# Operational Usefullness of Reserve Forces



## jmackenzie_15 (10 Jan 2005)

Ive been wondering recently, to what extent are the reserves used during operations overseas? From what I can understand, is that the main battle group is made up of regforce battallions, then they fill up some of the open ends with some reservists to pick up the slack.An example of what Im wondering is, hypothetically, if 3PPCLI and 2RCR went to Iraq, would the the reserve guys be put in the back? Or do they just throw the reserves in right along with the reg force infantry troops as if there were no difference?

Would you actually do the job of an infantryman overseas, or would you clean weapons and work in the lockups during the tour?


----------



## Lost_Warrior (10 Jan 2005)

Reserves go through what is called "work up training" or "pre-deployment training" before going overseas.

This training can last anywhere from 3 months, 6 months, to even a year.  This is to bring them up to speed with the reg force units they will be deploying with.  When reserves go, they do their duty, weather it be engineer, infantry, armour, etc etc.  They dont sit back and do the odd jobs.


----------



## dutchie (10 Jan 2005)

Just to add to this....

As has been mentioned in other threads, the initail deployment of Cdn troops to any particular Theatre of Ops is Reg only, and only on subsequest Rotos do Res troops deploy. That usually happens only when the 'heat' has died own a little. 

I say 'usually', because I can think of a couple of situations where this was not the case (UNPROFOR/Medak for example), and Res troops found themselves in battle.


----------



## jmackenzie_15 (10 Jan 2005)

That isnt true either, a sergeant from my unit 1NSH, was on Roto 0, did 3 WEEKS, NO BS, of work up training before he was in Kabul.He was supposed to be an NBCD specialist or something, but ended up being transfered to infantry patrols or something, im not 100% on those specific details, but he WAS on Roto 0, and he DID only do 3 weeks of training before he was gone.

The general feeling around our unit is, and from what our officers and experienced guys tell us, be prepared to go overseas with alot less work up time than 3 months.That, and the reserve units around here seem to be getting used by the RCRs more and more often, which isnt like in the past apparently.I guess RCR generally isnt too friendly to reservists =p any RCRs want to tell me otherwise?   

Someone else said that the reserve units out west were almost used dry by PPCLI.   ???

Seems like anything can happen in the reserves =p


----------



## dutchie (10 Jan 2005)

Well, in my experience, Roto 0 is actually the second rotation in theatre.

Secondly, there are exceptions for res not deploying with the initial force, one of those exceptions being specially trained individuals. 

Finally, I can't comment on what a particular Sgt in a particualr Res unit out east did or didn't do, but I would be quite surprised if he was on the initial deployment to Afghanistan in a rifle coy.

As fas a work-up - res and reg do the same mission specific work up. If that's 3 months, 3 weeks, 6 months or 1 year, they all do the same. Of course, if someone out there in the know can correct me, please do.


----------



## jmackenzie_15 (10 Jan 2005)

He was on Roto 0, if thats the second one, my bad =p

He definately was gone for 3 weeks to Ontario.He left for it, came back less than a month later, then was gone to Afghanistan.


----------



## Infanteer (10 Jan 2005)

ROTO 0 Op Athena was the first deployment to Kabul.


----------



## Lost_Warrior (10 Jan 2005)

Thats strange.  A corporal from my unit did 1 year work up training in ValCartier for the last Bosnia ROTO...and your Sgt did 3 weeks going into a warzone?  Something isn't right there.


----------



## jmackenzie_15 (10 Jan 2005)

He did it, dont ask me how, I dont run the camp and I have no idea how it works because Ive never been there   
He went, came home, and was gone just like that.Hes a bang on soldier though, one of the best in our unit easily.Maybe that had something to do with it =p.
He told us about this a few months ago.... I cant remember entirely, but he said he was in something called (something like) the peacekeeping centre in Ontario or something.
Id never heard of it before.


----------



## McG (10 Jan 2005)

Caesar said:
			
		

> Well, in my experience, Roto 0 is actually the second rotation in theatre.


Roto 0 is the first group on the ground (as at this time, no rotations have occured)
Roto 1 is the second tour (at this time there has been one rotation of troops in theater)


----------



## dutchie (10 Jan 2005)

I stand corrected. Thanks.

But this story of the Res Sgt sounds a little, well, 'funny'. Perhaps some miscommunication, misunderstanding, or just plain bs (not on jmackenzie's part of course).


----------



## jmackenzie_15 (10 Jan 2005)

Im sure from time to time there must be other reservists that get sent away alot quicker than expected... he cant be the only one in Canada =p

Im fairly certain this is where he went before being deployed:

http://www.peaceoperations.org/en/au_mission_history.html


Perhaps because he was originally meant to be an NBCD Specialist was why the time was so short? He always taught NBCD on bmqs for years and was always the guy that threw you around the gas hut =p Im assuming he has some qualifications in that area.


Back on topic, after work up training, reservists assume the exact same jobs as the regforce soldiers? Wouldnt they be put into like.... the least active rifle company or something like that  ???


----------



## Infanteer (10 Jan 2005)

When reservist Infantry soldiers fill a 031 spot as an augmentee, then they do the exact same job as their Reg Force brethren will do.  As I remember, it was the same for the Engineers as well. I'm not sure how the CS/CSS world runs reserve augmentations.


----------



## McG (10 Jan 2005)

jmackenzie_15 said:
			
		

> Im fairly certain this is where he went before being deployed:
> 
> http://www.peaceoperations.org/en/au_mission_history.html


I don't know who you are talking about, but I'm fairly certain that he actually went here:
http://armyapp.dnd.ca/pstc-cfsp/Default.asp


----------



## jmackenzie_15 (10 Jan 2005)

yeah your right MCG, my bad


----------



## ArmyRick (10 Jan 2005)

OK, lets sort some things out, troops! I am currently a reservist and have served regular army.. With that being said, what are you thinking "do reservist do the rear echelon stuff" ?
With 3-6 months work up training most reservist are good to go and can be placed right in the heat of the action.
There is nothing magical about the reg force training. They just do it all the time and for the most part stay up to speed on the skills and drills.

