Letters - Army Community - Army Discussions - Army Times

Letters

Lighten loads

Every officer from second lieutenant through colonel should read and heed S.L.A. Marshall’s book, “The Soldier’s Load and the Mobility of a Nation.”

This seminal work shows how commanding officers have continued to unnecessarily increase the load carried by soldiers with little or no gain in combat effectiveness.

Tests were conducted that demonstrated soldiers who carried more than 35 percent of their body weight (this includes their uniform) were less combat effective and incurred more injuries, regardless of the conditioning level of the soldier. This is relevant considering soldiers now routinely carry more than 100 pounds of gear.

Not only can soldiers not maneuver, but they are severely weakened by carrying loads meant for pack mules. They cannot effectively conduct their patrols.

How does one run with that much gear on level ground let alone the steep mountains of Afghanistan?

Soldiers need not carry every item in the military inventory. Resupply by helicopter, ground vehicles or mules should be used to allow our soldiers to be “combat effective.”

— Sgt. Alan Griggs (ret.), Buckeye, Ariz.

Punish bad tactics

I guess infantry officers are no longer expected to be tactical experts at the deployment of units and weapons or the use of terrain [“Reprimands rescinded: General finds 3 officers not ‘negligent’ in Wanat battle,” July 5].

With the exception of the commander of C Company, 2-503rd Infantry Regiment, all of the leaders from battalion level up through general should have been sacked for incompetence.

Where is it a normal “inherent risk of combat” to deploy a lone infantry platoon in an indefensible position and call that acceptable?

Maybe one should have at Arnheim and Bastogne in 1944 or Chosin in 1951, but Afghanistan is not World War II or Korea, and we’re not fighting hardened professionals or the hordes of the Red Chinese.

This was supposed to be a vehicle base and observation post, anyway. How about controlling some dominant terrain?

What is obvious is command arrogance up the chain of command in deploying an unsupported ground element on tactically unsound terrain without a clear, critical mission need. I mean, we’re only fighting the Taliban, the usual mountain insurgents.

What I learned at the Infantry Officer Basic Course was reinforced by my tour in Vietnam. We always controlled “some” dominant terrain in areas we operated in. We always had sister platoons within 30 or 45 minutes away from our area. Does anyone analyze terrain from the enemy perspective? Where will he emplace supporting weapons, what is his avenue of approach, how will he assault and how will he disengage and withdraw?

And to make matters worse is that a general who was about to retire lets a couple of officers off the hook.

— Lt. Col. John G. Woyansky (ret.), Colonial Heights, Va.

Salute for first lady

I just watched my local TV channel and noticed President Obama getting off a helicopter. The Marine standing by the door saluted the president, as he should. But I would like to know why the Marine held the salute until Mrs. Obama and her daughter passed.

As far as I know, a salute is neither given nor authorized for a first lady. The salute should have ended once the president passed.

— Sgt. Maj. Robert Winstead (ret.), Alexandria, Va.

Aussie-like ACUS

If you look at the Australian combat uniform and the new Army Combat Uniform for Afghanistan, they are about the same pattern why the Army is saying it is a new idea and design. It appears they just copied it from the Australian military.

— Sgt. Francisco Garza, Fort Hood, Texas

Call pattern MultiCam

I love how the Army is taking credit for a camouflage pattern that was not only developed a long time ago by Crye Precision but was also previously rejected in favor of the woefully ineffective Universal Camouflage Pattern.

There are a slew of pictures of the new Army Combat Uniform pattern at muticampattern.com/gallery that would have convinced any official that it works.

As if the delay isn’t enough, they name it after Operation Enduring Freedom. It should be called what it is, MultiCam.

But at least it was finally adopted. The only improvements still needed are to dump all the Velcro (hook-and-pile tape as it was renamed by the Army), not just from above the cargo pockets, and make the uniform more durable. A 120-day wearout? Are you serious?

— Sgt. Scott Henderson, Grafenwoehr, Germany

Need family time

I am gearing up for another deployment and that itself is not so bad except I have only been back stateside for about nine months.

While stationed in Germany in 2008 without my family, I was deployed to Iraq for 14 months. A few months after I returned, I finally received orders for Fort Campbell, Ky., in November 2009. I was so excited to finally put my family life back together.

It took a couple of months to finalize my family permanent change of station, but I finally got them moved in the beginning of February.

I went in to work, and after first formation, the commander put out a deployment warning for late summer or early fall.

So after only nine months of being able to be with my family, and actually only having a total of five months with them over the last three years, I am leaving them again. After adding up my total enlistment time, I will have served four years and five months. I added together the amount of time I have spent with my family, including block leaves and the short time they were able to spend in Kentucky, and it is a grand total of 10 months and 17 days.

That’s not even one-quarter of my enlistment. Those of us that do unaccompanied tours overseas then PCS to a deploying unit get left in the dwell-time dark.

— Sgt. James Ray Stanley, Afghanistan

Hide combat deadlines

Troops are hamstrung.

It appears there is disagreement between our military in Afghanistan and the Obama administration on the conduct of the war and the strategic decisions handed down by the White House.

The rules of engagement forced on our troops in Afghanistan appear to inhibit their ability to conduct successful operations in pursuit of the Taliban and other terrorist organizations.

President Obama shifted the strategic advantage to the Taliban and their supporters when he announced that troop withdrawal will start in July 2011.

This announcement gave the Taliban a boost in morale and the knowledge that if they hold out to the middle of next year, troops will be leaving Afghanistan. The Taliban can then launch attacks and try to bring down the Afghan government.

— Former Lt. Donald A. Moskowitz, Londonderry, N.H.