. But they have been robbed of the ability to earn that achievement. Knowing there are officially no physical barriers to earning the Green Beret cheapens the experience for everyone involved, including the population it is misguidedly meant to assist.

    The fact of the matter is that the Q-course today is markedly, measurably easier to skate through (I do not use that term lightly) than ever before. As long as one shows up for training, there is virtually no way to fail this training. MG Sonntag said it best: “Once they’ve been selected, there is no reason they should fail a single portion of the Q-course.”

    He willfully disregards the vital failure rate the Q-course creates by identifying those that were never cut-out for Special Forces. A Green Beret is much more than just a person that can gut-out 19 days of suck. They are intelligent, responsible, mature, clever, work well with others, and capable of adapting to any situation. They embody the SOF attributes. And these attributes are nigh impossible to assess in a 19-day selection, but absolutely critical to discerning before going to a team.


    IN PURSUIT OF NUMBERS

    o Voluntary Withdrawals (VW). 1SG (soon to be SGM) Steven Mcdavid, mandated immediately upon his arrival that EVERY SINGLE VW in the SFQC talk to him before attending the relief board. In every single case, his express goal was to talk the VW out of quitting. He had a roughly 90% success rate in this endeavor. Yes, there are roughly 15-20 students who have graduated in the last year alone, Green Berets, who have shown a COMPLETE lack of perseverance and have quit on their teammates during training, who are currently operating in real world environments. Those that were convinced to stay had their VW statements shredded and thrown in the trash. The TAC’s that owned them were directed to delete their VW SASs (documents that record student actions), and they did not go before a relief board. The only VWs that went before the relief board did so when 1SG McDavid was absent, and cadre were able to expedite the process.

    o COL Kornburger communicated his ideology immediately to the cadre upon taking command. His visit to a June 2017 Special Operations Instructor Course is where he laid out his philosophy, and what he truly things instructors are meant to do:

    o “you are not here to assess students, they were assessed in selection, they are with you to train”

    o “If a student fails in the Q Course, it is because you are a failure as an instructor”

    o “There is not reason a student coming out of selection should fail any part of any phase of the SFQC”

    Indeed, a student who fails the SFPA a total of 7 times, or recycles the 18C course 6 times, or is caught cheating 2 times, or attempts to blackmail instructors into passing him, or commits fratricide in a training environment (these are all actual examples), are all failures on the instructors part…with no exception.

    o The SWCS leadership tasked several individuals in 1st SWTG(A) with combing through every single student in the OT pool, who hadn’t already left on orders, to assess who could be reinserted back into training immediately. To date, dozens of students who were only 2-3 months into 1 or 2 year relief sentences were brought back and reinserted into training where they had left off. They are ramping this operation up, and have identified as many as 1/3 of the students, who have been dropped, for immediately reinsertion into training.

    o During a command meeting (the same one that dismissed all physical standards in SFOC) COL Kornburger command directed that a 92% graduation rate is his newly implemented standard for the SFQC. To note, there has never been a command mandated pass rate before. There is now. All subordinate commanders were tasked with ensuring that the SFQC met these numbers. We have been told time and again by every other previous commander/csm that standards, and not numbers, are what matters. We knew these were lies because command always spoke to the contrary, but at least they were ATTEMPTING to placate us. Now the leadership is not even trying. 92% is the prime directive from current leadership, not the quality of graduates moving out to Group.

    o Another directive that came out of the above command meeting: students conducting training (IN ALL PHASES), will be carrying less weight during the summer months. The initial number thrown around was 45LBS versus the standard 55LBS. COL Kornburger, truly a visionary, seems to think that students should learn that in combat its ok to adjust mission requirements to the heat. What is more, we have a Commander who wants to ensure that we cadre don’t know if students can handle THE BARE MINIMUM during higher temperatures. Instead, the teams will find out that a soldier can not tolerate the heat in the middle of Afghanistan or Iraq, when they collapse the first time they are faced with physical adversity. That is an inevitability, because students will not be seeing any physical adversity here in the SFQC.

    o As of July 2017, the incredibly risk-averse COL Kornburger directed that all SFQC graded physical training cease. The stated reason was a series of 4 Heat related injuries during one SFPA, and 13 heat related hospital trips during one land-navigation iteration. While that sounds concerning, put in perspective these are below average numbers. Summer classes routinely see double and triple these numbers. This knee-jerk reaction by gutlessly risk-averse commanders has delayed or completely cancelled well over a dozen previously scheduled events that affect the training and qualification of well over a quarter of all the students in training.

    o A number of SFOC cadre identified over a dozen cached GPS devices along the SFOC Land Nav lanes, and identified several students violating integrity. This was brought before senior leadership. SFOC cadre wanted to address the issue, which would have meant numerous recycles and/or possible reliefs. In response to such a massive loss of trainees the CSM response was succinct: “I personally don’t mind, I would actually kind of want these guys on my team, if you ain’t cheating, you ain’t trying”. Regardless of your opinions on that sentiment, if you get caught cheating, you should deal with the consequences.


    CADRE AS SCAPE GOATS

    o SFC Barbecho, a Language TAC at the time, was reported multiple times by his students for conducting PT that was “too hard”. He would routinely take the students on runs ranging between 6-12 miles, personally leading the way each time. The BN CSM Martin at the time, directed him to stop, not once asking him for an explanation or allowing him to defend his training regimen. He was later reported again, this time for making students do push-ups on concrete “while it was hot outside.” Despite student complaints, no medical issues were identified or reported. He was reprimanded, without a single cadre being asked for an explanation, and based solely on student complaints. Regardless, he mitigated concerns and catered to the students, mandating that gloves be worn for follow on sessions. He also participated in all corrective training after that. He was shortly there-after relieved of his position and reassigned to a different company. He, nor any other cadre, was given an opportunity to speak on his behalf. Students for the first time in SFQC history verifiably understood that by anonymously complaining to the command, they could get cadre fired, and would not have to endure “harder or perceived unnecessary training.”

    o SFC Geeseman routinely physically prepared students getting ready to go to selection. He would constantly have students ruck, run, and do team oriented events to prepare them physically. During one such training event, a student went down as a heat casualty. The medics on standby gave him IV’s, and moved him to Womack. Womack medical personnel failed to properly assess the patient, and gave him additional IV’s, more than was necessary. The student ended up losing part of his foot due to Womack’s error. Leadership, spearheaded BN CSM Martin, GRP CDR Col Lock, and SWCS CDR MG Linder, tried to fry SFC Geeseman for absolutely no reason other than to make someone take full blame for the incident. An incident, by the way, that is very common in training here. He did nothing wrong, and the ensuing IG complaint verified this. This did not stop the command from pursuing a GOMAR. This incident paved the way for a complete cessation of physical training in the Q-course.