Yes there are poor excuses of service members (I will not refer to them as soldiers) in the reserves, but guess what, the reg force have them too. They just hide them better.

So, I think will finish (instead of tearring some people a new a) with this, get the all the facts before you pipe up with comments here.

A big component (especially infantry) to being ready to deploy is what level are you at NOW! Its no good to be highly qualified soldier if you are not physically FIT, situationally aware and competent at your current job skills.

By the way, roto 0 is when the first mission hits the ground (Ihave been on a Roto 0 in the nineties).


----------



## jmackenzie_15 (10 Jan 2005)

Im curious to know what dictates how much work up time a reserve soldier requires before being good to go.... time in + qualifications + PT level?  ???


----------



## dutchie (10 Jan 2005)

The amount of work up is set for the entire Battle Group, and is done for all at once. It's not like Cpl Combat can come in with a week to go and jump onto the Roto because he's so switched on (there are exceptions to this, of course). That I know. The rest of your question (how is the length of work up set) I can only speculate at. If you care to hear my ideas, read below.

Work up is most likely set based on: Deployment date, readiness of Bn slated for deployment, amount of courses needed to staff all positions, number of augmentees (both Res and Reg), amount of mission specific training to be done (language, mission, culture, ROEs, etc) and of course operational requirements (for example -how dire the need is for us to be there right now). 

I'm sure others (pbi, dglad, Michael O' Leary, etc) have more to say about this area, but that's my best guesstimate.


----------



## jmackenzie_15 (10 Jan 2005)

hmmm interesting, thx caesar!


----------



## Fishbone Jones (10 Jan 2005)

Caesar,

There were many other Reservists on Roto 0, the 1st one for Athena, also. They ranged from Maj to Tpr, and most ranks in between. Not in hard 031 spots, but they were there. All part of the team, with everyone doing their part. You should research a little more before trying to give out "fact".


----------



## dutchie (10 Jan 2005)

recceguy:

You'll note in my initial post I did actually state that there are some exceptions.



			
				Caesar said:
			
		

> Secondly, there are exceptions  for res not deploying with the initial force, one of those exceptions being specially trained individuals.



Perhaps you should research my posts before correcting me.

Cheers.


----------



## Sandbag (10 Jan 2005)

My last tour was as a DCO of a Battle Group, and yes in a perfect world all members of the BG do exactly the same amount of workup trg, with their applicable subunit and then final confirmation trg with the BG.   But this is not a perfect world...big surprise!   So could augmentees be selected, change position, do less trg, etc..unfortunately, of course.   Regardless, the final decision of who is deemed op ready rests with the BG Comd, based on recommendations from the chain of comd detailing who is fit to deploy and in what jobs.   Thus any member, reg or res, can for the most part fill any position.   As well any member of the BG, reg or res, can be found lacking in skills/ability, etc and be replaced.   I can't speak on the latest roto, pbi would be better to comment on this. I have been on tours where we had as many as 430 reserve members in our BG and as few as approx 20, the requirements don't change IMHO.

Caesar has nicely summed up the rest.


----------



## mo-litia (10 Jan 2005)

This disparity in training and skill proficiency is the cross that we reservists must bear.   I agree completely with ArmyRick  
 that with the proper work up trg, most reservists can function side by side with their Reg Force counterparts.

The lack of physical fitness in some troops is particularly aggravating to me, as there seems to be no enforcement of the PT standards once a soldier has completed their trg - especially among the higher ranks. Thankfully, the infantry does eat it's own - even in the militia - so I do not have to see much of that in my regiment.   

Even so, seeing some fat sack of sh*t waddling around WATC, out of breath on a walk, is sickening to see; it makes the Reserves look bad, especially to some of the younger gung-ho reg force troops who haven't quite realized the benefits of having reserves yet, and therefore seem incubate the majority of this foolish anti-militia attitude.   Most reserve soldiers are competent for their jobs - and most Reg Force soldiers recognize this, but, as reservists we have to police ourselves when it comes to PT standards.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (10 Jan 2005)

Caesar said:
			
		

> recceguy:
> 
> You'll note in my initial post I did actually state that there are some exceptions.
> 
> ...



Your right. Guess I quit reading when I read your initial statement:

*Roto 0 is actually the second rotation in theatre*

No biggy. Point taken


----------



## dutchie (10 Jan 2005)

No worries, recceguy.

Cheers.


----------



## Gayson (10 Jan 2005)

Question:

If Roto 0 is the 2nd rotation, what designation would the first rotation be given?


----------



## Fishbone Jones (10 Jan 2005)

It's not. Roto 0 is the first iteration. Read the rest of the thread.


----------



## pbi (11 Jan 2005)

Good points being made here. I've mentioned my past (_ad nauseam_) sufficiently that my perspective is probably understood here. My comments;

-The Army normally expects that 90 to a maximum of 120 days of training (DOT)will be given to bring average Res soldiers to DLOC="Deployment Level of Capability" which is required IOT achieve the OPRED that Sandbag referred to. Note that I said "normally". Unfortunately, it is becoming increasingly fuzzy (IMHO) just what "normally" means any more. The Army is still under manning pressures, there is a much greater desire and willingness to use Res soldiers, and indeed we now have a pretty respectable pool of Res soldiers with at least one if not multiple missions under their belts. In the case of our Bde, 38 CBG, we launched a D&S Pl out the door with about 30 DOT for the current Roto of ATHENA. The Pl was all Res, although a few of the NCOs incl the Pl WO were ex-Regular Army. There were problems during training, primarily to do with fitness and weapons skills, but overall the trg (we ran it ourselves in the Bde) went well. The Pl did a good job overall-it encountered some problems (partly as a result of a lack of time to build cohesion, partly from other issues that were beyond its control and I won't go into here...), but all things considered I do not think its performance was measurably worse than an equivalent RegF pl;

