Afghan Duty Will Make or Break Career's

[Journeyman]

I heartilly agree that we shouldn't blindly toss away previous experience, but we do need to apply that knowledge judiciously.

I recall a camp Sgt-Maj in early SFOR who directed that these three-story bunkers be built at the main gate. Although they warmed the hearts of the Cyprus vets, they were completely irrelevant to the tactical situation on the ground. No one wearing the lead-Battle Group's capbadge would hear of stopping the project because the MWO "isn't some FNG." (Now if that isn't a rational response.... : )

So the interpreters, some of whom had obviously seen recent combat, chuckled over the Canadians' dopiness, several of us developed a better appreciation for the logic of Dien Bien Phu (hmmm....occupy the low-ground, then rely on false-courage rendered obsolete by the surrounding populations' 1st-generation RPGs)....and more through good luck than good management, the tour ended without harm.

So yes, seek the benefits of previous experience, but ensure you judge its' applicability. Respect has to be earned.

 

[TangoTwoBravo]

Just to amplify what JMan said, previous "soldiering" experience is never wasted or inappropriate.  By this I mean the experience of being a soldier on operations.

Previous tactical lessons or experience, however, can be dangerous if ithey are applied to a new theatre without careful consideration.  This may be what some folks mean when they say "Forget about xxxxx, this is different."  A TTP that was essential for surivial in Bosnia may be exactly the wrong thing to do in AStan.  Something that worked great in the Kabul AOO may not work so good in Kandahar province.

Sometimes we are victims of our experience.

As for the "old school army bit", PBI said it better than I did.  I'd love to trash around Germany in a Leopard.  Maybe I could join a re-enactment group.  Thing is, war's not there.  It's here.  And the Coyote/LAV is doing just fine.

Cheers,

2B

 

[William Webb Ellis]

Getting a bit back on the thread. I am no longet involved in green, save March 17.  But for those of you that were there for the transition between 90's army and the current army, did this hold true.  Were leaders/NCOs  and their career affect, either positivley or negativly by their actions "in theatre"?

PS: on the Chuck v. Jack, sub thread I refer you to this website:  http://www.4q.cc/index.php?pid=top100&person=chuck

 

[Hot Lips]

LMAO, Chuck rules !!!!

 

[pbi]

Getting a bit back on the thread. I am no longet involved in green, save March 17.  But for those of you that were there for the transition between 90's army and the current army, did this hold true.  Were leaders/NCOs  and their career affect, either positivley or negativly by their actions "in theatre"?

PS: on the Chuck v. Jack, sub thread I refer you to this website:  http://www.4q.cc/index.php?pid=top100&person=chuck

Yes. Operational time was given weight in PERs in the the RegF Inf, both for Offrs and WOs/NCOs. A number of individuals (in my own experience) proved themselves to be much better (or much worse...) on operations than had been thought in Canada. On the negative side, I have seen a number of careers utterly ruined by incidents that occurred on operations, that had they occurred Canada-side might have been dealt with more leniently. On the positive side, a number of our Army senior leaders, such as Gens Beare, Devlin, Lacroix, Natynczyk, Ward, Grant and Semianiw have all had recent operational xpeience which has clearly contribute to their rise. And, of course, there's the CDS himslf, who as CLS prove himself to be a highly capable and well-respected commander of ISAF V.

Cheers

 

[DG-41]

I have seen a number of careers utterly ruined by incidents that occurred on operations, that had they occurred Canada-side might have been dealt with more leniently.

Is there any way you can provide more details without giving away the farm? I'm curious to see what kind of incidents are forgivable in Canada but unforgiveable in theatre.

I totally don't care (and don't want to know) about the actual people involved - I'm not asking for gossip. But I smell "lessons to be learned" here if you can find a way to impart them without naming names.

DG

 

[pbi]

Is there any way you can provide more details without giving away the farm? I'm curious to see what kind of incidents are forgivable in Canada but unforgiveable in theatre.

I totally don't care (and don't want to know) about the actual people involved - I'm not asking for gossip. But I smell "lessons to be learned" here if you can find a way to impart them without naming names.

DG

Well, I didn't say "forgiveable". I said:

incidents that occurred on operations, that had they occurred Canada-side might have been dealt with more leniently.

This is, of course, my opinion, but these incidents included both officers and NCOs (at least three involving field or senior officers). They have related to misuse of alcohol, but also include loss of a weapon, negligent discharge and striking a superior. I don't want to go into any more detail than that.

On the good side, I have seen people win the CDS Commendation and others get their WSE made substantive, based on performance in theatre.

Cheers