The 90s Army and you.
Well I found a article by Jessica Scott that takes a look at the US Army of the 90s and today. Because I joined in 2006, I was wondering if I could get a idea of how on the mark this is. Lets start with this.
So now all we’re hearing about is the return to the 90s army. When shiny boots, a pressed uniform and a good PT score meant you were a great leader. We’re already seeing outstanding leaders punished for their less than stellar PT scores. Got an injury? Too bad, you’re slacking so you’re not the total army soldier we need.
I know that I have seen some this happen now but this is the part that I wanted to ask about.
Lest we need a history lesson, let’s not forget about the exodus from the force in 03-04, when a ridiculous amount of company grade officers fled in the face of the possibility of a long war. When far too many folks who had reached their 20 years of duty dropped their paperwork to avoid the conflict.
We talk about how the SGTs and SSGs in our Army today don’t know how to lead soldiers. Who’s fault is that? Instead of pointing the finger at the force, let’s look at the 90s army that abandoned the OIF-OEF army to fight the long war. The leaders of the OIF-OEF army were flexible enough to sustain combat over nearly a decade against an unconventional force. We were not flawless, not by any means. We made mistakes and some Really Bad Shit happened on our watch.
But to tell a force that has sacrificed through more than a decade at war that the 90s army was somehow better than us? That the 90s Army was more professional because we looked like soldiers then? The shiny boots didn’t stick around long enough to get dust on them in the deserts of Iraq. Too many of those pressed uniforms damn sure didn’t bleed in combat.
So what do you say? How accurate is this in regards to a mass exodus to avoid deployment? Or for the view that the Army in the 90s was better remembered then it really was?
Category: Veterans Issues
Blaming the 90s Army for getting out in 03-04 doesn’t sound like blaming if they were as bad as she’s claiming. At the end of the day, I don’t see the “90s Army” abandoning us as the problem, but its an interesting take on the 90s.
I was in during the 90s and the biggest problem because of the drawdown was the “zero tolerance” Army. If you made a mistake, you weren’t allowed to learn from it, you just left the Army one way or another. (piss test, DUI, APFT, HT/WT, etc.)
Its neither better nor worse than it seems. The 90s Army was good and bad. There was a lot of political BS going on and people kissing ass to get ahead, but undeserving. Yes there was also the spit n’ polish, 300 PT “studs” that couldn’t do anything else right. But, there were enough good Soldiers and Leaders who were keeping things together to make the Army function.
There is concern about this turning back into the 90s Army though. I and others have seen the “zero tolerance” issue pop back up again. Medical issues are looked at more severely for release, ht/wt and apft failures will be getting the boot soon enough, etc etc. Tough to say how serious it will get though at this point and if it will get back to the 90s Army that was reduced by Clinton 40?%, all the while sending us everywhere around the world to do peacekeeping missions and increasing the optempo 300% (which no one really talks about anymore after the optempo went thru the roof for OIF/OEF.
I recall that in ’03? after the stop loss on 18-series ended, hundreds of E-7 SF dropped retirement paperwork, but don’t recall significant amounts of others “abandoning” let alone leaving.
I saw a lot of the tail end of that mindset in 04. Indeed no one expected HAWAII to deploy, the old addage was that you wouldn’t trust the 25th to guard an MRE box. Motorpool Monday’s in Iraq, CSM pulling ppl over for speeding… The Age of the FOBbit had begun I thought. But then in 2007 I saw a complete change in the army. We were against the ropes, haggard even.
They still cared about PT scores but at that point every swinging dick was needed. Warriors, the ones that relished getting in close and mixing it up reigned supreme. We needed smart manly men who could mix daily firefights with hearts and minds. We needed to be everything at all times.
In 2009 as I was getting out one could smell the winds of change, the day after Obama got elected re-up bonouses dropped by 60%, many troops that had fought hard were shitcanned as quick as possible. I do not know how it is now but I suspect the bean counter and the paper princes reign supreme. It’s the only thing that would explain the SMA’s crackdown on sleeve tattoos
The 90’s Army screwed us over alright. I remember being ordered to starch and press my DCU’s in Afghanistan. According to AR 670-1, the starching and pressing of a uniform is up to the individual Soldier, or at least was, in 2004.
If memory serves me correctly, Big Army did the same thing during the 70’s after winding down Vietnam and Carters term as POTUS, Doc.
IMHO, I saw more people getting out of the Army back in 1993 when VSI/SSB rolled around than in 2003. Having enlisted back in 1989 and retiring, finally, in 2010, I saw many a change in the Army over the years and experienced the “90’s Army” firsthand. To compare that timeframe with the current one, as well as our decade at war could not be realistically done.