-I have been a Res soldier on ops with the RegF, and I have had Res soldiers under my command on ops in a Reg unit. Most of the comments made by folks here are pretty accurate. If the Res soldier is physically fit, keen, understands that like any "new guy" anywhere he may have to prove himself, and is ready to work the "long haul" as opposed to the 48hour weekend adrenalin burst, then IMHO they will do very well. I found that once my coy deployed into theatre, after a while I had to look closely to see if a soldier was Res or Reg-you just couldn't tell;

-here on ATHENA 02 there are Res in the D&S Pl, in CIMIC, and scattered around all over the contingent. For the most part, they seem to work out OK. To me the question is not "this job for Regs, that job for Res" but "right soldier to right job". By force of circumstances, Regs will take some jobs to a greater proportion: this is normally based on trg and experience rather than prejudice (although we would be foolish to think there is not some of that still...);

-formed Res subunits were deployed in Bosnia on the later Rotos, and performed at least acceptably up to well. Again, it depends on many factors. Our Bde fielded one CRIC and contributed to another, back to back, and found significant differences in the way the gaining RegF units received, treated and employed these Res elements;

-I can relate from a non-military experience that there is always tension in any organization composed of "full-timers" and "part timers". I served for a while as a volunteer firefighter in a department that was manned by paid crews during the daylight weekday hours, then by us VFFs at night and on weekends/hols. The stations, trucks and equipment belonged to the VFFs-the paid men were put in by the local municipal government to ensure timely response during working hours when most VFFs had commuted to work. If a call came in during the "volunteer hours" then the VFFs fought the same fires, did the same auto extrications and medic assists as the paid men did during the day, but for no pay. The relationship was, to put it mildly, poisonous. It resembled the worst RSS/Class A relationship you could possibly imagine. So, I think that to a certain extent we may not ever be able to extinguish mutual suspicion and dislike that may be endemic to "mixed" organizations, although in my experience we have come a very long way; and

-in my experience Res soldiers are not, as a rule, given "back seat" jobs. However, as a commander I could see a particular ethical or perhaps moral issue that might appear to work against the op employment of Res in some situations. That is, IMHO, that no commander should willingly employ soldiers when he knows that their lack of skills or experience unduly endangers them or the mission. In some circumstances this might prevent some Res from being employed. But, if you apply that criterion honestly, you must then examine each soldier's true abilities, both Reg and Res. I daresay that I have seen a few people in the RegF who should not be sent on certain missions either. "Waddling sacks of sh*t" are not confined to the Res, believe me......

Cheers.


----------



## McG (11 Jan 2005)

One thing that I think would greatly improve the reserve value added to operations would be to establish (and clearly comunicate to members of the CF) a dual-component force generation & augmentation plan that is supported by a workable managed readiness system.

Say what?

Basicly, I think we need to clearly identify what contributions we (the army) expect the reserve component to make to forcasted deployments and unforcasted deployments during times of stratigic1 peace, conflict, and war.   Expected contrubutions of the PRes could be expressed something like this:


*Forcasted Rotation**Unforcasted Deployment/High Readiness Capability**Stratigic Peace*high threat enviroment = X           
low threat enviroment = Yhigh threat enviroment = A
 low threat enviroment = B
*Stratigic Conflict           *high threat enviroment =   :bullet::bullet::bullet:
low threat enviroment =   :rage:   high threat enviroment =   
low threat enviroment =   :bullet::bullet:
*War*high threat enviroment =     :threat:
low threat enviromenthigh threat enviroment = 0
low threat enviroment 

This would then be tied to a functioning dual-component managed readiness system, and required reserve capabilities would be stood up and trained for high readiness tasks along side the regular force elements schedualed to go high readiness with them.

1.   I use the term "stratigic peace" and "stratigic conflict" not to reflect conditions on the ground in a theater of operations but more of an indication of the political urgency and precived international threat (and the Per/Op Tempo that would be politicaly acceptable in each circumstance)

"stratigic peace" could be compared to our "post-Cold War" days in the FRY.
"stratigic conflict" would reflect the Op Tempo & political urgency that the we have given the war on terror
"war" would reflect the Op Tempo & political urgency that the US has given the war on terror


----------



## pbi (11 Jan 2005)

> Forcasted Rotation Unforcasted Deployment/High Readiness Capability
> Stratigic Peace high threat enviroment = X
> low threat enviroment = Y high threat enviroment = A
> low threat enviroment = B
> ...



OK-I must be dumb but I can't decipher from your table what the Res committment is supposed to be. What am I missing here?
Cheers.


----------



## McG (11 Jan 2005)

That is because I don't know what the commitments should be.
However, someone who can look at reserve capabilities & regular force needs/shortfalls across the board should sit down and figure out what X, Y, and   :bullet: :bullet: :bullet: should be.


----------



## pbi (11 Jan 2005)

Right. Seen. Cheers.


----------



## pbi (11 Jan 2005)

The current plan being worked on by the Land Staff right now (IIRC) projects that one Res Cbt Tm will be ready per year (or maybe one per Roto although that sounds very ambitious...). I have a document here (somewhere) with me on that-I will try to dig it out and perhaps share some of the wisdom it contains. Cheers.


----------



## Jarnhamar (11 Jan 2005)

Two big problems the reserves face when forming their own company are;

1. constantly changing time table. 
I remember once or twice being told, on thrusday, that timings have changed and if i want to keep my spot on tour i need to attend pre-work up training that friday to sunday.  For me it wasn;t so bad (being an unemployed bum)  For guys with families and full time jobs it was pretty bad.  (We started our pre-pre work up training about a year before our tour)
The week-ends were constantly changing. Trying to keep a company of soldiers spread across ontario updated on those kinda chances seemed to have been a nightmare.

2. Interchanging people
One week-end a unit would send 7 guys and the next week-end 4 of those guys were different.  Guys would do some of the training, decide a tour wasn't for them and quit. Their unit would then fire in a new guy who was missing all the previous training and would have to use training time to play catch up. Keeping track of peoples courses must have been insane as well.

