LOGO
USA Society
USA social debate

Reply to Thread New Thread
Old 07-14-2011, 11:49 PM   #1
DenisMoor

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
640
Senior Member
Default Whining Army Reservists or Valid Complaint
http://www.armytimes.com/news/2011/0...t-iraq-071411/

Reservists allege mistreatment during Iraq prep


By Gregg Zoroya - USA Today
Posted : Thursday Jul 14, 2011 6:56:49 EDT



Nearly 200 Reservists in Iraq have signed a complaint accusing the Army of mistreatment and discrimination during the months they were preparing for war.

The soldiers say their movements and freedoms were severely restricted during a four-month training before deployment, describing it as virtually a "lockdown" confinement to base. The Army says it was pushing to get Reservists trained and denies discriminatory treatment.

The soldiers are with a Kentucky-based attack helicopter battalion — nicknamed "The Flying Tigers" — that went to Iraq in January. The request for an inquiry by Congress was signed by 178 soldiers or nearly half of the battalion, including company commanders.

No action has been taken on the petition, filed April 1.

"Army Reserve soldiers love the Army, they love their jobs and they love their country," the complaint says. "They also understand that service is voluntary, and if not shown the respect and courtesy accorded their active-duty brethren, they will no longer be willing to make the personal, family and civilian-life sacrifices required."

Army Lt. Gen. Jack Stultz, commander of all Reserve forces, says he is sensitive to troop concerns about restrictions during training such as being confined to base and being barred from driving civilian cars, wearing civilian clothing or drinking alcohol.

"I think we're all trying to do the right thing," Stultz says of the Army. "But is there some learning from this we need to look at?"

Lt. Gen. Mick Bednarek — commander of the First Army, which oversees Reserve units during preparation for war — says any restrictions placed on reservists in training, in this case at Fort Hood in Texas, were needed to quickly bring the civilian soldiers up to speed on flying the latest version of the Army attack helicopter, the AH-64D Longbow.

"It's all about readiness and doing everything we can to train and get them ready to go," Bednarek says.

The complaint was .... Read the rest of the story here.


My leadership decided that we were not supposed to drink liquor before we went to Afghanistan and other units were allowed to. We did not gripe but I am amazed by these lengths taken to get their issues heard.
DenisMoor is offline


Old 07-15-2011, 02:23 AM   #2
Gremlinn

Join Date
Nov 2005
Posts
536
Senior Member
Default
Doesn't that happen to all Reservists and Guard before deployment? My brother couldn't do much while they were training. I mean they only get a couple months to train before they go right? When I went to NTC we didn't get to just run around and do what we wanted. We weren't allowed to wear civilian clothes even after we got back from the box. Any time I've gone out to the field we're restricted.

What's the big deal? I know they're not used to that but see active duty is different than Guard and Reserve.
Gremlinn is offline


Old 07-15-2011, 03:07 AM   #3
sandyphoebetvmaa

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
599
Senior Member
Default
I ran these "soldiers" through my weapons ranges when they came through Hood (M9, M16, M249, M240B, M2, M203, MK19) and this is straight up whining like little biotches. How CRAZY! This is akin to an Active Duty unit complaining when they go to NTC or JRTC and can't go drinking or partying. That shit just does NOT happen in the Active Army and shouldn't happen in the reserves or guard either. When you are at training you are simply at training. No questions asked. OMFG! What the hell is the military (guard/reserve) turning into?!?!?!
sandyphoebetvmaa is offline


Old 07-15-2011, 03:34 AM   #4
Hedkffiz

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
550
Senior Member
Default
I ran these "soldiers" through my weapons ranges when they came through Hood (M9, M16, M249, M240B, M2, M203, MK19) and this is straight up whining like little biotches. How CRAZY! This is akin to an Active Duty unit complaining when they go to NTC or JRTC and can't go drinking or partying. That shit just does NOT happen in the Active Army and shouldn't happen in the reserves or guard either. When you are at training you are simply at training. No questions asked. OMFG! What the hell is the military (guard/reserve) turning into?!?!?!
Well it said this in the article: The charges echo an age-old grievance by reservists and National Guard troops that when called to war, they are treated differently than full-time Army soldiers. So it seems to be nothing new according to that.
Hedkffiz is offline


Old 07-15-2011, 03:16 PM   #5
AbraxiaAsus

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
428
Senior Member
Default
As someone that hated the Army and got out, I do have to agree this is whining. They are in training status and need to adjust. I understand their mindset, they're relaxed casual weekend warriors used to doing 8hrs and going home two days a month. However all the more reason for them to lock down and get focused on the mission.

