Category: U.S. Army

This story from Ft. Bragg is well worth spending a few minutes to read because it is hilarious:

The civilian found living in the barracks of Fort Bragg’s 3rd Special Forces Group was a “con-artist” who had never served in the armed forces, but had enough knowledge of the military to dupe others into believing he was a soldier, according to an investigation obtained by The Fayetteville Observer.

The report does not name the civilian, citing personal privacy, but according to public arrest records that match the circumstances described by the military, the civilian in the barracks was Triston Marquell Chase, 20.

U.S. Army Special Operations Command public affairs officers declined to say what name the civilian was known by to 3rd Group soldiers.

According to the investigative report, the civilian posed as an explosive ordnance disposal specialist for A Company, 1st Battalion, 3rd Special Forces Group. He was discovered after a drunken driving arrest on Fort Bragg in December. The civilian — and Chase, according to state court records — has six felony charges from 2014, including identity theft and larceny of a firearm, pending in Harnett County.

In the days following Chase’s arrest, military officials unraveled the story of how he exploited the lack of oversight in the barracks to obtain a room key, access the barracks and live there for months.  [Fayetteville Observer]

This guy must have been quiet the personality considering he had people loaning him their cars, and women regularly stopping by:

The person said he felt sorry for the man and provided him a key to his barracks room on the third floor, according to the investigation.

Investigators learned multiple women had visited the civilian in his barracks room and brought him food. One person told investigators that the man said he never had any money because he used his funds to take care of his family.

Heck this guy was even holding room inspections and holding his own formations!:

The fact-finding soldiers went to the barracks where they saw the man outside with six soldiers standing in formation with no Army combat uniform tops, just brown T-shirts, according to the investigation.

The officer told the man he needed to speak with him. The man said he was busy because “my supervisor told me to get these guys straight.”  (……..)

The man had become such a staple around the barracks that several soldiers said they had seen him conducting room inspections and assigning rooms to new soldiers, according to the investigation.

Sounds like the Army should get this guy to enlist and serve as the barracks manager.

You would think the Army would have waited to promote a story like this until after she had completed the basic infantry course.  You would think the PAO types would have learned this lesson after the embarrassment of the first female combat engineer enlistee who went AWOL:

A Louisiana woman is seeking to make history, enlisting to be the first female infantryman in the United States Army.

25-year-old Tammy Barnett raised her right hand in Shreveport, Louisiana, opting to join the US Army Infantry, a deviation from her original plans when she found out she could be first.

“I was going to go military police, but infantry is similar, and they are more on the front lines, like law enforcement here and I said that’s what I want to do,” said Barnett, a former police officer.

Barnett hopes to make history and lead the way for more women who want to go into the infantry.

“They told me that I would be the first female in history to go infantry in the military,” said Barnett.

“I hope that I give them the courage, because I’m a small female, if I can do it, they can do it too, this could give them the courage to step out of their comfort zone,” explained Barnett.  [Popular Military]

You can read more at the link, but she is going to be in for a rude awakening when she finds out that the infantry is nothing like being a policeman other than they are both proficient with shooting weapons.  Just for the record I continue to support women in combat arms roles as long as they meet the same standards as men.  For example I wonder if Ms. Barnett will have to pass the same physical fitness test and other physical requirements as her male infantry recruits?

According to a court, the threshold for religious accommodation is that the accommodation cannot affect unit cohesion and morale, good order and discipline, healthy and safety:

A decorated army officer is now officially permitted to wear a religious beard and turban in uniform thanks in part to a ruling late Thursday.

Capt. Simratpal Singh — a lifelong practicing Sikh, who was a West Point graduate, Army Ranger and Bronze Star recipient —was previously given a temporary accommodation in December. When it was set to expire in February, Singh sued after he was told by the Army he had to report for days of gas mask and helmet testing, citing religious discrimination.

He eventually won, with a court document saying that the temporary order would only be revoked if his beard and turban affected “unit cohesion and morale, good order and discipline, healthy and safety.”

According to The Sikh Coalition, which is currently representing Singh, he is the first Sikh American to receive a religious accommodation while serving.  [Mashable]

You can read more at the link, but there have been other Sikhs who have had religious accommodations made for them by the military so I am not sure why Singh is being claimed as the first.  In fact there is an entire Wikipedia page dedicated to sikhs who have served in the US military.