I think if (when) the reserves suppliment the regular force (as their own element or as an agumentee) they should;

a. Do away with all the pre-work up training and show up ready for the 1 or 3 or 6 months of work up, well trained.
b. Troops be able to commit theirselves fully to the training and not have other commitments that they need to miss training for. (within reason)
c. Attention be paid to a characters previous conduct, charge reports and PDRs. (Getting kicked off a previous tour for stupidity would be a big red flag in my books)
d. Aim for 125% to 150% of the number of troops asked for. This way theres room for people to drop out, fail, red flagged. Also fill the positions that pop up right before leaving.
e. Once positions are filled don't let parent units play mix match with troops.


----------



## GO!!! (15 Jan 2005)

If reservists can so easily be "brought up to speed" with reg force troops, why are so many of them drastically reduced in rank upon entry into the reg force (MWO to Cpl in one case) and when deploying on tours (Op Palladium)?  Furthermore, the ability of reservists to actually do their jobs is sorely tested when living conditions do not meet their expectations and they maintain the "show up if you feel like it" attitude, and pull pole on leave or r and r. Anyone who has been around can provide examples of this. Also, on Op Apollo, reservists were specifically precluded from the sharp end, and we were better off as a result. The reserves should be employed domestically as aid to civil power troops, and in rear ech jobs. Very few of them are cut out for the demands of a "real" operational environment. This is through no fault of their own, incidentally, as it is the Reserve structure that created them.


----------



## JBP (15 Jan 2005)

> If reservists can so easily be "brought up to speed" with reg force troops, why are so many of them drastically reduced in rank upon entry into the reg force (MWO to Cpl in one case) and when deploying on tours (Op Palladium)?  Furthermore, the ability of reservists to actually do their jobs is sorely tested when living conditions do not meet their expectations and they maintain the "show up if you feel like it" attitude, and pull pole on leave or r and r. Anyone who has been around can provide examples of this. Also, on Op Apollo, reservists were specifically precluded from the sharp end, and we were better off as a result. The reserves should be employed domestically as aid to civil power troops, and in rear ech jobs. Very few of them are cut out for the demands of a "real" operational environment. This is through no fault of their own, incidentally, as it is the Reserve structure that created them.



Correcty for the most part that it's not thier fault, they only do it (train) about 1/5th the time Reg force people do. It is known that during WW1+2, militia regiments/units and soldiers lasted longer in combat on average than reg force soldiers. Why? Maybe they hid in the trenches abit longer when the order to "CHARGE!!!" was given?  I do not proclaim to know how or why... It's just known they lasted longer, not by much, but they did!

Maybe Infanteer can shed some light on us here, he's got quite the brain for historical information it seems!


----------



## Infanteer (15 Jan 2005)

Pte (R) Joe said:
			
		

> It is known that during WW1+2, militia regiments/units and soldiers lasted longer in combat on average than reg force soldiers. Why? Maybe they hid in the trenches abit longer when the order to "CHARGE!!!" was given?  I do not proclaim to know how or why... It's just known they lasted longer, not by much, but they did!



Please qualify this statement with some sort of reference.  Firstly, I've never heard of it.  As well, the Reg/Reserve divide you seem to be playing on is completely different today then it was in the mobilization effort for both World Wars.


----------



## McG (15 Jan 2005)

Pte (R) Joe said:
			
		

> It is known that during WW1+2, militia regiments/units and soldiers lasted longer in combat on average than reg force soldiers. Why?


Well, it is known that in World War I, the standing armies of the west deployed to fight in the fields of France and Belgium.  They were unprepared for the new type of warfare (MG, barbed wire, etc) though they probably should have learned watching the Russians battle the Japanese.  The standing armies took high casualties as they learned trench warfare the hard way.  However, you assertion that the reservists statistically lived longer is 100% BS.  Reserve units & reinforcements would have had the benefit of lessons learned by the standing armies that fought in the opening stages of the war, but once in the line they would have been no different.

As far as the Canadian perspective on the war goes, the reserves did not deploy.  Sam Hughes did employ reserve colonels to raise battalions to form the CEF, but these were formed separate from the existing reserve structure.  .  Boer War vets often filled leadership positions and by the time these units went into the line, they had spent months in Canada and the UK being trained.  They had more in common with a standing army in its infancy than with reserves.

The Second World War also drew on leadership of a previous war, and this time there were years to train in the UK.  By the time our soldiers went into battle during that war, they were a standing army.  The one exception would be the troops deployed to Hong Kong, who were quickly defeated along side the British garrison.


----------



## the 48th regulator (15 Jan 2005)

GO!!! said:
			
		

> If reservists can so easily be "brought up to speed" with reg force troops, why are so many of them drastically reduced in rank upon entry into the reg force (MWO to Cpl in one case) and when deploying on tours (Op Palladium)? Furthermore, the ability of reservists to actually do their jobs is sorely tested when living conditions do not meet their expectations and they maintain the "show up if you feel like it" attitude, and pull pole on leave or r and r. Anyone who has been around can provide examples of this. Also, on Op Apollo, reservists were specifically precluded from the sharp end, and we were better off as a result. The reserves should be employed domestically as aid to civil power troops, and in rear ech jobs. Very few of them are cut out for the demands of a "real" operational environment. This is through no fault of their own, incidentally, as it is the Reserve structure that created them.



Yep and many can give examples of reg force guys being left behind on rear party because they could not handle it either.  

Please do provide an example of someone pulling pole on leave or RnR, I am dieing to hear it.

tess


----------



## ArmyRick (16 Jan 2005)

GO!!!, guess what? Just like 48th regulator has stated, you guys in the REG F have your own "Less than stellar" individuals ! So please do qualify your statement? 
All you have done is bashed reservist in general. 
Why do they get demoted upon entry into REG F? It depends on qualification and also availibility of the rank position. I know of one guy while I was in 2VP who direct entried into the REG F as a sergeant (he was a SGT in the reserves) and he went on to serve in 2 CDO. He is an excellent soldier and a great leader. I don't know if he is still serving or not.
Just because a few people have are below standard when they come on work up training, it doesn't mean every revervist is.


