Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reservists Complain Of Double Standard ( Army of Two :)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
Florida_Geek Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-04 07:22 AM
Original message
Reservists Complain Of Double Standard ( Army of Two :)
http://www.tampatrib.com/News/MGBBLL2DL2E.html

Dec 11, 2004
Reservists Complain Of Double Standard
By RICHARD LARDNER
rlardner@tampatrib.com


TAMPA - Sgt. Justin Myers was angry at first. Then he could only laugh as his unit, the 810th Military Police Company, escorted flatbed trucks loaded with new, up-armored Humvees from U.S. camps in Kuwait to Baghdad and other hostile areas in Iraq.

The 810th, an Army Reserve unit based in Tampa, badly needed improved vehicles to replace the older, less-capable fleet of Humvees it took to the Middle East in May 2003.

But the new models were intended for active-duty troops, a point driven home every time the 810th was assigned the escort mission.

``It got to the point where the audacity of it amused me,'' said Myers, 28. ``It essentially was a slap in the face. They're going to make us escort the top-of-the-line stuff in our broken-down vehicles.''
..cut...

avis said one soldier described the disparity between the active and reserve components by calling it ``An Army of Two,'' a play on the ground service's official slogan, ``An Army Of One.''

``There's two standards - one for active military and one for them at a time when they are being asked to do virtually the same thing, if not exactly the same thing,'' Davis said.

.. more at the Tamap Trib.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
central scrutinizer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-04 07:59 AM
Response to Original message
1. more like a triple standard
At the bottom are the reservists, then the active duty troops, but at the top are the mercenaries, who earn much more than either and have had armored Humvees from the beginning. That's the advantage of working for companies, that are cronies of Bushco, with no-bid, cost-plus contracts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HereSince1628 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-04 08:24 AM
Response to Original message
2. As I remember it, back in 71 a pecking order also existed.
The "full time" army was composed of USARMY=Draftees and Regular Army=volunteers.

The "part time " army was Army Reserve and National Guard.

So it was something of an Army of Four, it seems although things change (it was an all volunteer Army up until Stop-Loss) things remain much the same.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-04 10:54 AM
Response to Reply #2
5. It makes me sick, personally
When I think of all of the YEARS, the long days, the hours, the Congressional schmoozing, all of the EFFORT of good people who really put their hearts and minds into the Total Force concept. All of the concept types who bought the bullshit....and here we are all over again. Why can't we seem to learn from history? Even a dog knows not to repeat a real dumbass mistake...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-04 11:09 AM
Response to Reply #2
6. This was still true during the Gulf War
One brigade of the 24th ID was composed of reservists. Although they trained with the rest of the division they were not deployed when the rest of the division went to Saudi for Desert Shield/Storm. This has been an ongoing problem that predates Bush.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TahitiNut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-04 11:16 AM
Response to Reply #2
7. That's right. The 'philosophy' was that some folks were 'career soldiers'
Edited on Sat Dec-11-04 11:16 AM by TahitiNut
... and they were the ones who got preference on promotions and awards. I was told this many times ... "when this war is over, these guys will still be in the Army while you guys will be in your cushy civilian jobs."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Xipe Totec Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-04 09:17 AM
Response to Original message
3. Reminds Me of Saddam's Republican Guard
The elite troops protected by hoards of ill trained, ill equipped cannon fodder.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
0007 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-04 10:44 AM
Response to Original message
4. Not sure if the same thing existed in Korea during the early 50's
Does anyone know? I guess the National Guard units that were in Korea would know?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TahitiNut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-04 11:19 AM
Response to Reply #4
9. I was told it existed in WW2, too.
My dad and uncles would talk about this occasionally. It wasn't just draftees that were dissed ... it was guys who enlisted after Pearl Harbor who were regarded as not 'career soldiers.' Preference was always given to 'career soldiers.'
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HysteryDiagnosis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-04 11:19 AM
Response to Original message
8. If they keep this horseshit up they are going to have an Army of None. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 18th 2024, 08:40 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC