SpongeBob*24
Verified Military
Linda is probably on the bottom of the Atlantic by now.....
X-D
X-D
Pentagon issues warning for non-deployable personnel: 'Deploy or be removed'
- Thread starter AWP
- Start date
Hopefully, for her sake, General Mattis hasn't heard about this. I just read an article about General Mattis' motorcade getting stuck in traffic and he made his staff hump it a mile to the meeting so they weren't late.
Mattis Was Late For A Speech, His Solution Will Make All Service Members Cheer
Mattis Was Late For A Speech, His Solution Will Make All Service Members Cheer
Last edited:
I kind of wonder what kind of numbers we're talking about here.
The article says that 200,000 are non-deployable. Of those, 100,000 are for easily-remedied petty bullshit like Dental CAT IV. Another 20k are preggers. So that leaves what 80K, from which you subtract those who got sick or wounded in combat, and what are you left with? Something like 5% non-deployable? That doesn't seem like an unreasonable number to me, especially when you consider what those individuals might be able to contribute to the fight, the high cost of recruiting and training, and the fact that people aren't beating down the doors to join the service.
Again, I'm much more concerned with those who can deploy and haven't than the ones who can't deploy, especially if they've already gone downrange at least once.
The article says that 200,000 are non-deployable. Of those, 100,000 are for easily-remedied petty bullshit like Dental CAT IV. Another 20k are preggers. So that leaves what 80K, from which you subtract those who got sick or wounded in combat, and what are you left with? Something like 5% non-deployable? That doesn't seem like an unreasonable number to me, especially when you consider what those individuals might be able to contribute to the fight, the high cost of recruiting and training, and the fact that people aren't beating down the doors to join the service.
Again, I'm much more concerned with those who can deploy and haven't than the ones who can't deploy, especially if they've already gone downrange at least once.
One in five Army generals could not deploy for medical reasons in 2016, data show
I understand most were for dental exams but still, what happened to leading from the front?
I understand most were for dental exams but still, what happened to leading from the front?
ThunderHorse
Verified Military
I sort of dealt with this kind of thing at a lower level, my SCO was dental cat 3 once and would not go to the dentist...considering USR is done monthly...finally got him to go but I had to schedule his appointment...Part of it has to do with the fact that these guys are either chained to a desk or in conference rooms chained to a chair as they die listening to a briefing. And generals have aids for this crap.
The Army has too many bullshit training and readiness requirements. There is literally more time required than time available. So leaders have to do time triage. "If I go to transgender training, or get a dental checkup, or this ridiculous online SERE course, what's NOT going to get done at the strategic leader level?" The Army has been steadily peeling away stupid requirements, but it has a long way to go.
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2018
- Messages
- 59
Hmmmmm.....
I think I saw him around Fallujah a bit when he was commanding operation phantom fury. Must have been a coincidence. Maybe it was a different James Mattis. Ours looked about 14 years younger.
*Looks in mirror* holy shit who the fuck is that old bastard?
I'm sure this takes certain mos's and conditions into account.
Sounds like to me this is adressing the deployment Dodgers, who circle around tradoc and korea rotations.
Personally I deployed when I was told, where I was told, and won where I was told to go. Won so hard a metal band in another country wrote a song about how hard I won. (And others, about a battalions worth, but mostly me). Feels good having a theme song.
And when my shit started to fall apart and I couldn't move mountains no more I was medically retired.
Army been good to me. Twice.
Totally agree. It isn't just the Army that has alot of readiness requirements. The DoD headshed level talks about "velocity and lethality" but I'm not seeing how all these requirements make us any more of either.
Pls deploy me. Though everybody I know that’s not SF is bored to tears.
From what I see from Corpsmen, half of them want to go shore to shore duty (non operational commands) and get fat and a quarter just here for dat der TA and would rather claim psychological issues then to deploy. And the other third is rah kill.
Though the Navy has a great knack at sending the motivated dudes to a command where they’ll never deploy and send the ones who don’t wanna go straight to grunt units. Back in A school the only kid that got grunt orders in my class was on FEP, meaning he couldn’t maintain the PT standard...