----------



## pbi (17 Jan 2005)

GO!!! said:
			
		

> If reservists can so easily be "brought up to speed" with reg force troops, why are so many of them drastically reduced in rank upon entry into the reg force (MWO to Cpl in one case) and when deploying on tours (Op Palladium)?   Furthermore, the ability of reservists to actually do their jobs is sorely tested when living conditions do not meet their expectations and they maintain the "show up if you feel like it" attitude, and pull pole on leave or r and r. Anyone who has been around can provide examples of this. Also, on Op Apollo, reservists were specifically precluded from the sharp end, and we were better off as a result. The reserves should be employed domestically as aid to civil power troops, and in rear ech jobs. Very few of them are cut out for the demands of a "real" operational environment. This is through no fault of their own, incidentally, as it is the Reserve structure that created them.



Disagree on almost all counts.

First, I'd like to see some proof or even good anecdotal stuff supporting your contention that "so many" Res soldiers are "drastically" reduced in rank upon transferring to the RegF. I will offer instead that the great majority of Res who transfer to the RegF do so quite early in their Res service and thus have very little rank to reduce, and very little experience to substantiate a higher rank. As for the MWO-what MOC did he transfer into? His own? Another? What drove the decision to reduce him?

Second, your comment on the reduction of Res in rank when going on tours is inaccurate: that is no longer the policy and has not been for years. Some Res may be offered a position on a tour at a lower rank, but that is not a policy and not a mandatory reduction. The policy is to employ them at their rank.

Third, before commenting on about Res in combat, check out the number of Reservists who were in 2PP at Medak and in combat, and are wearing the commendation for it. Remember that 2PPCLI at Medak is believed to have killed somewhere from 10-30 Croat soldiers in action: a respectable total when compared to Op Apollo, wouldn't you say?

Your suggestions for employing the Res are defeatist and in any case would not produce the capabilities we need. They are already doing dom ops, alomg with their other duties. And, by the way, in today's operational environment, where is the "rear area"?. Res soldiers, given the preparation time that the Army sets for them (then often fails to give) can perform well on operations. The human qualities that make a good soldier are not confined to the RegF. Do Res soldiers have weaknesses? Yes! But your post IMHO is a broadside condemnation.

Cheers.


----------



## pbi (17 Jan 2005)

> It is known that during WW1+2, militia regiments/units and soldiers lasted longer in combat on average than reg force soldiers.



While GO  may be too much on the negative side of things, Pte (R) Joe has crashed off the road and into the ditch on the positive side. As some of our well-informed posters have already pointed out, this statement is ridiculous on a several levels, and doesn't help Res one bit.
Cheers.


----------



## GO!!! (17 Jan 2005)

the 48th regulator said:
			
		

> Yep and many can give examples of reg force guys being left behind on rear party because they could not handle it either.
> 
> Please do provide an example of someone pulling pole on leave or RnR, I am dieing to hear it.
> 
> tess



The best documented would be in Somalia when 2 reservists skipped out on 2 CDO. Substantiaion can be found in Rui Amaral's "eat your weakest man" and "Scapegoat" (author unknown)

The same thing happened in Bosnia in '96, 2000 and 2001, reservists just decided they didn't want to be there anymore.

You are right, the regs do have a bottom third, but there is a top third to balance them, I feel the mo lacks the experience to provide this balance.


----------



## GO!!! (17 Jan 2005)

pbi said:
			
		

> Disagree on almost all counts.
> 
> First, I'd like to see some proof or even good anecdotal stuff supporting your contention that "so many" Res soldiers are "drastically" reduced in rank upon transferring to the RegF. I will offer instead that the great majority of Res who transfer to the RegF do so quite early in their Res service and thus have very little rank to reduce, and very little experience to substantiate a higher rank. As for the MWO-what MOC did he transfer into? His own? Another? What drove the decision to reduce him?
> 
> ...



1) A quick look at the experience of most Inf coys would prove this. The res MWO in question was 031. I decline to name him in such a forum, on the basis that he is not the same soldier he was when he showed up 3 yrs ago. No one even suspects that he was in the mo before. I can think of 12-15 individuals who were mo MCpls and below who skipped all reg F trg and became Ptes. 

2) The policy of demoting reservists may no longer be in place, but the practice sure is. In addition, how many res MCpls have you seen put under the command of a Sr. Reg F Pte? I see it all the time.

3) Third, before commenting on about Res in combat... STOP - I did'nt. I said that they should'nt be any where near it.

4) The Medak pocket was a good example - but you've been in the army about 30 yrs now, right pbi? Can a Pl defeat a Brigade of Armour w/ no heavy wpns? 2VP was tested at Medak, it was NATO air superiority that won the day - or provided the deterrent that saved it.

5) This is not a condemnation. The res needs more trg and wayyyyy more working days out of each "soldier" before they can be deployed with any level of success on anything other than ROTO 5+.


----------



## dutchie (17 Jan 2005)

GO!!! said:
			
		

> 1) A quick look at the experience of most Inf coys would prove this. The res MWO in question was 031. I decline to name him in such a forum, on the basis that he is not the same soldier he was when he showed up 3 yrs ago. No one even suspects that he was in the mo before. I can think of 12-15 individuals who were mo MCpls and below who skipped all reg F trg and became Ptes.



Again, please support this assertion with fact. If you are going to use a specific soldier as an example, you should be prepared to back the claim up with a bit more detail. If you don't want to name names, fine, but what unit was/is he from? When did he transfer? Was he 031 in the Res before? 




			
				GO!!! said:
			
		

> 2) The policy of demoting reservists may no longer be in place, but the practice sure is. In addition, how many res MCpls have you seen put under the command of a Sr. Reg F Pte? I see it all the time.