    o SFC Jackson, a language TAC, was administering routine PT one morning, on a Thursday before a 4-day weekend. During this particular formation roughly 1/3 of the students decided, for whatever reason, not to show up or at least call in during accountability. SFC Jackson, understandably, decided to address the issue. He decided to have another PT formation at 0600 on a Friday. This would not interfere with his class, as even though it was a four day, all of his students still had language class on that day. He also revoked *1* student’s 4-day pass, as that student had been a repeat offender. Because of this, several students walked straight over to the SWCS HQ building (Bryant Hall), and complained to the highest echelon they could. SFC Jackson was called into CSM Arrowsmith’s office immediately. His company and battalion leadership went as well. As a result of this meeting. SFC Jackson was relieved of his position as TAC. During the entire meeting, CSM Arrowsmith did not point out a single ‘actual’ wrong-doing on SFC Jackson’s part, only that ‘several students had complained’. He also made it clear that, should this happen to other instructors, they would be fired as well. It can not be stressed enough, SFC Jackson was excersing BASIC NCO professional development, well within Army regulation, and was fired for doing so.

    o SFC Squires was newly placed as a TAC in SUT/SERE phase. He immediately started a PT program in which he routinely worked out with his students. During one session conducted at Towle stadium, he was reported “yelling” at the students (again, while PT’ing WITH them). His use of foul language resulted in him being immediately fired and moved to BN S-3. This is not hyperbole. When brought before the BN leadership, he was not once given a chance to speak, or allowed to defend his actions, he was fired based solely on what was reported by 3rd party observers. None of whom identified themselves. CSM Martin told him he would have taken his tab if given the chance, and that he disgusted him. No students had complained, and other cadre in attendance attested that while cussing was present, no demonstrably unprofessional behavior was exhibited. Shortly after this, all remedial corrective training was banned in 4th BN/1st SWTG(A). Cadre were instructed that they would be fired if caught punishing students through physical corrective training. Commanders used this incident to ensure that there would be a complete lack of student accountability through corrective training. There are entire classes that have graduated who went through the entire Q-course having never undergone a single physical event for failing to follow instructions, lying to instructors, or a myriad of other attributes failures.


    COMMAND FAVORTISM


    o SPC Thomas was an 18B trainee. He was first caught attempting to bribe an instructor with beer, and then later had a panic attack during an AAR while in the 18B FTX. During his relief board counseling, he attempted to blackmail 18B cadre by telling them that if relieved and returned to his unit, he would have to annotate that he witnessed the instruction of secret/noforn course material to international students. This was a completely fabricated event, and later verified as untrue via internal investigation. He then went behind his TAC’s back and, because he had a very good working relationship with his NG Group Commander, produced a memo directing his reclassification as an 18E. Despite all of these acts, he was not relieved, but was given a recycle into the 18E course. He would fail the SFPA and retest twice before being graduated.

    o “Desk-side boards” happen all the time. When the BN command team knows that a decision they are going to make involving a student will be highly unpopular amongst Cadre, they don’t bring the student before the ‘public’ relief board (where all Cadre/TACs/Instructors offer points of view weight in on the decision). They set aside a time and the student privately sees the BC one-on-one, to receive a decision. These boards rarely involve enlisted students, and are almost entirely decisions to keep 4, 5, or 6 time academic or SFPA failures in training. These desk-side boards were used by previous commanders during training lulls where only 1 or 2 students were up for relief, but have currently become a go-to for unpopular decisions. They are now a tool to reduce the amount of students who would otherwise have become de-facto reliefs at the board.

    o SFC Jimenez failed to earn a 1+/1+ in his language during language phase. He was allowed to graduate with his class. He has stated numerous times that he has several friends working in Bryant Hall directly under MG Sontagg. MG Sontagg was the authority that allowed SFC Jimenez to walk across the stage having failed the 1+/1+ standard.

    o SGT Larios was given an NTR for nearly a dozen infractions during his tenure in the SFQC. The one that got him an NTR involved lying to cadre multiple times in conjunction with failing to report and failing to follow instructions. Approximately 1 month after being given an NTR, he was reinserted into training.

    o CPT Mulholland (related to GEN Mulholland) was given an ARSOF NTR for his performance during the 18A course. He talked directly with the BN leadership, and was given an audience with the Group commander the next day (this process usually takes weeks). His ARSOF NTR was overturned, and he was allowed to attend CA selection the next class. He was attached to 4th BN so that he would not have to go through the normal process of moving to SPT BN and pursuing the CA application process there.

    o CPT Beasley was given an ARSOF NTR for his VW during ROBIN SAGE. COL Lock granted his appeal and gave him a 1-year relief from the SFQC. Instead of being out-processed and sent on assignment, he was kept in 4th BN to work in one of the battalion shops. He completed “110 hours of SOCEP training” in less than 1 month, and he was then immediately reinserted into training by COL Lock. He VW’d again several days after returning to training.

    o CPT Vasiliv was a VW out of ROBIN SAGE who quit on his team during training. He was brought before the 1st BN Commander, LTC Wheeler in a closed-door personal meeting for over an hour. After he exited, he had “decided” that he wanted to continue in the SFQC, and graduated the phase with his class.

    o SSG Ontiveros has been in med hold for almost a year. All students are required to be administratively dropped if held out of training longer than 90 days.

    o SSG Conklin was a 4 x SFPA failure who was put up for relief. He was never able to pass the “1x 15’ rope climb with 25LBS weight vest”. He was “tested on the rope climb” by 1SG Mcdavid…on a Sunday…with no cadre present. He miraculously passed and graduated with the next class.

    o SSG Baker was given an NTR. COL Lock reversed his decision to NTR SSG Baker, who would go on to fail SUT. SSG Baker is currently in training. Not related, SSG Baker has family connections in SF which COL Lock is aware of.

    o CPT Jimenez, currently in 7th Group, was the single source of several 4th Battalion investigations. He wrote anonymous emails, started IG complaints, or propagated rumors about virtually every single phase of the SFQC. His continual fabrications were verifiably false, and his numerous accusations resulted in several investigations that hampered operations for over a dozen cadre and battalion leadership. Literally every accusation he levied was proven inaccurate or untrue. But as a student, he was given complete top cover and left unimpeded to continue creating havoc, and was not held accountable for the numerous integrity violations he committed. He graduated with his peers.

    o SGT Winfield was under investigation for a discrepancy in his clearance paperwork prior to entering the SFQC. He was brought before 1SG Mcdavid and told that if he did not rebut, he would be given a LOR that would be locally filed, would disappear once he left the SFQC, and that he would be put back into training. Deciding he was undeniably innocent, he stated his intent to rebut. BN CSM Pevehouse, along with 1SG Mcdavid, directed him to cut his 18-page rebuttal down to 2 pages. He was then given an LOR, but it was filed in his permanent record in his OMPF. Before company leadership changed hands, 1SG Mcdavid stated his personal intent to have SGT Winfield removed from the SFQC.

    Students right now have witnessed the above transgressions. They are friends of or know every single person in each of the above cases. Students are being shown, time and time again, that the standards can be fudged. That failure is not a big deal. That if they fail they will get special treatment, or they can know the right person, or they can just try again; sometimes as often as 6 times before getting it right. We try to enforce that this is not so, that in Group you often only have one shot. But we can’t overcome the atmosphere of forgiveness and compliance that this place now breeds. The good students, through no fault of their own, don’t get taught the importance of first-time success. The bad students, visibly increasing in number, embrace it and are bringing it to Group. We are trying, but the commanders have the authority, and they are abusing it.