If you don't want that lifestyle then ETS. Sure I would have liked $400+/month just for sitting around 2 days, but it wasn't worth the risk and constant uncertainty. I'll be glad to serve, but have to draft me
AbraxiaAsus is offline


Old 07-15-2011, 04:05 PM   #6
Narcodran

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
586
Senior Member
Default
It's a command doing what it can to ensure taxpayers are getting a valid return on their investment from my perspective. Someone, somewhere, at sometime probably screwed it up for the majority. Sucks for those who would normally be more responsible, yes, but not unheard of in the military and not unfair discrimination, especially in a training environment where safety is paramount. Let's look at the nature of the mission, training to fly an attack helicopter they were most likely unfamiliar with, and certainly not as proficient in as an active duty pilot who performs the mission regularly. Is it even a question whether having someone showing up hungover and poorly rested could quickly become a bad thing? Four months, relatively short training period by any accounting. If a person can't buckle down and focus on what they came to do for that long they have no business getting paid to do what the rest endure quite easily. More than enough deployments happen out there restricting the very same priveleges these people are crying "discrimination" about. Someone get these fellas a rag, I know of a gaping orifice that appears to be bleeding.
Narcodran is offline


Old 07-15-2011, 07:05 PM   #7
AromeWahmaron

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
345
Senior Member
Default
In the MC...

I deployed with some reservists with me. To my knowledge, they're treated the same as everyone else. They are literally the same, they're taken from reserve status to active duty status.

No, I think this is a legitimate complaint, not "whining". I imagine I would be pretty pissed too if I switched to reserves and the branch I was in treated me like a 17 year old recruit. No drinking? No privately owned vehicles? No civilian clothes? That's the dumbest shit I've ever heard today.
AromeWahmaron is offline


Old 07-15-2011, 07:38 PM   #8
yovbQVpD

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
401
Senior Member
Default
I'm in the National Guard and I just want to say to all who have posted and to those in the future. We're not all like that.
yovbQVpD is offline


Old 07-16-2011, 12:03 PM   #9
goldcigarettes

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
516
Senior Member
Default
Perhaps the gripe is valid but to have their gripe get publicized in this fashion doesnt embody the Army values of selfless service. That is my opinion. And their leadership is no better by the example they are setting. Nothing wrong with backing your men but in some situations, you need to put a stop to certain gripes and handle them in-house.
goldcigarettes is offline


Old 07-16-2011, 05:30 PM   #10
SHaEFU0i

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
426
Senior Member
Default
In the MC...

I deployed with some reservists with me. To my knowledge, they're treated the same as everyone else. They are literally the same, they're taken from reserve status to active duty status.

No, I think this is a legitimate complaint, not "whining". I imagine I would be pretty pissed too if I switched to reserves and the branch I was in treated me like a 17 year old recruit. No drinking? No privately owned vehicles? No civilian clothes? That's the dumbest shit I've ever heard today.
Not trying to make a big stink of this, but have you attended Mojave Viper or Desert Talon? I'm assuming so. Were you able to drink, have your POV, or dress in civilian attire while there? Although the training these reservists went through is quite a bit longer than the MV and DT training evolutions, I'm sure it isn't any less necessary. If those are the restrictions put in place by the training command, chances are there is a valid reason for it and most likely stem from a past history. This doesn't discredit their griping at all (everyone is entitled to their opinion), but I do not think anything will come of it.
SHaEFU0i is offline


Old 07-19-2011, 10:53 PM   #11
suingincentix

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
461
Senior Member
Default
I see a way to kill two birds with one stone. I know probably EVERYONE who serves in the armed forces has heard "Don't like it, then get the f!@# out"... and with the talks of the downsizing of the army in coming years... I'm sure everyone is already seeing where I'm going with this, but I'll spell it out for those thinking, "Say its not so", but put them on a train back to Fort Couch and give them an other than honorable discharge. Currently, as a volunteer army, you can volunteer yourself in, but not out. Maybe they should change that, especially these guys. Everyone knows or finds out how the military works for the most part, mission, training, individual time. If it were up to me about these guys complaining, I'd tell them not to let the door hit'em in the ass on the way out. This is a prime example of the cancer that's killing our country's military's good name.
suingincentix is offline


Old 07-20-2011, 01:54 AM   #12
xquFzpNw

Join Date
Nov 2005
Posts
501
Senior Member
Default
"Army Reserve soldiers love the Army, they love their jobs and they love their country," the complaint says. "They also understand that service is voluntary, and if not shown the respect and courtesy accorded their active-duty brethren, they will no longer be willing to make the personal, family and civilian-life sacrifices required.".
So they willfully admit to being willing to break contract... Slam them i say.
xquFzpNw is offline


Old 07-20-2011, 04:55 PM   #13
OccabsLam

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
396
Senior Member
Default
So they willfully admit to being willing to break contract... Slam them i say.
I think, in context, it was meant they understand they came into this situation willingly, rather than being forced into it. I still think they're being a bunch of whiners but I'm not thinking what you have here is what was meant.
OccabsLam is offline