Another baseless load of shi-ite. There is no way a MCpl (Res or Reg) would ever be put under the command of a Pte (Res or Reg), unless the MCpl was reduced in rank first. 



			
				GO!!! said:
			
		

> 3) Third, before commenting on about Res in combat... STOP - I did'nt. I said that they should'nt be any where near it.
> 
> 4) The Medak pocket was a good example - but you've been in the army about 30 yrs now, right pbi? Can a Pl defeat a Brigade of Armour w/ no heavy wpns? 2VP was tested at Medak, it was NATO air superiority that won the day - or provided the deterrent that saved it.



Says who? I think you better get your facts straight. I know a lot of the guys who were in Medak, all reservists of course, and to a man they tell a different story than you....and it's not barracks room bravado either. 

If you want to be welcome on this forum, you need to be prepared to back up what you post with fact. As well, reserve bashing will get you nothing but a flame war. 

I suggest that you read the conduct guidelines before you post again, as you have violated several of them so far.

Welcome to army.ca


----------



## ArmyRick (17 Jan 2005)

Hey GO? Guess what? Where do you come up with such nonsense? Plainly said. I have served both sides of the fence. I know darn well that there are many revervist who hold their weight very well in soldiering side of the house.
So tell me GO, what about the reservist who are serving as ASSAULTERS in Dwyer Hill? (No names, no pack drill, But I know a few). Maybe they can teach you how to do your job?

Lets see some facts, by the way, whats your trade? How long have you served? What tours do you have? What rank are you? Lets hear from what background your ideas come from?


----------



## GO!!! (17 Jan 2005)

Lets see some facts, by the way, whats your trade? How long have you served? What tours do you have? What rank are you? Lets hear from what background your ideas come from?

*Sigh*

Fine. O31, 6 yrs, Cpl, Op Apollo, Op Athena

I was also in the Mo for a year. 

If you had read the rest of my posts, you would have seen that the main problem I have with the Mo is a lack of basic soldier skills, time in boots and simple experience. The fact that they only show up when it is convenient is also an issue.

By your own measure, how many reservists are at the hill - got a firm #? 

Did'nt think so. 

And the ones that are there are the overwhelming minority.

The point is, there should be a big thick line drawn between those of us who do this full time, and those who show up when there's nothing more interesting going on. 

If in your no doubt "extensive" experienece you have not realised this, perhaps you are more a part of the problem than the solution.

Have a good one.


----------



## Guest (17 Jan 2005)

In regards to the comments above from GO!!!:

i.e. ( 2. The policy of demoting reservists may no longer be in place, but the practice sure is. In addition, how many res MCpls have you seen put under the command of a Sr. Reg F Pte? I see it all the time) - What unit / sub unit are you in ? 

( 3. Third, before commenting on about Res in combat... STOP - I did'nt. I said that they should'nt be any where near it.) Obviously you are very young and have little real life experience - I personally have deployed with reservists that had professionalism and experience a plenty, that I would sooner stand beside than the vast majority of Reg pers... the R031 or 031 in there MOC doesn't mean half as much as the quality of the person.

( 5. This is not a condemnation. The res needs more trg and wayyyyy more working days out of each "soldier" before they can be deployed with any level of success on anything other than ROTO 5+.) - Bull, Bull and more Bull, while I agree that larger formations should consist and be run by full time soldiers (due partially to training and experience and more than anything cohesion and attitudes), be it roto 0 or any other roto there is a place for reservists on every operation they bring not only needed manpower to our units they also bring expertise in some areas that we lack or have in short supply.

To end of my comments the majority of problems that I have seen with reservists in pree deployment and deployment is that there Regular force counterparts don't give them a chance and alienate them. This is done not for what they know or don't know or for the experience they may or may not have but due to the fact that they feel threatened that this "outsider" has been allowed in to there unit. When people one don't realise the person is a reservist or two he becomes accepted socially into the group you will usually find that they make an excellent addition to the section / unit. So my advice to all of you is that if you want to deploy as an effective force, take the best men and women available to you regardless of whether they are reg or res. Insure that cohesiveness is achieved threw prep training that not only tests and builds on there skills as a soldier but binds them together as a unit, and leave the junk behind (both personnel and attitudes).


----------



## GO!!! (17 Jan 2005)

Well.

I will not name my unit or any of the people I have mentioned, as there would be no point other than to provide you with more ammunition.

And:

Would you hire a part time doctor?

How about a part time pilot, with only 10% as many hrs as a pro?

Probably not. 

I know I don't want to have my static line checked by someone who jumps once a year.

You are right on one point though, this forum is definitely overrun by reservists who detest any constructive criticism of their casual employment. 

Keep up the good work SAS - Saturdays and Sundays


----------



## dutchie (17 Jan 2005)

GO!!:

Maybe your work ethic is so poor that you only do things when you must, do the minimum, and b*tch and wine when you are shown to be wrong.

I can only surmise that from these gems of yours:

"I was also in the Mo for a year."  & "...the main problem I have with the Mo is a lack of basic soldier skills, time in boots and simple experience. The fact that they only show up when it is convenient is also an issue."  you must be speaking form your own _personal_ experience (and habits). Maybe you only showed up 'when it was convenient', maybe you lacked decent soldier skills, maybe you skive out of as much hard work as you can, but I (and most Reservists I know) don't. 

"The policy of demoting reservists may no longer be in place, but the practice sure is. In addition, how many res MCpls have you seen put under the command of a Sr. Reg F Pte? I see it all the time."
Maybe your upset becasue your BMQ/SQ/BIQ (or maybe RMS Clerk 3's) wasn't transferred to the regs? Sounds like sour grapes to me.

Lets not take the worst stereotypes of Reservists and tout them as fact, ok? Lest us Reservists start talking about 'your job is my hobby' or 'the Regs is just organized welfare', or 'you wouldn't last 5 minutes in a civvie job'....I don't hold these beliefs, but I am pointing them out to show how ridiculous your point of view is.