    This is the next generation of Special Forces. In just a few years, most of our regiment will be a product of this foundation. We will become a brotherhood of parasites: devoid of any real character, feeding off of the achievements those before us earned, and consuming the heritage as a whole. We can cure it, but it needs to happen now. We need to take back ownership of our profession.

    Help us fix this mess. The Regiment’s legacy depends on it.

    A concerned Green Beret,

    -DE OPPRESSO LIBER



    Commander Of The Special Warfare Center, Major General Kurt Sonntag Responds To Careerism, Cronyism, And Malfeasance Email

    November 30, 2017

    Recently a scathing email was sent globally across all spectrums of the U.S. Army Special Forces, or Green Beret communities. The anonymous author outlined shocking revelations that the extremely high standards within the U.S. Army Special Forces Selection and Qualification courses are all but non-existent as well as describing such a toxic command climate that Green Beret qualified instructors at the John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center and School (USJFKSWCS) live in constant fear of having their careers and livelihoods destroyed by careerist officers and command hell-bent on mass-producing Green Berets.

    The author describes the JFK Special Warfare Center and School as devolving, “into a cesspool of toxic, exploitive, biased and self-serving senior Officers who are bolstered by submissive, sycophantic, and just-as-culpable enlisted leaders. They have doggedly succeeded in two things; furthering their careers, and ensuring that Special Forces more prolific, but dangerously less capable than ever before. Shameless and immodest careerism has, in no uncertain terms, effectively destroyed our ability to assess, train, and prepare students, or to identify those students that pose very real risk to Operational Detachments.

    The email continued and immediately named the current commander of USJFKSWCS, Maj. Gen. Kurt Sonntag as the prime source of JFKSWCS toxic command saying, “In the last 24 months, Commanders and/or Sergeants Major at the Group and SWCS level have systematically removed numerous fundamental SF standards, lowered and undermined the grading metrics for others, all while simultaneously ensuring that a gagged cadre population was expressly prohibited from holding students accountable for their academic, physical, and character performance. Obviously, this concerns those of us whom are returning to Group. We have an understandably vested interest in developing the best new teammates we possibly can, for we will be serving alongside them. The issue is that career-focused leaders, far removed from team life, have no ‘skin in the game’ and thus do not concern themselves with the problems inherent in employing subpar soldiers in a no-fail environment: where individual limitation creates team-wide catastrophe, often with international repercussions.”

    The email, which has now been seen and read by the global Special Operations community was met with equal parts exuberance and out-right fear and anger. Yet, what does Special Forces command think?

    SOFREP reached out to the U.S. Army Special Operations Command (USASOC) along with the USJFKSWCS for comment on this email and received a response from the commander of the USJFKSWCS, Maj. Gen. Sonntag himself.

    Below is General Sonntag’s reply in full:

    “To the Men and Women of the U.S. Army John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center and School,

    Many of you have seen the anonymous letter calling into question the integrity of our training standards and the quality of the Soldiers being produced. Let me be clear, I would be proud to serve with each and every one of our Special Forces Qualification Course graduates, and I stand behind the quality of every Soldier we are sending to the operational force.

    The U.S. Army Green Berets have been at the tip of the spear in defense of our nation for more than 70 years. The U.S. Army John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center and School, the proponent for Special Forces, is charged with professional training and development of the force throughout a Soldier’s career.

    Since 1952, Soldiers seeking to enter Special Forces have attended a qualification course to learn advanced warrior skills. In 1988, a Special Forces Assessment and Selection (SFAS) was introduced to the course, which was based on the Assessment and Selection process of the Office of Strategic Services. SFAS evolved into a proven, challenging process that allows the regiment to better predict a candidate’s ability to succeed in training as well as operate successfully in their respective operational environment. The consistent achievements of our operational force across the globe is a testament to the quality of the effectiveness of the assessment, selection, and training model.

    The SFAS process ensures candidates successfully demonstrate the qualities of the Army Special Operations Force Attributes under dynamic and stressful conditions. To join the Special Forces Regiment, each candidate must demonstrate they possess the required strength, cognitive flexibility, and willpower to thrive in challenging and uncertain Special Operations environments. Students are evaluated using a holistic and multidiscipline approach, supported by a range of military and scientific experts to include psychologists, physiological experts and experienced combat veterans who select candidates who are physically strong, mentally tough and possess the character necessary to serve in the regiment.

    If SFAS is correct, and we believe it is, the SFQC is not a place where high attrition rates should occur. Instead, the mission of the SFQC cadre is to train to standard. Without a doubt, if you were to take five Green Berets who attended the course at different periods of time, none of them would have had to meet the same standard as those Soldiers who are now in the course. Since 9/11, the SFQC has had at least eight significant modifications, each resulting in new or modified Tasks, Conditions, & Standards throughout the respective programs of instruction. These modifications are made to keep training relevant, efficient and effective, with the needs of the operational force driving each one. Today, the SFQC consists of six distinct phases (Orientation, Small Unit Tactics/Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape (SERE), Military Occupational Specialty, Unconventional Warfare, language and graduation; followed by Military Free Fall training), which takes a minimum of 62 weeks in length if a candidate is not recycled.

    Let me address some of the concerns in the anonymous letter.

    – No fundamental SF standard has been removed.

    – No academic or character performance standards have been adjusted.

    – Previously, the Special Forces Physical Fitness Assessment (instituted as a ‘must-pass’ standard in 2012), rope climb, and ruck march were evaluated in the first phase of SFQC. Cadre will continue to administer diagnostic evaluations of these events throughout the SFQC with the final evaluation occurring in the last phase of the course. This shift gives the Cadre more time to prepare the students for these events. Students must meet these standards prior joining the operational force.

    – Training in the SFQC remains among the most difficult in the Department of Defense. In 2017, more than 2,000 Soldiers attempted SFAS and 541 graduated the SFQC.

    – I value our Cadre’s input and have not, and will not, issue a gag order. The CSM and I have visited each unit and conducted more than 10 town hall meetings with each subordinate unit within this command. We will continue to solicit feedback from each and every individual. My open door policy remains in effect.

    – Language and cultural awareness training remain an essential part of the qualification course. All students must achieve a 1+/1+ rating in their assigned language before entering the operational force; which is above the operational force minimum standard of 1/1. Up until 2006, students earned their Green Beret after successful completion of Robin Sage.

    – As an institution, SWCS has moved language instruction several times to optimize the flow of course instruction. I’ve recently adjusted the phasing of the SFQC, by moving graduation ahead of language training. By doing this, Soldiers who are already language qualified go directly to the Operational Groups after attending the Military Free Fall School; while those who are not qualified will attend language school and MFF before going to their Group assignment.

    We work closely with 1SFC (A) leadership to ensure we are producing the Green Berets needed by the 1st SFC (A), and to the standards to which they need them trained. As we speak to Operational Groups, we consistently receive positive feedback.

    – “They are well-trained, physically fit, and ready to join their teams from day one.”

    – “Highest quality graduates we’ve seen in years.”

    1st SFC (A) sets the standard and SWCS trains, coaches and mentors the students to achieve them. SWCS has always produced highly-qualified Soldiers who meet the expectations of the operational formations as they tend to the Nation’s business. That will not stop. Every decision is made, not only by looking forward, but with the utmost respect for our Special Forces legacy, to ensure we maintain the integrity and standards of those who have come before us.

