May 21st, 2013
The Military Times reports that the Defense Department is preparing to send a report to Congress that was two years in the writing. According to Military Times the report touts Reserve Forces as more cost effective than a large active duty fighting force;
According to a draft copy of the report obtained by Military Times, the Pentagon analysis concludes that Guard and Reserve troops not only are cheaper when in drilling status but also when fully mobilized, in part because their overall compensation is lower when taking into account noncash benefits such as retirement accrual and health care.
Moreover, the overall costs for outfitting units with reservists are lower because part-time troops do not tap many military perks such as family housing, DoD schools, installation-based family support and the moving stipends that active-duty troops get every few years when they are reassigned, according to the draft report.
Yeah, it’s as if Task Force Smith, Kaserine Pass and the First Battle of Bull Run never happened. I have nothing against the Reserves, but even they’ll admit their training is lacking compared to the active duty force.
During Desert Storm, reservist combat units were called up in case war went on longer than it did and in the months during the train up, none of the reserve units, as far as I know met the standard required before they were certified for combat. There was a buttload of reservists who went AWOL at Fort Hood during their training. I’m sure with the current crop that wouldn’t happen. I have more confidence in reservists today than I did the reservists of my days – but so much has changed since then. And this is a return to those old days.
It appears that the only thing the Defense Department is defending these days are their jobs in the Pentagon. They’re certainly not defending this nation in any recognizable form;
The Pentagon disavowed the draft copy obtained by Military Times, dated April 26, 2013.
“The draft report was released prematurely and there are some inaccuracies; the department does not stand by it,” said DoD spokeswoman Lt. Col. Elizabeth Robbins. “We cannot comment on the report prior to the final version being completed and sent to Congress.”
But a Pentagon official who spoke on condition of anonymity said the data appear finalized even if the language that fleshes out the 34-page report may undergo further revisions. Congress passed a law in 2011 requiring DoD to draw up the analysis, but it remains unclear when an official version will be finalized and released publicly.
Remember when they were talking about drawing down the active force before Desert Storm, and some units had to be reconstituted in the midst of their deactivation to respond to Saddam Hussein, but at least they had a large, trained active force to deploy and the only reservists were support units. How are we going to respond to threats in 2016?