From what I see from Corpsmen, half of them want to go shore to shore duty (non operational commands) and get fat and a quarter just here for dat der TA and would rather claim psychological issues then to deploy. And the other third is rah kill.
Though the Navy has a great knack at sending the motivated dudes to a command where they’ll never deploy and send the ones who don’t wanna go straight to grunt units. Back in A school the only kid that got grunt orders in my class was on FEP, meaning he couldn’t maintain the PT standard...
For trigger-pullers and other motivated types, the great killer of proficiency and morale is boredom. Worst situation is to be in garrison and have a command that likes frequent inspections, cleaning the shitters and other bullshit details...instead of keeping you busy training in your MOS, i.e., range time, working with helos, armor, amtracs, field exercises, amphib ops etc. Yeah, please deploy me is right.
There are enough alcoholics in Fayetteville and Jacksonville...don't need to create any new ones.
One hundred percent of my range time is personal time and I pay out of pocket. I’m the only person on my team that works out regularly and 3 people can’t pass the navy’s easy PT test. I offer to PT them but they don’t want to.
I can bitch all day but it’s up to me to maintain the standard. I’m slated to go to a grunt unit in a few months, we will see what happen. I just pray it’s a good command and they’ll let me go train and TDY/TAD to some good trainings.
Devildoc
Verified Military
I have been on both ends of the extremes. 90s, no money for anything extra, but with infantry units, we still trained like mad, PTd, etc. Post-9/11, FSSG unit, money coming out the ass, no one did anything: fat Marines, pregnant, non-deployable WMs, lazy. Sad. Post-9/11 infantry? Holy hell...money, money, money, everyone was studs, we pulled bad teeth so everyone was deployable (and everyone wanted to deploy!). I would take every cent I had--mine or Uncle Sugar's--to train me, my Sailors, and/or my Marines.
Some of the medical standards that DoD used to deem one "non-deployable" was horseshit, but some were legit. But if someone is non-deployable, they are part of the landscape and need to be excised from the body.
Training, a few TDY assignments, a Carib MEU, Jungle Warfare School -- all that and field exercises saved my sorry ass post Vietnam. If they hadn't kept me busy with training and deployments, I would've been getting hammered every night in J-Town.
And even then, there was downtime. I took MCI courses and bought books and read in my rack. You can't let yourself stagnate.
HIV-positive airmen sue Pentagon, Air Force to stop their discharges
If this gains any traction, the implications will spread wide.
If this gains any traction, the implications will spread wide.
R.Caerbannog
Verified Military
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2015
- Messages
- 2,581
Never realized that being HIV positive was acceptable in any service branch. Maybe I'm ignorant, but I remember everyone having to maintain a certain level of health to enlist/reenlist. Did things go wonky somewhere? It just seems weird that chicks are green lighted to take testosterone and dudes are okayed to chop off their nads.
Add on: Just curious to see if anyone has any information on this. It just looks like things have gotten super weird in the service.
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2018
- Messages
- 285
I remember when my youngest daughter was in and came down with asthma, she was a crew chief on hueys, they grounded her and said she would have to get out because she was nondeployable. That was before Iraq got started. She was told that by going overseas she might not be able to get her inhalers. On another subject, never did understand why my 2 girls and son went into the military after traveling around so many years with the old man.
ThunderHorse
Verified Military
Well, with it being cool for the DoD to pay for gender re-assignment to make the soldier non-deployable...I ain't surprised by this. I never met anyone that tested positive for HIV/AIDS. But supposedly they get reassigned on post and sit in a room where they can't injure themselves and possibly expose others? (Or so the story went at BOLC).
I don’t know what the rules are for HIV pos service members as far as assignments. But I have treated a few of them. There’s a certain demographic of males where it’s more prevalent. I don’t think they’re easily deployable though.
I’ve been told in the Navy they can only be stationed at San D or Virginia but I don’t have the NavAdmin on that though, I’m sure I could get some information when I get back from leave.
I see what you did there...
Similar threads