To me it’s like trying to compare apples to oranges. We can use a Garrison Professionalism vs. Wartime Professionalism all day. Having experienced the good and bad in both I cannot compare the two and say one was better than the other. Both have their merits in their own rights that would not make sense if placed in the other. At the same time, stating that we are going back to the “90’s Army” is false in my opinion as well. The current Garrison mindset may look like what it was back in the 90’s, but from what I see it lacks the common sense factor many leaders had back then. I am not saying that common sense is not present in today’s leaders; I just think many have their hands tied due to this P.C. world and are unable to bring it to bear. I know it frustrated the hell out of me when trying to talk sense into the Battalion leadership and having them see the common sense approach to subjects and getting in return a blank stare of no comprehension. Common Sense leadership seemed to rule more in the 90’s, at least from my perspective at the Company Level.
I am all for standards and discipline in the Army, as long as it makes sense. Since retirement I have worked on post at Fort Hood and see these changes first hand. While some change is always good, alot (lately) is not.
@#3 Lucky: Deployed to Iraq in 2004 myself. We were never told to starch our uniforms. However, while going back on mid tour R&R stopping off in Kuwait, it seemed everyone there was starching their DCU’s. Talk about looking out of place, but we gave less than a damn what they thought.
The 03-04 exodus among those hitting 20 years was very predictable on demographic grounds alone if one looks at history. The Reagan-era buildup began in earnest in 82-83. Add 20 to 82 and factor in OIF/OEF stop-loss, and, well . . . .
The junior officer exodus was similarly predictable, but IMO more likely for the reasons the article states.
Neither should have been a surprise. Nor should the return to a “parade-ground” mentality. Same thing happened after Vietnam in the mid-late 1970s; after Desert Storm in the mid-1990s; and is currently IMO happening again (and will likely increase over the next few years). I can’t comment about post-Korea ’cause I wasn’t around for those years; I’m gettin’ old, but not THAT old. Yet. (smile)
Much the same appears to happen after every major conflict. I personally think it’s more associated with the post-conflict reduction than directly associated with any major change in leadership philosophy (though some of that is also present). During a drawdown, minor distinctions become hugely important – because you have a ton of folks with otherwise very similar records competing for a much-reduced number of “slots”. Minor distinctions thus begin to take on a significance which far outweighs their actual worth – because the major distinctions are a “push”.
Just my $0.02 worth. But this is the 3rd time I’ve seen it happen, with much the same results the first two. And the beginnings of the 3rd time look quite familiar.
90’s Army NCOs any thoughts on human resource management programs below?:
Qualatative Service Program: To identify NCOs for involuntary
early seperation from active duty.
Qualatative Management Program: Considers SNCOs for denial of continued service who may not meet Army standards.
What I understand, these programs were suspended for a few years 2002 to 2009 time frame. From reading Army forums many NCOs are in favor of this to cull the herd and were glad it came back. There are some who think Army is hypocritical suspending this program when the fighting was hot & heavy and Army needed all hands on deck. Now with wars winding down the Army is ruthlessly using QSP/QMP to the maximum to downsize the force and not just bad/mediocre but the good solid soldiers as well (NCOs if selected need to have min. 18 yrs TIS to be allowed to finish out 20 to retire). Any blemish on service record & your career is over/no second chances. Does this increase selfishness in soldiers? Soldiers
increasingly worried about own career are reluctant to help fellow soldiers excel who than become direct competition.
Thoughts?
@2 Doc, couldn’t have said it better myself.
I was around in the 80s AND the 90s and am STILL around as a Reservist. I have vivid memories of Reserve O5s and E9s with 20 years tripping over each other to drop retirement paperwork as soon as mobilizations began in 2002-03.
I was a battalion commander in 04, and had a captain tagged to mob to Iraq who managed to contrive every physical malady imaginable and finally weaseled his way out of the mob station at Camp Atterbury, but the scumbag managed to stay in the USAR. He would virtually call me nightly to the point where I told my kids to tell him I wasn’t at home. My12 year old daughter even referred to him as “He who will not fight” when I asked who was on the phone!
No one every expected the USAR and NG to go from a Strategic force to an Operational one. Back in the 80s, the only time I thought I’d mobilize was if we were invaded from Alpha Centauri. As you recall, during Vietnam, you joined the USAR or NG is you DIDN’T want to deploy. Not mobilizing the Reserves or NG was one of LBJs “dirty little strategies” to keep Vietnam going for ten years, as it gave sanctuary to the privileged who really didn’t want to get their hands dirty but ran out of deferments and desperately wanted to avoid Vietnam.
Check out the mid-60 year old politicians who are “proud of their Vietnam-era service”. Among them my own Senator Richard Blumenthal. Joining either the Guard or the Reserve in 03-04 ENSURED you would mobilize and deploy somewhere
Couldn’t be more proud to have served in OIF 07-09.
The 90’s army, especially the late 90’s was the worst. The leadership didn’t have a mission as Bosnia was drying up and NTC/JRTC was the pinncle of any BN command. Maybe leaders were’nt allowed to lead based on lack of funds, but it was pretty bad. I couldn’t roll my tanks ever, so my guys swept the motorpool and waited on parts. Then everything changed on 9-11. I don’t remember an exodus in 2003 but I think alot of junior guys will get out now as the worst of garrison leadership will come roaring back. The new CSM of the Army scares me. They’ve used up alot of folks, no time for ticket punching school etc. Now they’re gonna bounce them for it.