    As the operational environment changes, we will continue to adjust instruction to fulfill our obligation to produce fully-qualified Army Special Operations Soldiers. Some of the comments in the email warrant further evaluation, and we are doing that through formal inquiries and a number of existing institutional forums.

    Let me reiterate, CSM Arrowsmith and I seek healthy dialogue as a means of improvement. Every level of the command has been encouraged to challenge the current process, phasing and training methodology to ensure SWCS’ training remains relevant to meet the needs of the 1st SFC (A). Training at SWCS will continue to evolve to meet the needs of the Army. We will remain relevant while upholding the highest academic, military and physical standards. SWCS strives for a professional, rewarding experience for its students, cadre and families.”


    Leaked Email Contains Highly Disturbing Revelations About U.S. Special Forces

    December 1, 2017
    By Allen West

    We’ve shared with you stories about the decimation of our U.S. military capability and capacity. We’re all aware of a force that has been stretched thin due to deep personnel cuts, while we have increases in civilians in higher headquarters, and the increased use of contractors. But, there’s not just an obvious degradation of the military readiness due to immense budget constraints. There’s also a more troubling degradation in the culture of the U.S. military. Amazingly, there is a push to align the military culture with the most troubling parts of civilian culture and society. And it appears this mentality has truly crept into the ranks of our U.S. Special Forces.

    As reported by SOFREP.com, “The following email titled “Careerism, Cronyism, and Malfeasance in SWCS: The End of SF Capability” was sent via a mass blast through Special Operations Command (SOCOM) yesterday. The email was penned by a Special Forces instructor at Fort Bragg who is dismayed by slipping standards and careerism, providing a damning critique of what has been an ongoing issue as the Special Warfare Center and School for over a decade.”

    You can read the entire email here, but here’s a short excerpt.

    “To our fellow Active Duty and Veteran Green Berets,
    Our Regiment has a cancer, and it is destroying the SF legacy, its capability, and its credibility.

    SWCS has devolved into a cesspool of toxic, exploitive, biased and self-serving senior Officers who are bolstered by submissive, sycophantic, and just-as-culpable enlisted leaders. They have doggedly succeeded in two things; furthering their careers, and ensuring that Special Forces are more prolific, but dangerously less capable than ever before. Shameless and immodest careerism has, in no uncertain terms, effectively destroyed our ability to assess, train, and prepare students, or to identify those students that pose very real risk to Operational Detachments. I cannot stress how systematic and severe the effects on the force will be if the standards, recently implemented here in the Special Forces Qualification Course, remain in place.

    We consistently and concretely identify dozens of graduates every year who are incapable of ever being ‘value-added’ to ODA’s yet are pushed forward to you. THAT NUMBER IS SET TO RISE DRAMATICALLY in the very near future. To clarify, we instructors recognize that none of us graduating the Q-Course were fully competent Green Berets when we first arrived to our teams. We are also acutely aware that senior generations derisively judging their juniors is a tradition as old as humanity. So this address is not being written because ‘cherries are so much more cherry than we were when we were cherries’. We do not expect them to be assets yet, we only expect that they possess the basic qualities necessary to become assets.

    I am asking for 20 minutes of your time because many students graduating the Q-course now do not possess those qualities and, from this moment forward, determining if ANY students possess them is not possible. The actions of SWCS leadership have created a new era of Special Forces that are; increasingly incapable of actualizing SOF attributes; markedly and demonstrably weaker; and quantifiably projecting measurable risk and liability onto the teammates with which they serve.

    Before this paradigm shift, cadre due diligence was capable of some risk mitigation in these aspects. We could, did, and often still do reach back to teams and prepare them for those [inevitable] outliers that slip through the course unimpeded due to cronyism, nepotism, or malfeasance. But the recent systematic dismissal of course standards and continuous violation of regulations at the Training Group and SWCS echelons makes student failure nigh impossible.”

    I read the entire email three times and found it to be very disturbing. The reason being was that it wasn’t general statements, but very specific assertions and allegations, and use of specific dates and names. If just ten percent of this email is true, it presents us with a very troubling assessment in our most elite of fighting forces, U.S. Army Special Forces, our venerable Green Berets. It troubles me to believe that in our Army, the concern is more about accommodating, and furthering the culture of the “participation trophy” rather than maintaining the highest, most rigid, and tough standards for the cutting-edge Warriors necessary to conduct the most dangerous missions.

    If I were the SecArmy, this would have my immediate attention, heck, there would be many things that would have my immediate attention, such as the Army judicial system and an investigation into Colonel Jeffrey Nance being one. But if there’s one thing that I’d make a firm commitment to, it would be to ensure social engineering had no future in the Army. We know there’s an issue with readiness in our force, but that’s not just about equipment; it’s about the standard of training readiness.

    And understand, I’m not one making the complaint that we need to go back to “old school” ways, but in some cases, we do need to. One of the points made in this email was that Special Forces candidates did not have to find points during the land navigation assessment…that to me is unconscionable, if indeed verified. There’s something very necessary in understanding the use of a map and a compass.

    We often hear about the “deep state” and just think that has everything to do with what’s happening in Washington DC. I believe we have a deep state effect happening in our military…and sadly, it’s not just relegated to those in civilian clothes. I know when I’m reading something from a whiner. That’s why I read this email three times, and it didn’t appear to be the rantings of a disgruntled Soldier. It was the pointed concerns of a professional Warrior who was and is responsible for the training of future Special Forces Warriors.

    I do sincerely hope that the Commanding General of the United States Army Special Operations Command (USASOC) will take this for action, and rectify this situation. Folks, this is not the Little League ball field…and a Green Beret should never be on the level of a little plastic trophy.

  10. #170
    Postman vector7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Where it's quiet, peaceful and everyone owns guns
    Posts
    21,172
    Thanks
    16
    Thanked 65 Times in 60 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military

    Mattis Was No Good

    December 21, 2018
    By David Archibald

    American Thinker readers were warned about General Mattis over a year ago in this article. Briefly, Mattis was and remains a supporter of global warming.

    The issue of global warming continues to be a reliable and simple litmus test. If someone believes in global warming, then you can be sure he is a globalist who loathes Western civilization.

    Then there was his support for the Islamist Anne Patterson, loathed by the Egyptian people for her support for the Muslim Brotherhood.


    Then there was the matter of allowing one of his underlings to throw Fox Company, of Task Force Spartan in Afghanistan in 2007, under bus so he could advance his own career.

    Since that article, Mattis's charge sheet has expanded somewhat. Trump wanted to get trannies out of the military simply because of the costs involved in having them. Mattis pushed back and slow-walked the order. Gender dysphoria is one of the worst mental illnesses, with a 50 percent suicide rate. Who in his right mind would leave people suffering from this condition near weapons or machinery? Someone who ranks ideology above effectiveness and unit cohesion would.

    Mattis argued the case for staying in Afghanistan, overriding Trump's gut instinct. There is no point in staying in Afghanistan. When someone stops paying for the imported grain that allows Afghanistan's population to double every 25 years, then Afghanistan will collapse. Mattis's reasoning for staying in Afghanistan is that we either fight them there or fight them here. The opposite is true. By continuing to feed them, we are creating more future terrorists. The way to keep this country safe is to forbid them to enter.