----------



## dglad (17 Jan 2005)

I think that GO's problem is similar to that of many who post on the Internet--broad generalizations as a basis of argument.   There are, in fact, Res F pers who "show up when it's convenient".   There are also Res F pers who are loyal, dedicated soldiers, who show up for all trg, whether it's the stuff with the high cool factor, or it's time to muck out hayboxes.   I've worked with Reg F soldiers in every Regiment who I wouldn't trust anywhere near a dull butter-knife, much less a Roto 0, and Res F pers who could hold their own in the most tense stand-off, with CNN on overwatch.

That's the trouble with generalizations--they're too general.

The fundamental difference between the Res F and the Reg F is really only one thing--readiness.   Res F soldiers are, by definition, less ready than their Reg F counterparts.   A Reg F soldier should be able to deploy on short notice, onto a Roto 0; that's his or her job.   A Res F soldier has a trg delta to be accommodated; once that's been addressed, he or she is ALMOST as ready to deploy as anyone else.   I say almost, because the one lingering factor that's going to work against the Res F pers in such a situation is cohesion; the Reg F soldiers, working and living and playing together as they do, will have developed it, while the Res F will need time to do so.   But, given time, the fundamental differential between Reg F and Res F narrows, and eventually disappears altogther.   Along the way, some soldiers--both Reg and Res--will drop out, because they're not sufficiently motivated, lack basic competencies, or because of outside factors (medical, etc.)

Saying our Res F pers need more trg time is specious; take that argument to its (il)logical conclusion, and they become surrogate Reg F.   And, given the realities of the people involved and the resources required, that's simply not going to happen.   The Res F is an ideal way of maintaining a less ready pool of pers with a basic core set of skills and knowledge that is kept constantly replenished against skill-fade, without costing what the same number of Reg F pers would in terms of money, infrastructure and other resources.

As for reduction in rank--I'm not sure where GO is basing his contention this is still a widespread "practice", as there isn't even a effective procedural mechanism to make this happen.   We fill a position with what the CFTPO calls for.   If a Res F soldier wants to take a reduction to fill a post, it MAY be allowed...but only after the force generator has exhausted all other possiblities.   There are VERY rigorous policies about this sort of thing, rigidly enforced at Environmental and NDHQ level...it's not a decision that would be taken below the force generator (i.e. Area) level.

MCpl "under comd" of a senior Pte?   That would make for an interesting mil law case study, if the MCpl chose not to obey an order from his Pte "supervisor".   Frankly, any commander who would allow such an arrangement among his or her subordinates is irresponsible and completely abrogating an obligation to establish effective C2 in the organization, not to mention a fundamental duty of care.   It would be worthwhile for such individuals to be identified, so they could account for such a decision in a rational way.


----------



## jmackenzie_15 (17 Jan 2005)

Speaking from my own experience in my own unit, the guys that show up when it is 'convenient and nothing else interesting is going on' are the vast minority, and its usually due to commitments to university or other outside employment.It's because of guys like you that some reservists don't wish to go to the regs in the first place.

I would like to hear on what people you are basing these opinions on, because /most/ reservists that I know, are proud to do their job and work as much as they possibly can and enjoy doing it, as I do.


----------



## muskrat89 (17 Jan 2005)

dglad - Thanks, Sir - for bringing this back to ground


To everyone else, tread lightly - I sense that this thread is turning south. This is a touchy issue at the best of times. It's great to see different ideas and perspectives - even gripes and beefs, but let's keep it civil.


----------



## ArmyRick (17 Jan 2005)

GO,
031 Athena and Apollo? 3VP or 2VP?
Lets see Reservist have become assaulters in JTF2 and other support positions, qualified Patrol pathfinders, serve in sky hawks, and oh yeah THERE are reserve pilots and doctors.

Well your so sure that reservist have their place in life? You know so much?
You will learn sooner or later when a "Toon" out performs you... It will happen sooner or later. If it hasn't already.


----------



## aesop081 (17 Jan 2005)

GO!!! said:
			
		

> Well.
> 
> I will not name my unit or any of the people I have mentioned, as there would be no point other than to provide you with more ammunition.
> 
> ...



Just so you are aware......i fly every day with part-time pilots, i have no problems with that, they are some of th best pilots around.  I have served with reservists and most of them served with the dedication and knowledge and ethics that puts alot of regs to shame.  The 48th regulator ( member of this site) is one guy i will never forget, he knows what i am refering to, he is a prime example that most reservists have their witts about them.  You should check you "hollier than thou" attitude at the door.  BTW i'm regular force so i'm not reservist detesting critisism !!


----------



## Fishbone Jones (17 Jan 2005)

And all this consternation from a guy who won't even fill out his profile. Personally, I think the guy (GO!) is just jerking your chains. A troll in internet parlance. It's a well known behavioural pattern of an insecure type of person. Half truths, general innuendo, sniping from the shadows... well, you get the idea. I don't think he's worth responding too unless he comes up with something tangible. Six years ,nowdays, in the CF does not an expert make. However, good on the ones that did respond, with fact and reasoned rebuttal. Anyway, what would I know, I'm a Reservist now, must have forgot all the thuds and gluebags I met while I was in or working with the Regs all those years.


----------



## Michael OLeary (17 Jan 2005)

GO!!

It is really too bad that you have joined the board with little more to contribute than a general, and undeserved, condemnation of the Reserves. I cannot imagine what is the source of your anger. No matter, your hostility is something that you will have to work through on your own. 

Your perceptions of the Army Reserves, and this forum, are both flawed. It is unlikely that your breadth of experience offers you the credibility to so openly critique the Reserves or the members of this forum as a group. The range of experience on these boards, Regular and Reserve, officer and NCM, serving and retired, is impressive. You would not find a similar group to draw upon or share your experiences with in any Mess or other venue in this country.