She’s entitled to her opinion, but this makes zero sense to me. I came up in the “90s Army”, whatever that’s supposed to mean. I’ve been lucky, and only deployed three times since 9/11. None of my friends from the “90s Army” has less than three deployments… except for the ones who were killed on their first deployments. I didn’t see anyone running for the door when the balloon went up.
I got out in January ’95 under the VSI program.
Got myself into some trouble which ENDED my career. [would have been QMP’d with what happened]
ONE mistake was a career ending action for us enlisted anyway. [my commander who made it a field grade and reduced me to E-5 was allowed to retire after calling a black co. cdr the ‘n’ word at a staff meeting and throwing a phone at him] They were getting rid of NUMBERS back then in the ’90’s as far as I can remember.
As long as the war is on, you guys now can screw goats and stay in. Well, up until now that “peace” is breaking out again.
I’m just an old Marine, so I can’t comment on what the Army does, but I enlisted in 1978 and retired in 2009. That makes me a 80’s, 90’s, and 00’s Marine. Hell, I only retired because I the Marine Corps told me my services were no longer required. What I can add to this conversation is that while certain regulations may be relaxed in a combat theater, if the unofficial relaxation of those same regulations was permitted in garrison as well then that is a failure of the leadership at the time; the soldiers of the 00’s (and those from previous decades who were still around).
I was a “90s soldier”…in fact an officer like Jessica Scott. The Army then was a peacetime army so yeah…there was a lot of chicken shit going on. It still burns my craw that you guys wear sunglasses without prescription lens. Seriously…somethings just get burned in you. Training hard was not the order of the day. This doesn’t mean that there were not hardcore NCOs, but there was not life/death decisions that hardened an NCO, made them a leader. There are clearly more combat hardened troops today then there were in the 90s. SO yea…that makes a serious difference. Was the Army better now than back then? no idea. It would like asking that of the WWII era troops were better then todays. The difference is in the training and in the mindset. Back then troops were trained for one specific mission…invading Europe. They trained for two years…..TWO YEARS! No question they were ready. That mindset carried on to other missions. The same today. The game face went on when the balloon went up. The trouble is that in a peacetime army the bureaucrats come out from under their desks. They need the line time now. They may have a combat patch or a ribbon from being in the area but they didn’t really pull a trigger. It will be these guys that water things down. It is bound to happen. The real heart of the matter is that the hard core, tough as nails training is about to get kiddy again. It will happen over night. It is a peacetime Army. Was it any better or worst? Its the leaders that make a difference. The hard part will be insulating your troops from the bad ones, because that bad leader is there for a while. Nothing is chasing him away any time soon. It will be about statistics more then results. The military is a reflection of society. This is true in all accounts, in all history, in all nations. Your job as a leader never changed. The fight is still the same. Only the tactics are different and… Read more »
Oh…forgot to add something….if you leave the Army because you can no longer tolerate the garrison BS, or you didn’t get what you wanted in your reenlistment contract….or any number of reasons that are used to justify the decision to leave. In fact there will be studies and article written about the exodus. This happened in my time when O2s and O3s were leaving by the bushel. The Army thought it a serious problem.
So what? IF they don’t want to stay let them leave…besides I think the Army needs to rethink how officers are grown.
Still if you leave its not them…its you.
Listen…you aren’t going to change the Army. If you leave understand one thing…your decision. You are doing it because you can’t change. You can’t adapt. It’s a hard thing to swallow but the Army is the ARmy. It is ever constant. I freely admit that I left because I could not deal with the BS that a non-troop leading officer position was going to do to me. I wanted to be with troops, but that is not in the cards for an Ordnance Officer after a while. I didn’t like that. So I left. No harm no foul. Simple as that.
So as they say….it’s not her…it is in fact you. Stay or leave, the Army will always be there.