    Mattis entered into a "suicide pact" with Steve Mnuchin and Rex Tillerson with the effect that if any one of them was fired, the other two would resign.
    Normally an employer, upon hearing that his employees have entered into such an undertaking, would fire all three straight away. The president didn't do that, and Tillerson showed how ineffectual he was. Tillerson won't be taking much of his time leading the Boy Scouts of America from now on; he allowed gay troop leaders, and now the venerable institution is considering bankruptcy in response to gay rape claims. Like Mattis, Tillerson rose through projecting an image. The reality fell far short of that.

    Then Mattis did something that is either inspired or shows that he has a tenuous grip on reality: he ordered fighter aircraft availability to jump to 80% by September 2019 while at the same time reducing operating and maintenance costs. Mattis's order is looking delusional.

    For example, the F-35C had a 15 percent "fully mission capable" rate in 2017. For the USAF's F-35s, Lt. Gen. Jerry Harris said in a congressional hearing in March that "the newer F-35s with 3I or 3F software were available to fly 60 to 70% of the time, which is a good number, but that the Air Force's 100-block 2b and older F-35s' availability percentage sat in the low 40s. He said the cost of operation differed based on production block and usage but was approximately $50,000 per hour."

    Mattis seemingly ordered the increase in availability without looking into the causes of why aircraft availability is so low.

    What do we need in the next secretary of defense? For starters, someone who sees the need to kick Turkey out of NATO. All the money spent in Syria has been spent fighting proxy forces of our purported allies. Somone who has never ridden in a defense contractor's corporate jet and has no desire to do so. Someone who will tell the president to get rid of the secretary of the Air Force, who is an agent of Lockheed Martin. And the chosen one must not believe in global warming.

    https://www.americanthinker.com/blog...JHHG2E.twitter

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


    Nikita Khrushchev: "We will bury you"
    "Your grandchildren will live under communism."
    “You Americans are so gullible.
    No, you won’t accept
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    outright, but we’ll keep feeding you small doses of
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you’ll finally wake up and find you already have communism.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    ."
    We’ll so weaken your
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you’ll
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    like overripe fruit into our hands."



  11. #171
    Postman vector7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Where it's quiet, peaceful and everyone owns guns
    Posts
    21,172
    Thanks
    16
    Thanked 65 Times in 60 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military

    The U.S. Army May Cut Nearly Half Of Its Already Underappreciated Naval Fleet

    These watercraft have become more important, not less, in an era of 'great power competition,' especially when looking toward the Pacific.

    By Joseph Trevithick
    January 21, 2019



    The U.S. Army has confirmed that it is reassessing the size and composition of its often forgotten fleet of logistics ships, landing craft, and other watercraft as part of its over-arching modernization plans. At least one possible course of action the service is considering appears to involve doing away entirely with all of these craft in the Army Reserve and National Guard, which amount to almost half all of all these assets within the Army as a whole. This would eliminate a significant portion the Army maritime capability at a time when it is only becoming more important, especially with regards to potential combat operations in the Pacific region.

    gCaptain was first to report on the existence of the review of the Army Watercraft Systems program on Jan. 14, 2019, after obtaining a memo titled “Army Watercraft Transformation Through Divestment of Capability and Force Structure by Inactivation of Units.” While most people wouldn't think of the Army having a Navy of its own, they do. The largest of these vessels are eight Logistics Support Vessels, also known as the General Frank S. Besson-class which we at The War Zone have profiled in depth the past. As of November 2018, the service also had 34 Landing Craft Utility 2000s (LCU-2000) and 36 Landing Craft Mechanized Mk 8s (LCM-8), along with a variety of tugs, small ferries, and unpowered barges.

    Meet The Biggest And Baddest Ships In the US ArmyBy Tyler Rogoway Posted in The War Zone
    The US Army Is Buying New Boats to Replace Vietnam-Era Landing CraftBy Joseph Trevithick Posted in The War Zone
    Marines Riding On Cargo Ship To Pacific Exercises A Sign Of A More Flexible Deployment StrategyBy Joseph Trevithick Posted in The War Zone
    The Navy Eyes Replacing Its Hospital Ships With A Fleet of Smaller Medical VesselsBy Joseph Trevithick Posted in The War Zone
    The Navy's Giant Sea Base Is In The Middle East And Could Get Serious Medical CapabilitiesBy Joseph Trevithick Posted in The War Zone

    “The Army is assessing its watercraft program to improve readiness, modernize the force and reallocate resources. This is an ongoing formal analysis between OSD [the Office of the Secretary of Defense], the Joint Staff, Army Headquarters and the combatant commands,” Cheryle Rivas, an Army spokesperson, told The War Zone by Email.

    “This will be a long-term process as we review all aspects of Army watercraft employment. The Army watercraft force that emerges will be more ready and capable of meeting the National Defense Strategy and combatant commander requirements.”

    Though obscure, the Army’s organic fleets allow the service to avoid necessarily having to rely on the U.S. Navy or contracted ships to move personnel and materiel by sea. It also means the service doesn’t have to add to the existing burden on the Navy’s amphibious ships and landing craft, which are often stretched thin, to begin with.


    An overview of all of the Army Watercraft Systems as of November 2018. "AC" refers to the "Active Component," or regular Army units, while "RC" refers to the "Reserve Component," which includes Army Reserve and National Guard Units. APS are Army Prepositioned Stocks, caches of stored vehicles, other equipment, and supplies in strategic locations in case of contingencies.
    The Army’s watercraft can help unload cargo from commercial ships in permissive and non-combat environments, as well, which could ease logistical requirements during distributed and expeditionary operations. These same capabilities have proven valuable during humanitarian relief operations after natural disasters at home and abroad.

    It is for these exact reasons that the Army has watercraft units spread across 10 locations on the East and West coasts of the contiguous United States, as well as in Hawaii. Army mariners also run operations from facilities in Kuwait and Japan and can deploy worldwide, as required.


    A map showing the locations of Army watercraft units and assets as of November 2018. The "zones" refer to how the service breaks up purchases of contract maintenance support for these elements at home and abroad.
    But the memo that gCaptain obtained reportedly included plans to sell off or otherwise divest up to 18 LCU-2000s and shutter eight Reserve and National Guard watercraft units over an unspecified timeframe. The Army’s end goal was to “eliminate all United States Army Reserve and National Guard Bureau AWS [Army Watercraft Systems] capabilities and/or supporting structure,” according to the document.

    Rivas would not confirm or deny the specific details that gCaptain has previously reported or say whether they were just one of many proposed courses of action. We do not know what units specifically might be on the chopping block.


    A pair of Army LCU-2000s during an exercise in California in 2015.
    Eliminating all watercraft capabilities in Reserve and National Guard units would automatically require moving three LSVs, seven LCU-2000s, nine LCM-8s, eight tugs, and two floating crane barges into so-called “Active Component” units or risking losing those capabilities altogether. This is around a third of the LSVs and roughly half of the landing craft the Army has in total outside of prepositioned stockpiles of equipment around the world.