Old 07-20-2011, 05:06 PM   #14
corolaelwis

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
470
Senior Member
Default
If the AD Army soldiers are treated the same way, they have no complaint. If the AD soldiers are treated differently, then they might have a valid complaint.
corolaelwis is offline


Old 07-20-2011, 05:14 PM   #15
QuidQuoPro

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
597
Senior Member
Default
If the AD Army soldiers are treated the same way, they have no complaint. If the AD soldiers are treated differently, then they might have a valid complaint.
I agree, and from reading the article I'm not even certain that fully applies here. It sounds like this is simply training them to be up to speed on a helicopter they are unlikely to be familiar with, Active Duty, presumably, would already have been through training necessary to fly it. So in my mind I wonder if Active Duty even have to go through that same training, or is it incorporated into some else? Anyone working in that community available that can provide some clarification on the matter?
QuidQuoPro is offline


Old 07-20-2011, 05:28 PM   #16
Andromino

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
540
Senior Member
Default
I agree, and from reading the article I'm not even certain that fully applies here. It sounds like this is simply training them to be up to speed on a helicopter they are unlikely to be familiar with, Active Duty, presumably, would already have been through training necessary to fly it. So in my mind I wonder if Active Duty even have to go through that same training, or is it incorporated into some else? Anyone working in that community available that can provide some clarification on the matter?
So then if there was an AD person that was switching to that airframe, would they be treated the same? If so STFU. If not, may have a gripe...
Andromino is offline


Old 07-20-2011, 05:36 PM   #17
Shipsyspeepay

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
492
Senior Member
Default
So then if there was an AD person that was switching to that airframe, would they be treated the same? If so STFU. If not, may have a gripe...
What I'm not altogether clear on is whether AD even go through this specific training curriculum. I know I've been to military training where they've nixed drinking and added other constraints for safety reasons. If that's the policy for this training curriculum (which I find most likely to be the case) then I think they're just a little too used to that civilian lifestlye. I find it highly unlikely they are attending a course with the written or spoken policy that AD participating in the course are allowed to do what they want but reserves have to behave.
Shipsyspeepay is offline


Old 07-21-2011, 06:12 PM   #18
vekiuytyh

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
449
Senior Member
Default
i was navy, and been out awhile. but i remember when the reserves came and did their time. honestly, we did try to treat them the same. and some were cool. others, just wanted to party the whole time. couldn't get a full day's work out of them, as they had some place to be.
i agree with not leting them drink, etc. sounds like someone is just trying to get their mindset ready for what they'll have to do. the ad already do that 24/7. the reservists aren't coming from that mindset, and need to get into it, before they go.
vekiuytyh is offline


Old 07-23-2011, 08:29 AM   #19
eCw56dzY

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
400
Senior Member
Default
Not trying to make a big stink of this, but have you attended Mojave Viper or Desert Talon? I'm assuming so. Were you able to drink, have your POV, or dress in civilian attire while there? Although the training these reservists went through is quite a bit longer than the MV and DT training evolutions, I'm sure it isn't any less necessary. If those are the restrictions put in place by the training command, chances are there is a valid reason for it and most likely stem from a past history. This doesn't discredit their griping at all (everyone is entitled to their opinion), but I do not think anything will come of it.
Yes indeed I have, and you make a very good point.

However, there does seem to be a huge difference between these two examples. For us at Mojave Viper, these restrictions apply to EVERYBODY. According to the logic that the Army seems to be applying here, the active duty Marines attending Mojave Viper should be allowed to drink and wear civies, while reservists can't.
eCw56dzY is offline


Old 07-25-2011, 05:52 PM   #20
Kemapreedasse

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
478
Senior Member
Default
Yes indeed I have, and you make a very good point.

However, there does seem to be a huge difference between these two examples. For us at Mojave Viper, these restrictions apply to EVERYBODY. According to the logic that the Army seems to be applying here, the active duty Marines attending Mojave Viper should be allowed to drink and wear civies, while reservists can't.
What's still not clear to me is which active duty they are referring to. If there's active duty participating as students in the training as well as the reservists, and they get to drink and go off base and such while reserves don't, of course there's a valid complaint. I'm still under the impression this training is specifically designed for reserves as a refresher, and hence no AD would be students there. Thus the reserves would be constrained by the training policy, not their status as reserves. The AD they are referring to could be anybody, AD serving at the command in an operational status, AD on base, hard to speak to it without an insider's perspective. I just think the scenario with a written or oral policy dealing with AD and reserve privileges independently is absurd enough to be just about the least likely scenario.
Kemapreedasse is offline



Reply to Thread New Thread

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:28 AM.
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
Design & Developed by Amodity.com
Copyright© Amodity