I was in the 82nd from ’94 to ’97. I joined the military because I wanted to see the world. Instead, I spent the majority of my time at Ft. Bragg getting high and tights every 2 weeks, pressing my uniform, shining my boots, and painting the underside of my HUMVEE black for Division inspections. There wasn’t anything going on back then. We deployed once to Panama for two months to deal with Cuban refugees who became restless, and the most excitement anyone could expect to deal with during a tour of duty was to spend 6 months in the Sianai. I’d have really liked to have had that opportunity, but it never came. I remember we’d get a day off from work if we went 82 days without someone dying and we cursed the kid who committed suicide on day 81, who denied us our day off. There were always DUI checkpoints on Yadkin Road leading into base, and many was the soldier who was drummed out for that. I was just telling the story yesterday of being a Corporal and having to accompany a young PFC from New Mexico down to Army CID for a polygraph that he failed for having a small bit of pot in a black plastic film canister in his barracks room. It took me a while from reading the post-9/11 stories about the Army that it was no longer the Army I remembered. That being said, I don’t think anyone can say that one was better than the other. If 9/11 had happened when we were on duty, we would have adapted, grooming and base appearance standards would have relaxed, and we’d have dealt with it just as the later generation did. Now that the wars are winding down, there’s a natural contraction and a return to these seemingly meaningless rules and regulations. If you know anything about history, you’ll realize that this is the natural order of the military universe. We all know it’s stupid. We knew it at the time that such rigid adherence to inflexible rules and regulations did not… Read more »
My service spanned ’77-’99. What I remembered most about the 90’s Army is their zero tolerance policy. Being a good field soldier would almost guarantee your departure. As an NCO you tried your hardest to make sure you got your ticket punched with whatever school or credential was the flavor of the month. People were getting booted for crap in their personnel files from 5 or more years ago. I had a good friend, an E-7 with 17 years of service get QMP’d cause of a DUI 6 years in his past. For the Top 3 everytime we had our records reviewed for promotion we were also reviewed for elimination. High stress times to say the least. I sweated every year cause while I managed to get the NCO schools, the right assignments, and civilian education, being Infantry I lacked a Ranger tab which is all it would take to get me bounced. It was the atmosphere not so much of messing up but of not having the right stuff. I was in several commands where officers would hold this over the enlisted heads also. On more then one occasion I had a company commander or bn commander casually comment about that’s a nice NCOER you got there, be a shame if something happened to it. I saw officers wield Article 15’s as tool to get rid of troublesome NCO’s. The need to pass all PT tests, piss tests, height/weight combined with all the silly sensitivity training we had to attend for more then a few just got to be too much. I don’t think too many of my peers expected me to live to retirement because of the times I locked horns with others. I never made it past E7, to put it in perspective I made it to E7 in about 10 1/2 and retired after 22. I was never busted, never received an Article 15 or a courts martial, but I had just enough in the NCOER’s or letter of reprimands that would appear just before the board would convene combine with the aforementioned lack of a… Read more »
I’ll point out the flawed philosophy of the current “leadership” at the top, paraphrasing: The attributes our Army learned in the last 10 years of war are not the attributes of the peacetime army that looks pretty marching in parades. We’re going back to those things that were good for thee parades. I saw the 90’s Army develop from the Cold War/Desert Storm Army. I saw the post 9/11 Army recover from its risk aversion. In the 90’s, the Army motto changed from “Be all you can be” to an “Army of One.” Soldiers immediately recognized the selfishness and lack of teamwork in the new motto, and it became a reality. The 90’s Army was not ineffective because of haircuts and shiny boots. It deteriorated because of the dog eat dog cuts, and selfish attitudes. It deteriorated because an era that promised to throw everyone out for the least infraction caused the birth of risk-averse officers. The negative effects of the 90’s Army are coming back. The 80’s Army had constantly improved, without a war, and with a QMP process. QMP is just a tool, like powerpoint, a rifle, or a drone. It can be used correctly, to cut the riff-raff. Or it can be used incorrectly, to do harm to the military, and to slash good Troops, as it was in the 90’s and is being chosen for the slashes of the 10’s to do. There are differences though. The cuts of the 90’s, while too deep, came at a time that Our Military was strong, ready and rested. The military of the 21st Century added few Troops to the rolls, but is on the precipice of being slashed deeper, to numbers lower than anytime since pre-WWII. The Military today is small, tired, and badgered. While the enforcement of rules and regulations which no one understands a reason for is plain stupid, that is not what will undermine military leadership. It will only be a symptom. Ending the careers of good leaders because they have a small black mark will create a risk averse leadership. And risk averse leadership… Read more »
I got into the GA Guard in 94 (spent a year in the Reserves first). We were lucky in that we had a lot of Desert Storm vets and being in a Cav troop attached directly to brigade meant we got left alone to do scout stuff so we trained a lot with a minimum of BS. In Kuwait in 2004, I wasn’t at the big bases like Doha or Arifjan so I can’t comment there. We were standing watch either on boats or at various checkpoints in full battle rattle so there wasn’t that much garrison crap we had to put up with. Usually I’d wear a uniform about 3-4 days before I had a chance to wash it. I never starched my uniform and I think I only ironed it when we finally redeployed. Toward the end of our deployment, things started to change. Camp Patriot became a salute zone and who ever was in charge of the camps became more focused on minor BS. For the most part though, things were more relaxed. To be fair, the Coast Guard was always more relaxed than the Army. That actually was a tough adjustment for me to make.
Someone ought to tell Ms. Scott that a lot of the 90’s Army (and military in general) was thanks to the “peace dividend” after GWI. Having been on AD in the 80’s and 90’s, we were much more mission-oriented in the late 80’s and up until about 1992 or so when the BRAC started shutting down/drawing down everything.
And having known a lot of the older salts who were around in the 1960’s and 70’s when I was but a young boot, they said much the same thing about the 1970’s as well.
Problem is, this “hollow force” of Obama’s is making Carter’s look positively draconian.