    The loss of the three LSVs would be especially pronounced. These ships displace 4,200 tons and have loading ramps fore and aft for the rapid loading and unloading of tanks and other armored vehicles, as well as trucks carrying personnel and cargo. They can also accommodate oversized cargo.
    DOD
    Works load a Boeing C-17A Globemaster III's fuselage onto an Army General Frank S. Besson-class Logistics Support Vessel.
    Capability-wise, these ships sit between large amphibious assault ships and smaller landing craft, an intermediate tier of vessels the Navy no longer has itself. LSVs have also proven they can perform in a multi-mission role, acting an intermediary platform to get materiel from amphibious ships to shore and in less traditional roles, including as submarine tenders during exercises. It would not be hard to configure them as small, impromptu sea bases, as well. You can read more about these ships here.
    DOD
    An Army General Frank S. Besson-class Logistics Support Vessel acts as a tender for a foreign submarine during an exercise.
    Beyond potentially losing these kinds of capabilities with any cuts, the Army could find it difficult to retain the personnel assigned to the watercraft units. These individuals have training in the relatively specialized role of Army mariners and may require significant retraining before going elsewhere.

    On top of that, if the Army is considering selling off or otherwise divesting as many as 18 LCU-2000s, this calls into question whether or not the service plans to limit its watercraft cuts to Reserve and National Guards units. The Army only has 14 of these craft outside of prepositioned stocks and another 20 inside those stockpiles.

    This could mean shutting down all of those units or eliminating the extra ones it has on hand in case of a contingency. The Army is planning to acquire 36 new landing craft, known as Maneuver Support Vessels (Light), or MSV(L)s, in the coming years, but these are supposed to replace the aging LCM-8s.
    US Army
    An artist's conception of a pair of future Army Maneuver Support Vessels (Light).
    It is possible that the memo gCaptain obtained mistakenly referred to the LCU-2000s, when it meant the LCM-8s. There are 18 of these Vietnam War-era landing craft across active Army, Army Reserve, and National Guard Units, along with another 18 in preposition stocks.

    However, if this is the case, the Army could still find itself in a capability gap depending on when it wants to divest any of these landing craft. The construction of the first four MSV(L)s isn’t supposed to start until 2021.

    It’s not entirely clear what might be driving any decision to cut the Army’s watercraft fleets, either. We at The War Zone have noted in the past that the service's maritime capabilities have only become more valuable in recent years, which one might have expected to cause growth rather than contraction in those units and their assets.

    The last major change in the service’s maritime capabilities came in 2011, when the Navy took full ownership of all of what were then known as Joint High Speed Vessels (JSHV). The Spearhead-class of what are now called Expeditionary Fast Transports, abbreviated EPF, continue to provide important, multi-purpose intra-theater maritime capability for the U.S. military around the world. You can read more about these catamaran vessels here.
    USN
    The Navy's Expeditionary Fast Transport USNS Spearhead. This ship was originally destined for the US Army.
    As Army spokesperson Rivas noted in her statement, the service does have to balance its watercraft requirements against a host of modernization priorities, including new armored vehicles, artillery systems, air defenses, and much more. The U.S. military’s overall effort to re-focus on preparations for “great power competition” against countries such as Russia and China have prompted all of the services to work to revitalize various conventional military capabilities after decades of low-intensity conflicts.

    This shift in attitude has reportedly already led current Secretary of the Army Mark Esper to question the value of various elements of his service that no longer seem to be in line with these priorities. Most notably, he has advocated for doing away with the Peacekeeping and Stability Operations Institute (PKSOI) within the Army War College, ostensibly to free up funds for other programs. Advocates have pointed out the wide-ranging benefits PKSOI provides, including its interagency connections and knowledgebase, at extremely low cost.
    US Army
    Secretary of the Army Mark Esper.
    The services watercraft may have attracted similar budget-conscious scrutiny, which could become even more pronounced depending if President Donald Trump's Administration asks for or receives a smaller defense budget in the next fiscal year than it has in the recent past. But, while they may not be ideally suited for "tip of the spear" operations in a high-end conflict, their capabilities could still be invaluable in more permissive areas during distributed operations. These craft could help free up more capable amphibious ships for more demanding missions.

    In the Pacific region, especially, where the “tyranny of distance” means that units may be spread across a wide area and positions thousands of miles from established logistics hubs, having additional intermediate maritime transport capacity could be vital to sustained operations. The Army’s fleets already give the Navy more flexibility in how it deploys its own amphibious capabilities.

    Eliminating the Army Reserve and National Guard capabilities would deprive them of unique assets to assist in non-combat missions, including disaster relief at home, as well. The Puerto Rico Army National Guard’s LCM-8s helped move personnel, equipment, and supplies in the aftermath of Hurricanes Irma and Maria in 2017, the latter of which absolutely devastated the island and made overland travel difficult, if not impossible in many cases.
    US Army
    A Puerto Rico Army National Guard LCM-8 during operations in the aftermath of Hurricane Maria.
    “The Army is assessing the program,” is all the service’s spokesperson Rivas could tell us when we followed up for additional details. “This is an on-going formal analysis and a long-term process.”

    We will be keeping a close eye out for any future information about how the Army’s plans to cut or otherwise transform its understated, but important maritime capabilities.

    Contact the author: jtrevithickpr@gmail.com

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


    Nikita Khrushchev: "We will bury you"
    "Your grandchildren will live under communism."
    “You Americans are so gullible.
    No, you won’t accept
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    outright, but we’ll keep feeding you small doses of
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you’ll finally wake up and find you already have communism.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    ."
    We’ll so weaken your
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you’ll
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    like overripe fruit into our hands."



  12. #172
    Postman vector7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Where it's quiet, peaceful and everyone owns guns
    Posts
    21,172
    Thanks
    16
    Thanked 65 Times in 60 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military

    Leftist Ideology and the Corruption of the American Military

    by William Boyd



    Liberal ideology holds the American military in a vice grip, squeezing the very lifeblood of warlike virtue from its veins. Nowhere is this spiritual corrosion more evident than in the integration of women into our armed forces. Like the Marxists before them, the contemporary Left dismisses reality out of hand. “Nature we will teach—and freedom we will reach.”


    Winning wars be damned.

    What follows is a compendium of my own personal observations as a Marine Corps officer, as well as an exploration of official policies that reveal the Leftist corruption of our military institutions.
    Liberal ideology holds the American military in a vice grip, squeezing the very lifeblood of warlike virtue from its veins.
    Like academe and the mainstream media, the American military bows before the altar of political correctness, offering up sacrifices of its very being and purpose in order to satisfy this jealous god. The indoctrination into the sacred rites begins early in a marine’s career. For me, it started at The Basic School (TBS), the 6-month initial training for newly commissioned Marine Lieutenants. Throughout the course, the new officers attend a variety of social mixers with senior Captains and Majors in different occupational fields in order to discern which job they wish to be selected for at the end of the training.

    The staff of TBS and the Infantry Officer Course (IOC) set aside one of these mixers for women and minorities only, so they could plead with these groups to join the combat arms—artillery, infantry, and tanks. While the staff fêted the “oppressed,” the white males returned to barracks to clean.

