Joe Galloway vs. DoD Flack

[Lemur]

I thought this email exchange (http://www.defensetech.org/archives/002404.html) might be of interest to the Orgites, especially those with a military background. Joe Galloway is the author of We Were Soldiers Once ... and Young, as well as being an active reporter on the U.S. military. Larry DiRita is the top P.R. shill for the DoD.

Interested in your thoughts on the exchange.

[yesdachi]

I don’t have time to read it all but I liked this quote.

"victory has many fathers; defeat is an orphan"
--Count Ciano, Mussolini's son-in-law in 1945

[Redleg]

I like the exchange - Joe Galloway basically does a good job of identifing what could happen.

He actually has some experience in that department having watched what happen to the United States Military after Vietnam.

To bad his main point is not being listen to by the politican in the Public Relations department.

[KafirChobee]

Always interesting to read Joe's summarys. As Red pointed out, it is a pity that the arrogance and ineptitude of the SECDEF doesnot permit them (RummY) to see the reality they have sown, or even to listen to those with a different perception than their own of what the military must be.

I believe, Joe Galloway is dead on.

[Vladimir]

This "journalist" needs to learn how to write all over again. Is it beneath him now to bother with proper punctuation or capitalization? I also found it interesting that this all volunteer, "broken" force is doing such a good job meeting its recruiting goals. The biggest problem with recruitment exists with the "weekend warriors" who, as a whole, possess less will and ability to fight as those on active duty. If the military's broken after a three year, low intensity war then it's time for us all to throw in the towel.

[Lemur]

Vladimir, DefenseTech is a blog reprinting emails. I'll admit the formatting leaves something to be desired, but please keep it in context. Also, considering how much of the burden those "weekend warriors" are shouldering, perhaps you should give them some props. Last I heard, they get the worst equipment, as well as the most unpopular duties. I'd say they're some of the best and bravest citizens we have. You shouldn't dissmiss them so lightly.

To describe the occupation, pacification and rebuilding of a country the size of Iraq as a low intensity war seems to gloss over all of the difficulties we're facing.

Lastly, if you're going to criticize a "journalist" for his "punctuation and grammar," you should "look up" the "overuse of quotes."

[KafirChobee]

Vlad, the present "occupation" (war as it is most often referred to, though hostilities with the former Iraq Army ended long ago) will make this the second longest war in US history - behind only the Vietnam conflict.

In 'nam the National guard were used sparingly (needed them at home to combat the war-protestors and freedom-marchers); did hear of a Reservist unit that got lost in the bureaucratic paper snafu that left them there for over 2 years - but, that could be a urban-legend.

With the National Guard, these people had careers outside the military and families that depend (ed) on them. Did you know the families of Guardsmen are not allowed the same courtesies or use of military facilities as Regular Army? Their families can't use the PX, are not allowed to use the military hospitals or dentists - nor given the same life insurance (last I saw). It is just another travesty perpetrated by Bush and his fellow neverheardashotfiredinanger gang. The National Guard is suppose to be a last line of defense - not the first. To be used for national emergencys, and an all out real war. Iraq does not qualify for either. The only reason they are being used is Bush doesn't have the gonads to re-instate the draft before the fall elections (come December .... surprise surprise), and the Decider can't decide what to do - except stay the course straight into a typhoon.

I believe Mr. Galloway, has some experience concerning extended conflicts - and the fubars of the military bureaucracy since then. He's not a dissident - he's a supporter of our military personell. But, he is not a blanket to give people the warm fuzzys that all is going well.

The idea that NOW we figured out what we were doing wrong ... and we've fixed it - is nothing short of good propaganda. These peeps have altered a few techniques (like busting down doors at 3 AM, versus 2AM) - but it is the same thing they did last year. The only difference is we've involved Iraqi militia and a few trained soldiers (btw, the Iraqi army still has a +60% desertion rate after training - do ya think maybe we are training the new alquadas? wouldn't surprise me.) to claim somekind of moral victory I have yet to figure out.

Further, from a report (other than Joe's - think it may have been in the Washington Spectator) I read recently, the Army is losing NCO's at an alarming rate - when their deros-ETS hits, they are quitting. This is what occurred during 'nam - I saw it, men with 12-18 years in quitting after their 3rd tours in 'nam. It really is not fair to send men into hostile-fire zones again and again with little or no respite between the tours. Or, expect their families to readjust to each deployment and homecoming - wonder what the divorce rate in the military is today? oh, well - it doesn't matter.

steps off soap box :balloon2:

[Redleg]

With the National Guard, these people had careers outside the military and families that depend (ed) on them. Did you know the families of Guardsmen are not allowed the same courtesies or use of military facilities as Regular Army? Their families can't use the PX, are not allowed to use the military hospitals or dentists - nor given the same life insurance (last I saw).


You know that directly contradicts the information I had when I was training National Guard Soldiers in five different states during the time frame of 1998-2000. So I will have to ask for proof of such a statement.