Instead of going to the Army to solve their concussion problem, the easiest thing the NFL could do is get rid of helmets.  If players were not wearing helmets they would not lead with their head as much and use it as a weapon against opposing players.  It would be interesting research to see what the concussion rate is between NFL players and professional rugby players who do not wear helmets:

The NFL’s quest to become safer has extended to an Army lab at Aberdeen Proving Ground, where rubbery, fluid-filled straps tether a crash test dummy’s football helmet to its body. While they allow turning of the head, the straps tighten automatically under jarring blows to minimize violent head whips.

Designed by Army Research Laboratory scientists, the “smart” strap system was one of three recent winners of an open competition for funding to develop new approaches to reduce brain injuries to players.

Concussions are a billion-dollar problem for the league as a new feature film spotlights the issue and raises questions about how the NFL is trying to tackle a matter that could threaten the sport’s future.  [The Baltimore Sun]

You can read the rest at the link.

Below is an interesting update on the controversy surrounding the now three women who have graduated Ranger School based on a media interview with the command team at Ft. Benning.  Like I have maintained based on what I have read, it appears the special treatment for the females was that they received extensive pre-training and unlimited recycles like most infantry officers receive for Ranger School.  Soldiers who are not infantry do not get the same pre-training  and amount of recycles, so the inequity for Ranger School did not begin with the female graduates which no one is talking about:

Maj. Gen. Scott Miller’s voice held frustration late Friday afternoon during a quickly arranged media roundtable on the fourth floor of McGinnis-Wickam Hall, headquarters of the Army’s Maneuver Center of Excellence.

The commanding general of Fort Benning has been fighting allegations for months that female soldiers were given special treatment to pass Ranger School, the most physically and mentally demanding training offered by the Army.

Four hours after the third woman graduated, Miller sat front and center with Command Sgt. Maj. Timothy Metheny to his right and four members of the Airborne and Ranger Training Brigade, including the commander, Col. David Fivecoat, and Command Sgt. Maj. Curtis Arnold, on his left flank.

“There are some people who obviously have some concerns,” Miller said. “I can’t address them if they are opaque. These guys can’t address them or fix them if they are opaque.”

Among the three reporters was Susan Keating, a People magazine correspondent who has reported that multiple unnamed sources have told her there was unfair assistance given to the women.

The most telling moment came more than 50 minutes into an interview that lasted almost an hour and a half. Miller, who won the Bronze Star for Valor as Delta Force ground commander in the Battle of Mogadishu, was asked if his credibility had been damaged by the allegations.

“I have thick skin and I am a public figure, but I will tell you who doesn’t deserve this is these guys,” he said, pointing to the Ranger instructors. “They don’t deserve this. … I keep telling everybody I will put my name on anything I say or do. If they are not willing to put their name on it or come back to me. …”

That sparked an exchange between Miller and the People correspondent, prompting Keating to ask Miller, “What if one of my sources comes to me and I say, ‘You need to go tell Gen. Miller right now, you need to go knock on his door and tell him exactly what you are telling me, and give him the same specifics, dates and details that you are giving me’? What’s the push back on that? Will he get repercussions?”

“He will not get repercussions,” Miller responded.

“Will you come back and say, ‘Why did you give a go when you shouldn’t have?” Keating asked the general.

“If he says he gave a go he shouldn’t have given, then he needs to report that,” Miller said.

“So, there would be repercussions for him, right?” Keating asked. “This is part of what we are up against. I have actually asked these people, why don’t you go knock on his door? He’s been in combat. He’s been around the block a few times, right? They say, ‘No. Our careers will be over. We will be ruined.”  [Stars & Stripes]

You can read the rest at the link.

The accusations about special treatment that allowed the two female officers to graduate the US Army’s Ranger School has just gotten more serious:

But whereas men consistently were held to the strict standards outlined in the Ranger School’s Standing Operating Procedures handbook sources say, the women were allowed lighter duties and exceptions to policy.

Multiple sources told PEOPLE:

• Women were first sent to a special two-week training in January to get them ready for the school, which didn’t start until April 20. Once there they were allowed to repeat the program until they passed – while men were held to a strict pass/fail standard.

• Afterward they spent months in a special platoon at Fort Benning getting, among other things, nutritional counseling and full-time training with a Ranger.

• While in the special platoon they were taken out to the land navigation course – a very tough part of the course that is timed – on a regular basis. The men had to see it for the first time when they went to the school.

• Once in the school they were allowed to repeat key parts – like patrols – while special consideration was not given to the men.

• A two-star general made personal appearances to cheer them along during one of the most challenging parts of the school, multiple sources tell PEOPLE.

The end result? Two women – First Lts. Kristen Griest and Shaye Haver – graduated August 21 (along with 381 men) and are wearing the prestigious Ranger Tab. Griest was surprised they made it.