    After the mixer, the Commanding Officer of IOC made an appeal to our class as a whole to join the infantry, while reiterating the need for women and non-whites as platoon commanders for the grunts. In his words, “Without diverse leadership that looks like America, future marines would not respect their officers.”

    This kind of favoritism for “marginalized peoples” was manifest throughout my entire instruction. The treatment of women was especially egregious. Female marines rarely carried squad or platoon gear such as radios, machine guns, or batteries. They were more likely to fall out of hikes. Their injury rate was higher overall. During one hike, I witnessed a male Lieutenant, one of the largest in our platoon, carry not only his pack but that of a diminutive female officer who had been injured in the course of the march. While she limped along in tears, he plodded with her gear on top of his own in order to prevent her from falling out.

    At one point, I witnessed a fellow officer holding the hand of one of his female peers during a hike in order to keep her with the platoon on a steep hill. On another occasion, two male officers physically stopped a female from falling out so that she would not fail the event. The Marine Corps is, quite literally, pushing women through some of its toughest physical training in order to ensure the “correct” level of diversity.

    Basic School instructors, mine included, liked to say that in the Marine Corps “there is only one standard, the Marine Corps standard.” This is a lie. There are two standards: one for men and one for women. Thus, on the annual Physical Fitness Test, required of all marines, a perfect score for a 21-year-old male is 23 pull-ups, 110 crunches, and a 3-mile time of 18 minutes. For a female of the same age a perfect score is 9 pull-ups, 105 crunches, and a 3-mile time of 21 minutes.

    Women also receive special benefits for family life. After giving birth, female marines receive 42 days of non-chargeable leave and can take an additional 12 weeks of maternity convalescent leave. “Secondary caregivers”—that is, fathers—only get 14 days. Female marines can take the 12 weeks of leave at any time in the year after giving birth. Although their duties are interrupted by taking leave, that cannot be used as a factor in determining whether women shall be promoted.

    I am not unsympathetic to the needs of new mothers. The plain truth, however, is that women are utterly out of place in the military. Heather Mac Donald, in a recent Wall Street Journal op-ed, notes that

    In September 2015 the Marine Corps released a study comparing the performance of gender-integrated and male-only infantry units in simulated combat. The all-male teams greatly outperformed the integrated teams, whether on shooting, surmounting obstacles or evacuating casualties. Female Marines were injured at more than six times the rate of men during preliminary training---unsurprising, since men's higher testosterone levels produce stronger bones and muscles. Even the fittest women (which the study participants were) must work at maximal physical capacity when carrying a 100-pound pack or repeatedly loading heavy shells into a cannon.
    Our tasks are demanding, and debasing the standards we must meet, including providing special treatment, is not in the national interest—rather the contrary. Further, though Mac Donald makes a strong case, the problems wrought by “gender equality” are even worse than she describes. For what passes for “gender equality” is frequently the opposite. One marine told me that he knew of a female counterpart who got promoted before he did even though he deployed repeatedly into combat in the Middle East, while the female never left her desk job back in the States. Female marines have their own grooming and uniform regulations. They can wear earrings, make-up, and nail polish in uniform. They are not required to cut their hair in the military style. Official policy allows them special uniforms, including those for pregnancy.

    Not only does the Marine Corps bend over backwards to accommodate women in the ranks; it requires annual training on Equal Opportunity to ensure that all male marines develop the appropriate sensitivity toward their female counterparts. Battalions are required annually to fill out climate surveys that ask anonymously whether any marines have heard language deemed degrading or offensive to women and minorities.

    First Lieutenant Virginia Brodie, one of the first female artillery officers in the Corps, demonstrates this zeal for language policing in her article for Task and Purpose, “Hey! You Shouldn’t Address A Bunch of Marines As ‘Gentlemen’ When the Group Includes Female Marines.” Brodie slams her former Battalion Commanding Officer for addressing a group of marines as “gentlemen” when females were present. Of course, for a Lieutenant to make such a public denunciation of a Lieutenant Colonel, and her own CO to boot, would usually be a career disaster. And yet, in the current climate, it was the Battalion Commander who might well have feared for his career. Improper deference is a sign of heresy. The Marine Corps has no room for the heterodox. As Brodie explains, “He knew I was there, but it seemed as if my presence was being disregarded. A commanding officer is responsible for setting the tone of the entire unit and, without words, he made women feel unwelcome.” A mortal sin indeed.

    Dedication to political correctness and equality, says Brodie, demands that the vast majority of marines change not only the way they speak but also the way they think: “This year marks 100 years of women in the Marine Corps. For the marines who served their entire career in units with only men, the habit of only saying ‘gentlemen’ must be broken. Words matter.” Brodie’s strident feminism show why women should not be in the Marine Corps in the first place. She says that she feels “vulnerable” correcting men for not using the right language, going on to explain that she relies on her Platoon Sergeant—a man—to correct other men when she feels “powerless” and “disregarded.”

    To repeat, this female officer is of such a moral fiber that she feels helpless when called by the wrong greeting. Our enemies surely quake at the news.
    If only the Marine Corps cared as much about winning wars as it does about policing language—then we might actually have something to show for the last two decades of blood and treasure spent in the Middle East!

    The double standards and censorship wrought by the Left evidence the corruption their ideology inflicts in our ranks. The Marine Corps, like the rest of the American military, no longer places winning wars and defending the nation at the top of its priorities. If it did, how can we explain the insistence on special privileges for an entire class of physically and spiritually inferior “warriors?”

    Consider the effort required to place female sailors on the aircraft carrier USS Eisenhower in the 1990s. In his book Men, Women & War, Martin Van Creveld writes that on the first mixed gender cruise 39 women, 10% of the total amount, became pregnant. All of them had to be returned home via special flights. This trend continues today. Though the phenomena are rarely noted outside the military, those who have served at sea know only too well that both sex and pregnancy are common occurrences aboard naval vessels, as they are throughout the military. Sex and pregnancy, along with women’s greater healthcare needs in general, cost the military a good deal of money, with no gain in performance to justify it.

    Such a state of affairs belies the supposed seriousness of our armed forces. As Van Creveld suggests in his book, the very presence of women throws into question the purpose of having such a large and expensive military at all. Since 1945, no two nuclear-armed powers have fought a conventional war. The possibility of annihilation makes such a conflict singularly undesirable. Thus, absent real necessity, America’s armed forces have become the playground of social justice. To argue America needs women to fill roles that men will not is patently absurd. This is not Germany in 1945, when 60-year-old men were forced into the Volksstrum to fight off ravaging hordes of Soviets. The attempt to shoehorn women into a naturally male profession is the result of ideological enthusiasm, not rational policymaking.

    Despite the absence of conventional threats, the United States still faces the possibility of serious conflict. As our misbegotten adventures in Iraq and Afghanistan demonstrated, we can be defeated. By forcing women into a male domain, the Left eviscerates the culture of war so necessary to success in battle. How is the military supposed to concentrate on inculcating the necessary hardness of soul required to face death in war if it is more worried about ensuring female Lieutenants always feel included by public greetings?