Interesting questions. I enlisted in 1978 and am just now retiring, with a 9-year hiatus from ’92 to ’01. On your first question regarding a supposed exodus of company grade officers in ’03-’04, it might have happened, I don’t really know. But I’m fairly comfortable that anyone who left the Army in the “face of a long war” are best done without, particularly officers. I’m also comfortable that far more talent left the Army in 1992-94 in the face of a long peace. How good was the Army of the 90’s? The bottom line up front is the Army’s superb performance during Desert Storm in 1991. We were that good. Repeated rotations to the National Traning Center and a serious commitment to actual training in the field built units that were genuinely tough, well disciplied, and highly skilled. Having said that, starched uniforms and spit shined boots had very little to do with that. It had a lot to do with getting back to doing PT (something that the 80’s Army did not do well or regulalry), enforcing height/weight standards (I remember a Master Sergeant in our HQ Company that had additional panels sewn into his permanent press fatiques to accomodate his bulk), and drug screening. So, while you coud be spit-shined and starched (that was the expectation), you could not so much be a spit-shined, starched wide body, PT failure, or druggie. Exeptions there are to every generality, but that’s the generality. As for the folks that insist on the virtues spit-shine and starch, those are work avoidance techniques. They have their time and place, but are not the foundation of pride and dscipline. The folks who long for an air conditioned office, servile subordinates and low performance expectations are the ones who most often bring that up. The point is, “shiny boots, a presed uniform and a good PT score” never automatically meant that you were good leader. “We’re already seeing outstanding leaders punished for less than stellar PT scores.” No shit. Being an outstanding leader in the Army means that you have an exemplary PT score. Being… Read more »
Only problem, Rik–the only people who aren’t going to be “selectively and aggressively separated” are those senior NCO’s/senior officers who have little trigger/deployment time, but play the political game very, very well. All the services are guilty of this.
I saw it too many times in the 90’s, and I’m sure we’re seeing the beginning of it now.
When I went up for major in 2001, what had been a cohort of 300 was down to 65. There were 120+ vacancies for majors for our year group. The Army was required to cut between 15 and 20, regardless.
This after:
200 days in the field per year (92-95)
IFOR and SFOR (96, 97,98) (< 8 months with family, over 3 years)
4+ years to captain
5+ years to major
Less than 300 APFT: career killer
Taped: career killer
The Big Daddy Rush: finding a colonel or general to 'mentor' you to the correct jobs with face time with the officers who make up the promotion board
TRADOC = ignominious death of one's Army future
Recruiting Command: where officers go to die, usually because some recruiter got caught fucking a potential recruit 300 miles away
Soldier suicide: career ender
Failure to maintain expert
And my personal favorite: SELCON !!! That's where the Army won't promote you, but will retain you on active duty as a captain until you reach 17 years, when you're discharged. No retirement. That's saying you aren't good enough for promotion, but the shitbags who got promoted aren't competent at that soldiering stuff so you have to stay on.
Here’s my perspective:
I was commissioned in May of 2000. While a Platoon Leader in Korea, I participated in ARTEP evaluations, Red/Amber/Green training cycles, 10-step training model, proper MDMP, etc. September 11th happened about 18 months into my time in service.
My observation is that we now have an entire generation of leaders (YG2001 and 2002 Officers are MAJORS now) who have never served in a “garrison” environment. There’s still a level of professionalism, decorum, and common sense required to lead which a lot of leaders at all ranks either don’t have, failed to acquire, or just completely disregard.
Some things that need to be brought back from the “90’s Army”:
-Etiquette
-Focus on Drill and Ceremonies (many don’t know how to march)
-Formal events/Dining-in’s
-ORGANIZATIONAL DAYS
Some things that need to return to the annals of history:
-Starched uniforms
-Skin high fades
-Check the block schools
I hope the proposed changes attempting to enforce shaving and grooming standards on leave is promptly deposited in GEN Odierno’s trash can.
DaveO 24,
Is it correct that reaching 18 years is “sanctuary” for Os and officer is permitted to cross finish line at 20? If that is case than stopping officer at 17 on SELCON is ultimate slap with pimp hand – thanks for your service, but now there is the curb and here is the kick.
Has anyone read this book?
“Getting It Right, Second Edition: American Military Reforms After Vietnam and Into the 21st Century”, but James Dunnigan:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0595184464/
It speaks to Rik #22’s comment: “The bottom line up front is the Army’s superb performance during Desert Storm in 1991. We were that good. Repeated rotations to the National Traning Center and a serious commitment to actual training in the field built units that were genuinely tough, well disciplied, and highly skilled.”
Their thesis is that increased recruiting standards, realistic and rigorous training, and the kick in the ass that came from how Vietnam ended up made for a unique moment in our military history – it was the first time that we won the first battle of a war.
I enlisted in 1983 in the CALGUARD. The Gulf War triggered an exodus of the old guard careerists who had enlisted in the NG to avoid the draft and went on to serve mostly well with no expectation of deployment. There was a similar cohort of younger ones that had joined to get benefits that got out as well. Deployment scared them off.
The next exodus started after 9/11 deployments and stoploss extensions ended around 2004-2005. We had full to overstrength Companies prior to 9/11 in all 5 MP Companies in my BN. In 2004-05, after 2 deployments within 3 years, company strengths dropped to 50-60% as people fled from the units, afraid they would be deployed again, mainly enlisted, but of all ranks. There was a severe officer shortage when I retired in 2009 and the Companies were still understrength.
Admittedly my time was post-Vietnam ’70s to mid-80s: by then between Gramm-Rudman-Hollings and budget cuts, the impression was that anyone who could be “encouraged” out was going to be. Disability ratings were being cut, and simply having bad knees was pretty much a career-ender. I can only say that the early ’80s were FAR better than the late ’70s, but by mid-80s in retrospect the writing was on the wall.
Can’t help but remember Donald Sutherland inspecting the Airborne in “The Dirty Dozen”: “Very pretty Colonel, but can they fight?”
Some interesting comments about everyone getting out at the start of the war. I got out (mistake) in 2006 since my wife was sick of deployments. I tried to go back in last year and was told by the Army Reserve recruiter that he was over strength. I don’t think he was BSing me. He pulled up vacancies and had to go to a wide search to find anything for my rank (E-6). We found one E-5 slot nearby in a supply MOS. It sounds like all the reserves in my area (central FL) are full although spots open up sporadically.
I finally gave up and joined the Sheriff’s Reserve just to be doing something. I have 13 years in the military reserves. I’d still like to find a way back in to finish my 20 but I think I screwed myself to make my wife happy.
‘the best duty assignment i ever had ? the one i just left. the worst ? the one i just got to’ pretty popular saying when i was in. 97-07. i think the mentality applies to a lot of things. errant pride and nostalgia cloud judgement.
No. 10 Sustainer:
Thanks much for the exposé
– of VIETNAM WAR CRIMINAL LB JOHNSON.
– of Vietnam-“ERA” Official Gov’t evasion/confusion nonsense.
From:
Couldn’t be more Proud Vietnam War Veteran (In-Country) .
I joined the Regular Army in 1974. Did my 2 years as a grunt, then got out. I joined the CA Army National Guard in 1989 and became a 12B. I reenlisted when the Gulf War was spinning up, while many were trying to get out. I didn’t go anywhere. I waited, then along came 9-11. I was in a Mess Kit Repair unit by that time….so I waited…then went to Bosnia in 2003- just as my enlistment was due to run out- I reenlisted again so I could go. 6 months after returning from Bosnia, I was in Iraq.
I know lots of Guard bums who did everything they could to not deploy. They are gutless, useless pieces of shit. I do think when you’re not in the field, soldiers should have pressed/spit shined uniforms and boots- which the new uniforms don’t allow you to do. However, in the field or in a war zone- dress for business- like you are ready to kick ass.
As I saw some “spit shined 300 PT score” soldiers run away when war came, I also saw many run to volunteer to go. For my deployments, we took too many useless oxygen thieves- where as if we let them stay home and only took people who worked, we would have done a better job.
The Soldiers who didn’t impress me were the ones who wanted to get promoted and be in charge—they went to every NCO /Officer school in peace time, but when war came- they ran thefuck away.
Ok, I have a unique perspective on this having been in all three armies discussed in the comments above. I enlisted in the early 90’s Army (Oct ’91), got out in the mid 90’s (’95), and re-enlisted in the current army (’07). The early ’90’s army was bad-ass and I loved it. Even as a Reservist we actually trained and did things. As an engineer we built bridges (well our company did) and then we blew them up (my platoon did). We did live fire exercises, worked closely with the local National Guard units (armored company out of Boise). We also starched our uniforms and polished our boots (something I miss in today’s Army because of the discipline, focus, and attention to detail it instilled), but when we were actively doing shit those garrison requirements were the first to go. Then in ’93 I transferred to the IIR and went on a mission for my church. Two years later I came back, spent a couple of months drilling and then got out (U’ed out actually because I didn’t have enough rank to take advantage of President Clinton’s draw down). The Army had been completely made over. Our drills were all paper and power point. Garrison bullshit was everywhere, even when we were in the field. We had no training budget, no rounds to shoot, and couldn’t even get det cord to train with, let alone other explosives. We even had a fuel ration that limited where and how often we could start our 5-tons. Morale was in the crapper, good soldiers who had the time in got out. Good leaders left because they couldn’t be good leaders anymore. It was horrific. I did feel bad about how it all ended, so in 2007 I whipped myself back into shape, and even though it meant going through basic again I went back. Basic was a freak’n joke. We were taught more, but didn’t have the same focus on discipline that had existed before. Its possible we are a smarter Army now, but we aren’t as hard of an Army. Since my… Read more »
#26 Devtun:
17 years + major = Sanctuary
17 years + SELCON captain = dismissal, with separation pay.