“I thought we were going to be dropped after we failed Darby [part of Benning] the second time,” Griest said at a press conference before graduation. “We were offered a Day One Recycle.”  [People Magazine]

The whole article is worth a read, but I think the words from Major General Miller in the article in regards to a woman will graduate Ranger School need further context to be a smoking gun.  As far as the claims of special treatment I think it is fair to say that the female Rangers did get special treatment compared to male Ranger candidates from non-infantry MOSs.  Infantry soldiers that attend Ranger school have an advantage over other candidates especially the officers because of the training they do to become proficient in their MOS which feeds naturally into tasks required during Ranger School.  It appears the Army senior leadership made a decision to give female candidates as much of an advantage to pass the course as infantry soldiers receive.

As long as the US military keeps a robust air and naval presence in and around Korea I think this should stop North Korea from miscalculating.  However, it doesn’t change the fact that cutting down to 420,000 soldiers for the US Army will be devastating:

United States Army Chief of Staff General Raymond Odierno has warned that reductions in U.S. forces could lead to a misjudgment by North Korea.

Odierno, who is retiring next month, said on Friday in a meeting with reporters that if the United States sends a wrong signal to its potential enemies, it could lead to their misjudgment.

He expressed concern that reductions in U.S. troops would spread the perception that Washington’s response capabilities will weaken.

Odierno said that he considers Russia as the biggest threat to the United States, saying that what Russia says and acts shows the Cold War did not end in the right direction.  [KBS World Radio]

It is one thing to be a toxic leader, but to be fat and demand others cover up for you being fat is even worse:

An Army colonel fired from her job in April tried to intimidate subordinates to bend the rules after a tape test found her to be overweight, according to an Army investigation.

The investigation also found that Col. Glenda Lock, commander of McDonald Army Health Center, fostered a “toxic” work environment. Her own command sergeant major described her as a “dictator,” according to the investigation obtained by Army Times through the Freedom of Information Act.

Though Lock did have some supporters, many of the dozens of witnesses in the report portrayed Lock as an authoritarian leader and sometimes-abusive “bully” who decimated morale, citing several specific examples including belittling of subordinates and retaliatory reassignments.

Army Times reached Lock by email, but she declined comment.

“I will again hold my comments for now. Thank you for the opportunity to provide my perspective on this action,” Lock’s email said.  [Army Times]

You can read more at the link, but I have seen some senior leaders that don’t pass the eyeball test in regards to weight and in this case a First Sergeant stuck to enforcing the standard despite the threats from Colonel Lock.

I wonder how long it will be before someone cries racism/sexism or whatever other -isms there are out there to get this policy revised like we saw with the hair policy:

If you want to go out in public on Fort Leonard Wood you better ditch the tank top, pull up your saggy drawers and shave that scruff.

Maj. Gen. Leslie Smith, the Missouri post’s commanding general, issued new appearance standards in a Nov. 10 policy update.
The rules not only crack down on sloppy dress, but skimpy outfits as well: No short skirts, exposed midriffs and revealing undergarments.
The rules fall under the post’s Command Policy 18, which used to be called “Wear and Appearance of Uniforms.” Now it’s called “Wear and Appearance of Uniforms and Civilian Attire,” which really brings into focus the expansion of the policy to include not only soldiers in civilian clothes, but also spouses, kids, guests – anyone who comes on post. (Army Times)

You can read more at the link.

Breaking promises like this was bound to happen with all the officers being kicked out of the Army:

About 40 officers selected for involuntary separation this spring will be ineligible to attend graduate school on the Army’s dime, as initially promised.

Early in their careers, these officers signed contracts agreeing to serve three additional years on active duty in exchange for the Army paying for their master’s degree. As part of the program, called the graduate school option, or GRADSO, soldiers are eligible to attend school while still on active duty and still receiving pay and benefits. After graduating, they are required to serve three days for every one day enrolled in school.
About 40 officers who signed the contracts now find themselves among 1,100 captains selected for involuntary separation as part of an ongoing Army drawdown to reach an end-strength of 490,000 by Sept. 30, 2015.
One of these captains, who asked that his name be withheld for fear it would hurt his civilian career, said he will have served 34 of the 36-month-service obligation that should have enabled him to cash in with an Army-paid-for degree. (Army Times)

You can read more at the link, but the argument can probably be made these officers did not keep their side of the bargain by not being high performers that would have prevented them from being cut. Bottom line is that expect more situations like this if the Army due to sequestration continues to make cuts.