The 90s Army and you.

| June 20, 2012

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

60 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Devtun

SMA Chandler in You Tube interviews talked lots and lots about Army Standards & Values. He warned NCOs failing to meet this criteria that they will be pushed out of the Army pronto. Sure, that’s the standard now where you had better be the complete squared away soldier who excels in all facets of soldiering, education, unit participation, and community volunteer if they know whats good for them.
What happens when Army mobilizes for next big war and needs tons of warm bodies to fill out combat units? Back to stop loss & shelving QMP. Yeah, you don’t meet SMA Chandler’s standards/values criteria (articles 15s, LORs, counseling letters, fired for cause, failed APFT, failed leadership course), but we need you to vanquish evildoers and you can’t leave no matter what.
Soldiers have to be slightly paranoid and even in wartime carry the mentality peacetime demobilization could start anyday now-could even be tomorrow. The soldier must strive and give utmost effort to meet all professional requirements.
Even with very good record & all the squares filled – just perception that your career is stalled i.e. slow to promote could have Army HR managers breathing down your neck. For the career soldier its got to be scary. The noose is tightning slowly and steadily – budget cuts are order of the day. With almost $16 Trillion debt & no BIG wars -future administrations Republican or Democrat will be under extreme pressure to keep cutting defense budget. Are we going back to days of Maintain a Navy and Raise an Army?

DR_BRETT

No. 49 Sustainer:

I Thank you AGAIN, for your comments regarding LB JOHNSON (your No. 10)
I Thank you for your thoughtful response No. 49.
I speak ONLY, for myself.
About the Airport Well-Wishers who applaud now, I do not trust those well-wishers who now act, if, based on GUILT — I’d prefer, that they had earned PRIDE in THEMSELVES. I do not know every well-wisher, and generally, I question the honesty of many U.S. residents/voters/citizens, these days.
I don’t care a damn (even a bit) for those who may “realize just how hideous their behavior was.” —
I’m properly selfish, my job is my life — their problems they created all by them”selves.”
But those who obstruct freedom (Capitalism) had better move aside. Justice (cause and effect) will operate.

The “man” in the suit on the airliner — evaded a signal opportunity to learn about Man, when he ran away from Honor (the “man” in the suit ran away from the Marine).

I did NOT sacrifice anything, in Vietnam, or anywhere else —
I oppose all sacrifice, but I respect PAYMENT for values worth fighting for.

– from a U.S. ARMY Man who had it pretty easy in Vietnam —
zero wounds, thanks to other men who provided the Heavy Security.

BK

This is a tough one.

People forget that in the mid-1990s, the point requirements for E-5 and E-6, at least in 11B-land, skyrocketed.

Compare that to contemporary times, when they hold a mirror under your nose, and if it fogs, you get your stripes. Of course it’s not that simple, but my thought is this…

When the points for E-4 to E-5 promotion were so high, it really meant that no waivers for time in grade suffered the high rate of fast-tracking. E-5s and E-6s seemed older, more mature, because their making points was contingent on the kind of point accrual that only time in service allowed. We had a lot of E-4(P)s running around as command appointed corporals as a result. Leadership especially at the team leader level was honed. But because we also didn’t have multiple combat deployments, we could also spend considerable amount of time on squad training through company training leading up to one big stint per year at one of the national training centers.

I think it’s an unfair comparison on the whole, really. Yeah, I think the 1990s cultivated better leaders as a consequence of training and near stagnant-upwards mobility. I think the biggest problem is that a youthful NCO corps lacks sufficient emotional maturity, at times, to be effective leaders. But my experience in the 1990s was active duty in a parachute infantry unit, my experience in this century was in a Guard stryker unit…I could be wrong.

Hondo

Bingo, DR_BRETT. Service isn’t “sacrifice”; it’s payment.

Or, more precisely it’s repayment – for the freedom the United States has given each of us and our families.

DR_BRETT

No. 54 Hondo: Thanks, Mr. Hondo, for comprehending .

DaveO

Hondo, what are the dates on those regulations? Were there policies in place in the 90s that may have modified those regs?

And, expect the Army to act counterintuitively: it will fire a lot more captains and majors. Just like 2001, they will pull from the Guard and Reserve to make up for the lack.

Hondo

Uh, DaveO . . . if you had followed the link I provided, you’d see that I quoted from the current version of AR 600-8-29. It’s dated 25 Feb 2005. The link is to the authoritative version found on the US Army Publishing Directorate web site.

This matches my recollection of the regs from the 1980s, 1990s, and 2000s as well. SELCON has always been exactly that – selective continuation, governed by the needs of the service. Until they’ve completed 18 years of service, neither an enlisted soldier or an officer has ever had a statutory entitlement to continue on service until he/she achieved retirement eligibility. Before 18 years, you could be separated administratively during a reduction based on needs of the service. But after 18 years of service, any separation has to be for cause.

Devtun

Hondo-

Less Than a year ago the Air Force cut loose 157 2X passed over Majors. Looked like they had 15-17 years in service. Many were highly decorated and deployed numerous times-some got their notice they were being cut only days before they were scheduled to deploy. Read some of the sob stories about them feeling that Air Force was being unfair & being disrespectful. Some stated they had sacrificed & performed at a high level-that they also had families to support and mortgages to pay. It sucks, but these Majors i’m sure understood being passed over twice to Lt Col meant their careers were at high risk of being terminated. Major to Lt Col promotions I think is around 70% in Air Force. For whatever reason they didn’t measure up. Officers do need to be well rounded-perform well at variety of jobs, get advanced degrees, and demonstrate progression/potential on their evaluation reports. Maybe they lacked the progression
& potential part? Yeah, SELCON prospects dicey during drawdowns / budget cutting to get to 18 yrs. Really tough.

Hondo

Devtun: I heard about that. But I also think you’ve pegged that exactly correctly. During a drawdown, extremely fine discriminators can be the difference between getting selected for promo and being a non-select. The vast majority of the files are damned good, so even a small blemish gets weight far outweighing its actual significance. My impression is that the USAF had relatively liberal SELCON policies for a long time, and that last year was the first time they’d shown a largish group of Majors the door for 2x nonselect in quite a while. However, that’s only an impression on my part – my background is Army, and I’ve never discussed he USAF’s SELCON policies and practices with any of my current or retired USAF colleagues. But again: SELCON has always been optional for the services and based on needs of the service vice the individual. Short of 18 years of service one can be shown the door administratively and involuntarily without “cause” as a force-shaping measure if needs of the service dictate. After 18 years, you have some legal protection (“sanctuary) and generally can only be involuntarily separated for cause. Saw an interesting case illustrating that in the early 1980s on the enlisted side. A Senior NCO in my unit had a serious drinking problem. He’d been determined to be a rehab failure and was being processed for admin separation. His O6-level commander approved the separation (within his authority for that type of separation) – but suspended the execution of his discharge (can’t remember for how long, but I seem to remember either 6 months or a year). The individual had 17+ years at the time, and went over 18 years of service during the period of suspension. Barring additional serious issues he therefore could not be discharged because he’d reached the 18 year “sanctuary”. I left the unit shortly after his discharge was approved, but I later met with a former colleague and discussed the matter. Here, things worked out all around. The individual (who was a damned good NCO when sober) finally cleaned up his act and ended… Read more »

Anonymous

The article seems to generalize just a wee bit. I joined RA in 84, got out in 92, joined the Reserve for 8 years and then transferred over to the Guard. Currently sitting here in beautiful, sunny Kandahar on my third rotation – the 90’s Army is actually looking pretty good…