I do know some states treat their guardsmen better then others thought


http://www.nga.org/cda/files/05guardsurvey.pdf#search='National%20Guard%20soldier%20benefits%20upon%20activation%20for%20deployme nt'


I do know that there is some major problems for National Guard and Reservists if they are hurt and their treatment goes beyond the activition period of their unit.

http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d05125.pdf#search='Pay%20and%20benefits%20of%20National%20Guard%20soldiers'




It is just another travesty perpetrated by Bush and his fellow neverheardashotfiredinanger gang. The National Guard is suppose to be a last line of defense - not the first. To be used for national emergencys, and an all out real war. Iraq does not qualify for either. The only reason they are being used is Bush doesn't have the gonads to re-instate the draft before the fall elections (come December .... surprise surprise), and the Decider can't decide what to do - except stay the course straight into a typhoon.

You have a serious misconception about the Guard yourself. And frankly it wasn't Mr Bush and crew that started using the Guard for deployments overseas. You might want to check out the number of Guard Units that deployed into Bosinia and Kosovo.



I believe Mr. Galloway, has some experience concerning extended conflicts - and the fubars of the military bureaucracy since then. He's not a dissident - he's a supporter of our military personell. But, he is not a blanket to give people the warm fuzzys that all is going well.

I agree - I also beleive that Mr Galloway is about spot on with his criticism, but that is from just reading the emails provided in the article itself.



The idea that NOW we figured out what we were doing wrong ... and we've fixed it - is nothing short of good propaganda. These peeps have altered a few techniques (like busting down doors at 3 AM, versus 2AM) - but it is the same thing they did last year. The only difference is we've involved Iraqi militia and a few trained soldiers (btw, the Iraqi army still has a +60% desertion rate after training - do ya think maybe we are training the new alquadas? wouldn't surprise me.) to claim somekind of moral victory I have yet to figure out.

Yes indeed their are inflirators into the new Iraqi Military - however one must accept that and attempt to fix what one broke.




Further, from a report (other than Joe's - think it may have been in the Washington Spectator) I read recently, the Army is losing NCO's at an alarming rate - when their deros-ETS hits, they are quitting. This is what occurred during 'nam - I saw it, men with 12-18 years in quitting after their 3rd tours in 'nam. It really is not fair to send men into hostile-fire zones again and again with little or no respite between the tours. Or, expect their families to readjust to each deployment and homecoming - wonder what the divorce rate in the military is today? oh, well - it doesn't matter.

steps off soap box :balloon2:

Can't find the article you are refering to. But the CGSC publishes a leadership survey every year from within the Majors that are currently at the school.

http://www.d-n-i.net/fcs/leadership_comments.htm

In this survey (I don't know the date of it) but it seems to point out several key points that both support some of your comments - but also contradicts a few.

[Brenus]

I find very interesting hat all the modern armies which bet on high technology to win a war have now to face a over stretch of the deployment capacity. Because peace keeping needs a lot of troops on the field (Redleg, Kosovo and Bosnia are not actually Hot spots,) it is a problem to sent troops when you need some.
My brother is still in the French Army, and he told me that the French Army can hardly face all its duties, defence of the territory, peace keeping and intervention, mainly in Africa with actually Cote d’Ivoire and Chad which are quite hot.

[Redleg]

I find very interesting hat all the modern armies which bet on high technology to win a war have now to face a over stretch of the deployment capacity. Because peace keeping needs a lot of troops on the field (Redleg, Kosovo and Bosnia are not actually Hot spots,) it is a problem to sent troops when you need some.

Its no problem to active National Guard and Reservists to help the Active Military fullfil a mission. As someone attempted to alledge the National Guard is not the last line of defense for the United States. The National Guard and the Reserves are suppose to be an intergal part of the military, hince they were deployed to Bosnia and Kosovo during the 1990's to assist in the mission. I do see that you understood my point in essence - if not my writing.



My brother is still in the French Army, and he told me that the French Army can hardly face all its duties, defence of the territory, peace keeping and intervention, mainly in Africa with actually Cote d’Ivoire and Chad which are quite hot.

And I have a brother that is also currently still serving - a First Sergant with a Manuever company in Iraq. And the United States Military has been facing the stretching of forces for many years now. It was a major issue during the 1990's and its getting worse from what I have been reading.

[Major Robert Dump]

If the military is meeting its recruitment goals then why are they putting airmen and sailors on ground patrols in Iraq? It's all in the way you read the numbers, I guess, and the reference to how the military of 2000 could not have sustained "rotational deployments indefinitely" like it does now is a little silly and queer, because "rotational deployments indefinitely" isn't really something to brag about since it points lack of soldiers, lack of planning and screws the enlisted with stop loss orders.

When the war with Iraq is over I sympathize with president who inherits the task of managing a post-war military, especialy if said president is a Democrat, because he will get the blame for everything.


BTW: active duty reservists and guardmen and their families get the same benefits as the regulars when on active duty, although its not always an easy task to fulfill the rewuired paperwork so the wife and kids can go to the military hospital and the PX should they live near the base. In many cases, the family doesnt bother, and in many others the soldier is suited up and deployed while the paperwork is still in limbo for his family to get their military IDs.

Drills dont count as active duty, so when not active guard and reservists get partial benefits and limited visits to the PX etc