On the enlisted side of it was the usual scenario of:
NCO at just under 19 years, must Reup to get to 20 and retirement, and s/he comes down on orders to Korea. Decline Korea means no reup means discharge at 19 or very close to 20.
There’s also the Component Game: Reserve Officer in a Conditional Voluntary Indefinite status, having reached his or her 8 years Constitutionally required service is not eligible for separation pay and benefits, while a USMA grad 2LT, with almost 2 years of service but resigns because s/he can’t hack it, gets the full meal deal in cash and bennies.
Dave #29,
You survived 70’s? just how did you manage? I recall
Generals Schwarzkopf, Colin Powell, Barry McCaffery, George Casey have all talked about serious problems with drugs, alcohol,insubordination,dereliction, racial violence, and AWOL. Yeah, add insult to injury-serious budget cuts restricted fuel, ammo, and spare parts. “The Hollow Force” was common expression being used. People have a funny way of adjusting to misery and just plugging along no matter how bad it sucks. Kudos to you.
My dear grammy said that it will all be the same a thousand years from now, and life is too short. So don’t sweat the petty shit. 8)
Honestly, I think a lot of people see SMA Chandler as everything that was wrong with the 90s army. Ticket punching and setting yourself up for your future career. Now this very person is judging soldiers who embody the selfless service. Lets say you have a SSG that hasn’t had all of the schools that another SSG has had because her or she has been on 3 or 4 deployments. That same SSG may not score a 300 on every pt test because they have been deployed 3 or 4 times and have an aggregate ammount of injuries that may not equal a profile. That SSG may have a Tattoo or two because they wanted to get something to commerate the deployments they have been on and the friends they have lost. That SSG may not want to go to every freaking school that comes down the pipe because they don’t want to spend any more time away from their family. I would also like to wonder what the percentage of soldiers have to get taped now due to the increase in muscle mass over the last 12 years because soldiers carry so much more weight. As we all know HtWt standards are more about apearance than about performance.
They seem to want a guy (or gal) that has never been in trouble, maxes every pt test, has no tattoos, been to lots of schools…sounds good on paper, but sometimes having a guy with a little operational experience is just a little better than having a guy with shiny boots.
DaveO: don’t think so. I’m pretty sure that the statutory sanctuary point is 18 yrs of total active federal service for both enlisted and officers. Before then, one can be administrativly separated. 2x passed-over Majors can definitely be separated if they don’t have 18 years total federal service.
SELCON is optional, not mandatory, for CPTs and MAJs who get passed over.
I got out in late ’91 as a young Sergeant, disgruntled with local unit politics and a jacked-up view of the world in general. When 9-11 shit hit the fan, I was married to a woman who knew she was not cut out to be a military wife. Still love her, still wish I would have gone anyway. I obviously don’t know what it was like during the rest of the ’90s, but if I had it to do over, I would have taken the BNCO slot and tried to gut it out. Hindsight after maturity is a bitch.
Like the poster of the article, I too enlisted in 2006 (for what I called Operation: The Army Needs Bodies), which to my knowledge is the antithesis of the 90’s Army, but it looks like I’m going to be around just long enough to see the return of that mentality in garrison…after my next deployment of course.
I can’t say I’m looking forward to it and like more than a few of you I suspect, I have a wife who is full of piss and vinegar should I even whisper “re-up”. That said, am I going to blame the 90’s Army, faced with a civilian command and political class (Clinton era) that apparently never read its history to understand what happens when you gut a force? Not really. Not entirely anyway.
What I can tell you is this: There has to be some way to make us flexible in how we prepare for conflicts (which lately seem to bite us in the ass and THEN have us adapt). Just once I’d like the Army to actually learn from a conflict then retain that knowledge, rather than have to re-learn what was lost.
Garrison Soldier,Field Soldier,Combat Soldier…I was taught that there was no difference. A soldier was a soldier… End of discussion. Then I saw Rif’d Cpts. who were Company Cdrs in Division and sent to Group as E-6s because they didn’t have their degrees. Multiple combat tours in SF and conventional units didn’t mean a damn thing. They were warned. Chickenshit peacetime stuff will always arrive when cutbacks are in order. Many times the Rif’d is not fair, but what do you do? I always have said that a group of mass murderers, who had high and tights, and were breaking starch and were taught extra 22-5, could easily pull the wool over any SGM and Gen. who would say that they were the finest troops ever inspected. Sadly, that is how it was, is and will be.
I would tell my soldiers that the cutbacks are coming and what looks good on paper will save their careers. I put it on them. Some listened and some fell by the wayside.
Hondo: you’re wrong.
Enlisted in WA ARNG after watching the Iraq invasion on television. Finished IET and immediately went to OEF in early 2006. As they say, we went to war and a garrison broke out.
That said, I do think there is a place for uniform standards. I don’t worship at the altar of the 300 APFT, but physical fitness and ability to do your job is a significant, necessary component of the overall soldier picture. To hear our old CSM (a 42A) tell it, though, the most important function of the Army is to do NCOERs over and over again to perfection. Trivial things made gospel kills morale and drives good people away.