    The advent of the nuclear age did not spell the end of war. Conflict did not go away; it merely changed forms. Today, our wars are abroad. We can afford defeat in Iraq and Afghanistan. The 1st Taliban Camel Division is in no danger of seizing DC. But this relative peace shows signs of ending. The ongoing populist backlash in Western nations signals that the state itself faces a crisis of legitimacy.
    This crisis, if not resolved, could lead to ruinous conflict. A Distant Mirror, Barbara Tuchman’s excellent study of 14th century France after its defeat at the Battle of Poitiers, gives historical precedence for what such a breakdown of social order might look like. If anarchy comes to our nation, the armed forces will be needed, not for foolish wars of empire around the globe, but to preserve America itself. With its slavish appeasement of “marginalized peoples,” women especially, our military has shown that it is unable to think clearly and confront serious threats.

    If we do not reject the ideological insanity brewing in our military institutions, we may lose more than our martial virtue; we may lose America itself.

    http://theagonist.org/essays/2019/01...-military.html

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


    Nikita Khrushchev: "We will bury you"
    "Your grandchildren will live under communism."
    “You Americans are so gullible.
    No, you won’t accept
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    outright, but we’ll keep feeding you small doses of
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you’ll finally wake up and find you already have communism.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    ."
    We’ll so weaken your
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you’ll
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    like overripe fruit into our hands."



  13. #173
    Postman vector7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Where it's quiet, peaceful and everyone owns guns
    Posts
    21,172
    Thanks
    16
    Thanked 65 Times in 60 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military

    Military Priorities, China vs America

    Chris Menahan
    InformationLiberation
    Oct. 01, 2019



    Just days before China unveiled a nuclear weapon that can "strike the US within 30 minutes with ten warheads" as part of a giant military parade, US Major General Lori Reynolds announced she's declaring "diversity" is a "warfighting necessity" which will help America defeat the more homogeneous nations of China and Russia.

    First from The Sun, "China unveils terrifying Dongfeng-41 nuke that ‘can strike US in 30 minutes with TEN warheads’ at 70th anniversary parade":



    The Sun, "China unveils terrifying Dongfeng-41 nuke that ‘can strike US in 30 minutes with TEN warheads’ at 70th anniversary parade":


    CHINA has unveiled its “ultimate doomsday weapon” during one of the nation’s biggest military parades.

    The terrifying super-nuke took centre stage at a huge arms showcase held in Tiananmen Square, Beijing, to mark 70 years of Communist rule.

    The Dongfeng-41 is a 7,672 mph intercontinental ballistic missile that is said to have the furthest range of any nuclear missile and could reach the US in 30 minutes.

    China's Communist Party celebrated its 70th anniversary in power with a military parade that showcased the DF-41, alongside the country's most advanced weapons.

    Soldiers in helmets and combat gear shouted, "hello, leader!" and "serve the people" as a formation of fighter jets trailing coloured smoke swooped low over the capital.

    As a reminder, President Trump struggled just to get a few tanks in the vicinity of his military parade on July 4th due to the left.



    The Marine Times, "Diversity of 'races, religions, backgrounds and genders' essential to warfighting in the information age, 3-star says":


    The challenges of the future operating environment are happening now for the intelligence community, the Marine Corps’ top general for information says. And diversity in thinking and in the ranks is essential to meeting the challenge.

    Lt. Gen. Lori Reynolds, deputy commandant of information, shared that observation and other insights to more than 300 intelligence Marines at the 9th Annual Marine Corps Association and Foundation Intelligence Awards Dinner Thursday.

    “I believe that diversity of thought will matter in the future fight,” Reynolds said.

    Diverse force, especially in intelligence, she said, is not about quotas but about, “how we think about the tools we put in a toolbox or use keys on a keyboard.”

    “And I believe a dramatic mix of talent, of all races, religions, backgrounds and genders will be the difference in the future,” she said.

    The three-star noted how a variety of perspectives, languages and cultures all feed the intelligence understanding of adversaries and of the information environment, an aspect that near-peer competitors such as China and Russia do not hold.

    “We must talk about diversity as a warfighting necessity and tonight I’m declaring it essential to the information environment,” Reynolds said.

    Reynolds' words sound exactly like the BBC propaganda piece I highlighted last month which ridiculously said the CIA was "too white" to prevent 9/11.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


    Nikita Khrushchev: "We will bury you"
    "Your grandchildren will live under communism."
    “You Americans are so gullible.
    No, you won’t accept
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    outright, but we’ll keep feeding you small doses of
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you’ll finally wake up and find you already have communism.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    ."
    We’ll so weaken your
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you’ll
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    like overripe fruit into our hands."



  14. #174
    Creepy Ass Cracka & Site Owner Ryan Ruck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    24,463
    Thanks
    46
    Thanked 61 Times in 60 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military


    Army's New Recruiting Ads Focus Less On Combat Roles

    November 11, 2019

    The Army's glitzy new recruiting campaign that kicked off on Veterans Day focuses less attention on combat roles and highlights lesser-known jobs like cyber warriors and scientists.

    The ads are intended to "surprise" the 17-to-24-year-olds of "Generation Z" and raise awareness of less-popularized roles in the Army at a time when a strong economy is making it difficult to find new recruits.

    The "What's Your Warrior" campaign will still highlight combat roles, but it also plays up some of the service's 150 career fields. It's a main reason why the new pitch showcases cyber protection and scientists researching the Zika virus.

    "The goal is to show the breadth and depth of roles that you can play in the United States Army and how these individual roles come together to form the most powerful team on earth," said Brig. Gen. Alex Fink, head of the Army's enterprise marketing. "You can be a warrior and work in cyberspace or in signals, or as a logistician."

    The ads are a big change from previous recruiting efforts "in terms of the use of colors, the use of music, the way we transition, the types of roles that we're going to show and how we show those types of roles will be different," Fink added. "We want to try to do it in a way that surprises our Generation Z audience."

    The Army's stated recruiting goal for fiscal year 2020 is 69,000 new soldiers, but a stronger economy and a shrinking pool of candidates who meet educational, health and fitness requirements has hindered that effort.

    In addition to putting the new ads on TV, Find said they'll have a strong "digital marketing presence" so members of Gen-Z encounter them on social media.

    "That's part of how you reach them," said Fink. "We've got to meet them where they are."

    One of the five soldiers highlighted in the ad campaign is Captain Erika Alvarado, 34, an Army Reservist who leads a Cyber Protection Team.

    Focusing on non-combat roles will get the attention of younger potential recruits, Alvarado said.

    "It will definitely open their horizons and perspectives to know that it's not just war and shooting and blowing things up," Alvarado added. "We have professional careers, whether it be myself, like in cyber or the medical, or engineers."

    Alvarado initially joined the Reserves as an enlisted soldier when she was 17, needing a waiver from her mother so she could join before her 18th birthday.

    She later became an officer and about a year ago transitioned from being a career logistician to the cyber realm.

    "I would say no matter what passion an individual has, in any type of specialty, the Army has a position for them," she said. "And every one of them is just as important as everyone else."

    The ad campaign is included in the Army's proposed $335 million marketing budget for 2020, though the actual amounts to be spent this year will depend on pending congressional action.

    Fink characterized the ad campaign as "the most complex and most integrated marketing campaign in the history, of the United States Army."

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •