Retention and Recruitment Crisis

I respect that. I just don't see it that way. What if rangers wanted to do a D-Day jump. Historically it was all men, is it discriminatory to exclude women? I don't think so. I see about a billion whataboutisms with this topic.

But if the army said, "no, that's not cool, you wanna do that go to the jump club," I would be OK with that, too.
Yes, it would absolutely be discriminatory to exclude female Rangers from a contemporary jump honoring D-Day simply because they are women. Which is why you will never see it happen.

For comparison, the Rangers even let a Gold Star Mom jump with them into Normandy.
 
Yes, it would absolutely be discriminatory to exclude female Rangers from a contemporary jump honoring D-Day simply because they are women. Which is why you will never see it happen.

For comparison, the Rangers even let a Gold Star Mom jump with them into Normandy.

Alright. I will declare a modus vivendi on this one.
 
I hate it when you make me look up words. :)

My one year of Latin in high school pays off lol...

True story: when I was in HS I was also in debate club. Great because it taught me a lot about logic and arguments and fallacies. During a debate we came to a point where neither side was going to lose, and I said, "boom! Modus vivendi, bitches!" I got into a bit of trouble on that one.
 
Last edited:
If "The Rangers" wanted to do a D-Day jump - then it would have nothing to do with gender - if a female Soldier serving in Ranger Regiment was on the manifest - she is representing "The Regiment" she isn't there to represent feminism.

just my two cents


The problem is never with gender - the problem is with the standard.
 
All of the mentioned units are on Fort Libery-Bibbitty. No cost to get them to Pope Airfield.

C130 holds 64 paratroopers + non-jumping two jumpmasters. That bird was the only one used.

Static line jumping is something that has to happen every quarter to maintain current status. Unless you plan to have a follow-on mission, unit cohesion doesn't matter as much as individual jumper training.

Is it a blatant photo op? Sure. But it doesn't cost anything extra or inherently interfere with training plans.
 
If someone happened to work in the direct path of the runaway train that is the current state of limited training resources -they would know first hand that doing a jump for a photo op like this is bullshit if there are other soldiers on jump status in the unit that are currently in a possible "pay loss" status
...unless every single female paratrooper on that plane was ALSO a pay loss

Otherwise, readiness and requirements just took a very visible public back seat in the name of a DEI photo op.
But hey, diversity is our strength
 
All of the mentioned units are on Fort Libery-Bibbitty. No cost to get them to Pope Airfield.

C130 holds 64 paratroopers + non-jumping two jumpmasters. That bird was the only one used.

Static line jumping is something that has to happen every quarter to maintain current status. Unless you plan to have a follow-on mission, unit cohesion doesn't matter as much as individual jumper training.

Is it a blatant photo op? Sure. But it doesn't cost anything extra or inherently interfere with training plans.
Of course it does. Airborne ops are expensive by nature. And airborne op is often an all-day thing in a conventional unit, so there's time away from the unit. Money, plus time away from work, plus risk of injury. If you need to jump, jump with your unit. Enough with holding specific groups out as being different from, and therefore better than, anyone else simply for being who they are.
 
Prigozhin’s mutiny scared the hell out of the top dogs in Beijing so they’re declawing their PMC’s by limiting their role. But not to worry. Trudeau can just invite the PLA to handle Canadian defense…and he might get a belt and road initiative as part of the bargain.
 
Of course it does. Airborne ops are expensive by nature. And airborne op is often an all-day thing in a conventional unit, so there's time away from the unit. Money, plus time away from work, plus risk of injury. If you need to jump, jump with your unit. Enough with holding specific groups out as being different from, and therefore better than, anyone else simply for being who they are.

If you want to highlight military diversity and celebrate gender fluidity, it’d be cheaper to just do a LAPES drop with a pallet-load of transsexuals. What a photo op that would be.
 
If the Division Commander is the one pushing "kiosks" instead of chow halls...should he not be the one who faces consequences?


I can't find a lot of information about this, but if the kiosks are in addition to chow halls, it sounds like a great idea. I'm not for replacing the chow hall with kiosks. Times have changed, but there was a lot of planning, morale building, and brotherhood built in the DFACs in my experience.

My kid at West Point still uses the DFAC but that's a different environment. Interested to hear from someone still active on this...
 
Kiosks have been used as a way to entice more soldiers to utilize the DFAC, but they're also closing the actual DFACs at certain times (weekends mostly) to only run Kiosks.

This works fine in theory, but the Carson post shuttle is trash. From where I was in the barracks to Stack DFAC was 2.5 miles; easy for me with a car, not so easy for my brand new soldiers. The kids out in the aviation barracks had a 4 mile trip.
This is the same story in other bases like Liberty and Cavazos.

DFACs have a few problems for attracting soldiers; quality of food, quantity of servings (protien), and consistency of product.

The TL;DR way I'd adress fixing it is collegiate style budget, BCT cook companies, and updated menus.

The #1 thing I'd want to see fixed is giving DFACs an actual budget. For some god awful reason the army decided DFACs need to run like a civilian restaurant, I.E. we only make money when soldiers come in and swipe meal cards. This creates a catch 22 of the DFAC only being able to serve cheap food (fish, ground beef, chicken), which in turn makes soldiers not want to eat there. Go to a collegiate styled budget, where the DFAC's monthly budget is determined via the number of single soldiers assigned to the Brigade/other metrics the DFAC supports.

The next is cooks in the DFAC need to stay in the DFAC, I.E. focus on supporting the DFAC and not being pulled for Motorpool Mondays, etc. This is currently in practice at the Cook Companys and has had a considerable impact from what my active duty peers have told me. Currently these companys only exists at the "Echelon above Brigade" level, but I think it could be recreated at the Brigade level by creating a cook company within the Support Battalion. The BCT structure (as I remember) was that all cooks were part of the BSB, but that they were part of the support company that fell under (OPCON/ADCON, can't remember which). This created a "two dads" situation where the cooks in 1-502nd get pulled for ABC and the dudes in 1-75 get pulled for xyz.
A Brigade level cook company allows for a rotation between DFAC operations, training, and equipment maintenance. The other battalions would maintain a cook E6/E7 within the support company as the culinary SME to provide all logistical planning/support the line units need.

Lastly is the menus. Quite frankly, younger troops aren't big on the army chow menus that have existed since the 70s. Nobody is excited to come into the DFAC for meatloaf, corn, and mashed potatoes. The army needs to desperately update it's menu planning to allow for more "quick service" styled options; think Chipotle, subway, noodles & Company, etc. The most utilized DFAC I ever worked in was one that sold itself on having "Fazoli, Chipotle, Subway, Wingstop" days each week. That lasted until a new foodservice warrant got there and told us we "weren't following Army menu plans" and made us go back to the old 21 day menus. Our usage halved after that.
 
Back
Top