Jason #38: Chandler sure gives off that 1990s inflexible, my-way-or-the-highway CSM vibe.
“I’d like to have two armies: one for display with lovely guns, tanks, little Soldiers, staffs, distinguished and doddering generals, and dear little regimental officers who would be deeply concerned with their general’s bowel movements or their colonel’s piles, an army that would be shown for a modest fee on every fairground in the country.”
“The other would be the real one, composed entirely of young enthusiasts in camouflage uniforms, who would not be put on display but from whom impossible efforts would be demanded and to whom all sorts of tricks would be taught. That’s the army in which I should like to fight.”
– Jean Larte Guy
Our problem is we can only ever have one Army. When there isn’t a “war” going on, then we are the first one, when a war happens, the second one wins it.
Great comments though, I think everyone’s seen the differences in things from every era, like was stated, it happens for every significant conflict.
What really burns my ass the most is the amount of Soldiers in the Army who haven’t deployed and who could have, but avoided it like the plague. At the same time, many begged and pleaded to deploy and weren’t allowed to for some reason.
I cannot speak for every Nam Vet but after returning to Conus. I copped a atitude for the chickenshit, petty crap of stateside duty was send me back to nam and let me be a Marine again.Not a toy solider. I finally adjusted to “new Duties”. A lot of Nam Vet’s opnion was what are they going to do ,shave my head and send me to Nam.Most of us adjusted and performed well but were caught in the downsizing of the 70s.
DaveO: cite sources, please. DoD instructions on selective continuation clearly state that it is not mandatory and is at the discretion of the services secretaries. And para 1-13 of AR 600-8-29 very clearly states that MAJs and LTCs who are 2x nonselected for promotion may indeed be administratively discharged unless they’ve attained 18 years service: “1–13. Failure to be selected for promotion a. An officer on the ADL who has failed to be selected for promotion to CW3, CW4, CW5, CPT, MAJ, or LTC a second time will be subject to one of the following: (1) Discharged or released from active duty according to AR 600–8–24. (2) Retired under any provision of law, if eligible, on the date requested by the officer and approved by proper authority (retirement will be not later than the first day of the seventh month beginning after the month in which the President or the President’s designee approves the report of the board that considered the officer the second time). (3) Retained on active duty (if a commissioned officer) until qualified for retirement if, on the date the officer would otherwise have been discharged, he or she is within 2 years of qualifying for retirement under 10 USC 1293, 3911. (4) Retained on active duty (if a warrant officer) until qualified for retirement if he or she is within 2 years of qualifying for retirement on the date the SA approves the board report. (5) Selectively continued under provisions of paragraph 1–14. (6) In the case of fully qualified AMEDD officers, recommended for continuation on active duty by a selective continuation board until all active duty service obligations have been fulfilled as prescribed in paragraph 1–14.” http://www.apd.army.mil/pdffiles/r600_8_29.pdf As I said before: the 18 year sanctuary applies to MAJs 2x selected for non-promotion – and to LTCs as well. But if they’re not SELCON, they can indeed get the boot at 17 years. SELCON is optional and based on the current needs of the service. It’s not a legal or regulatory entitlement. Current Army policy is to retain Majors who are 2x nonselects if they have… Read more »
NO 32, DR_BRETT After 40 years, It’s my opinion that the “collective guilt” of a nation over how it treated returning Vietnam veterans, allowed those of us returning to Iraq from our two weeks of leave to walk in two lines through the Atlanta airport to thunderous, almost embarrassing applause, from virtually every citizen in the terminal. At that time, Iraq was no more popular than Vietnam. As cliché as it sounds, the American people no longer routinely “mistake the war with the warrior”, but sadly, we only got there on the back of Vietnam veterans. I was offered a first-class seat by the airline when I flew from Atlanta to Florida to meet my family on that same leave. I felt too out of place to do anything but thank the guy, and hustle back to coach! I’m a Reservist and am an assistant principal at a high school and my experience and those of returning Vietnam veterans was night and day, typified by one of our English teachers I couldn’t help but think of a story told by this teacher who retired after 35 years in the classroom and on the football field as a coach. He served in Vietnam as a Marine Forward Observer. He survived the entire horrible siege at Khe Sanh, receiving two Purple Hearts during this time. One was from the rib of a V.C. Sapper going through his cheek when the Sapper dove into a bunker and detonated himself….pre-AQI! He tells the story of returning from Vietnam, when he flew out of San Francisco back to New York, hoping to be at Yale Bowl that coming weekend for a football game with his old high school friends. He sat next to a man in a suit with a briefcase on his lap, the 1968 equivalent of an iPad. As they buckled in, the man turned toward the Marine who was in uniform. He politely asked: “Where are you coming from?” The Marine replied “Vietnam”. The man then asked: “Did you see any action?” to which he responded humbly: “Yeah. A little”. The flight… Read more »
With everything that’s happening in the military and in Afghanistan, it looks to me like TAH needs to add a new blog catagory: ‘Back to the 90’s’