Your posts here have only served to undermine a growing recognition that, Regular and Reserve; we are all in the same Army, with the same objective to serve our nation. You have an opportunity with a Forum like this to demonstrate that the Regular Force, which you so strongly advocate, is a reputable, effective and worthwhile force. You can use this position to help potential recruits who may be interested in a military career, to show them that your Army, your Regiment, and your trade are worthy objectives for them to aspire to. You could demonstrate that you are a soldier they will want to serve with and learn from. You haven't yet, but there is still time to salvage something and share the knowledge and skills you have to offer the participants on these boards.

Good luck.

Pro Patria


----------



## dutchie (17 Jan 2005)

Well said, Sir.


----------



## the 48th regulator (17 Jan 2005)

whew, 

I'll say one thing for sure;  Thanks team for proving what a wild site this is.  A forum where we can express our ideas about something we love.   Not a voice box for some disgruntled troopy that just came back from defaulters, that needs a place to vent.

As for the victim of our ire, I advise you should just do as yer name suggests, mate.

dileas

tess


----------



## bossi (18 Jan 2005)

Good grief ... what a pile of ... whatever.

As for the "operational usefulness of Reserve Forces" ...
Well, unless virtually EVERY other Army in the world is wrong ... there seems to be a consensus that having a reserve component to an Army is useful.
Why?
Probably because when you need replacements or reinforcements "overnight", it takes too long to train civvies from off the street ... (and, looking at other discussions on operational tempo, it also helps alleviate the strain upon the gene pool when you've got a reserve you can draw upon).

A specific case in point has already been mentioned - the Patricia battalion that fought in the Medak pocket, which had approximately 40 per cent reservists (and, also keep in mind - due to the requisite technical skills the "specialist" platoons such as mortars and ADP were Reg Force heavy - thus, the "line" coys were reserve heavy ...).
And, yes - Op ATHENA Roto 0, too - both "specialists" and general augmentees.

Now, as to the discussion of "part time" doctors and pilots - let's keep something else in mind:  When they're not in uniform, they're working fulltime elsewhere - during the Falklands War the majority of surgeons in the task force were ... reservists ... and, as for the flying hours of Reg Force pilots given the dimishing numer of airframes ... (good grief - the more I think about it, the more ridiculous your post seems ...)

Reservists on The Ski Team?  Yes - it's a fact (and they earned their berths fair and square).  Prove it?  Don't be silly - only an amateur would ask that.

And, one more point:  Only six years of full-time service?  What about a reservist with over 20 years of full-time service ... ?

I'm glad to see this thread was dragged back onto thicker ice ...

The Reg Force needs all the allies it can muster these days - trying to drive a wedge between Reg and Reserve is one of the most foolish pursuits imaginable (unless, of course, "divide and conquer" doesn't start alarm bells ringing ...)


----------



## Brad Sallows (18 Jan 2005)

The reservists in 2PPCLI at Medak had been with the battalion deployed for what - 5 months? - plus workup time before that.  That fact must be borne in mind when people are tossing around assessments of how well reservists can measure up; I should think we can turn civilians into regulars in that period.  Generally time is required to integrate, cover the "supplemental" training gap, and complete the mission-specific training.  In special circumstances (experienced reservist, or short-term replacement for deployed pers on leave) little to no additional preparation may be required.  The real test will be a situation in which all hell breaks loose shortly after deployment.  It is worth maintaining reserves if they can be brought up to sufficient speed in a shorter period than civilians, and more importantly if there are reservists competent to be integrated above the rank of Pte(B).  The latter is more likely as long as the CF consistently seeks to include reserve augmentees in order to develop a base of reservists with more experience than evenings and weekends.


----------



## dutchie (18 Jan 2005)

Brad Sallows said:
			
		

> The reservists in 2PPCLI at Medak had been with the battalion deployed for what - 5 months? - plus workup time before that.   That fact must be borne in mind when people are tossing around assessments of how well reservists can measure up; I should think we can turn civilians into regulars in that period.



Care to expand on that? The troops in Medak were a few weeks away from going home, so they had been in theatre around 5 months, plus several months work-up, just for clarity sake.

Are you suggesting that had the battle occured 6 weeks into the deployment that the troops would have performed poorly? Obviously 5 months of experience in theatre improved their performance, but it would have had the same impact on Reg force pers. Do you think the gap would have been greater? I think not. Especially at that time. 

Turn civies into batle ready soldiers in 5 months? Please forward your training plan to the CDS, I'm sure he would love to implement this. By your theory, we could take Reg Force recruits, train them in 5 months, and they would be battle ready. IIRC, an Infantry recruit has just finished his Battle School (or BIQ - whatever) by 5 months in......could you imagine a Coy worth of recruits in Medak? Think the outcome would be the same? Those Reservists were competent, skilled, and switch-on troops the day they walked into Bn on the first day of work-up. There is not way they would have performed the way they did had they not been. Don't forget that it wasn't just the Pte/Cpl types who were res, so were the Section Cdrs/2ICs (and up, I imagine).


----------



## Infanteer (18 Jan 2005)

Caesar said:
			
		

> Those Reservists were competent, skilled, and switch-on troops the day they walked into Bn on the first day of work-up. There is not way they would have performed the way they did had they not been. Don't forget that it wasn't just the Pte/Cpl types who were res, so were the Section Cdrs/2ICs (and up, I imagine).



There was a reserve Platoon Commander, wasn't there?

Anyways, your point ignores one of the most important factors - cohesion.  One disadvantage of cobbling together Reserve soldiers from across Canada and throwing them into a operational setting is that they are for the most part going to be unfamiliar with, their own capabilities (most have only faced 2-day Mo exercises), their mates (Neat hat, bud), and their leadership (takes a while to hammer out SOPs, familarity, etc, etc).  Throw something like this up against a determined enemy and you're going to have dead Canadian reservists.

When I deployed as part of an all-reservist company, we were blessed with two things:

1)  The company had been together for 6 months and deployed on a Domestic Operation.  6 months on Class C work-up with a reg force battalion - not much "calling up the reserves" in that, we were essentially Regs for a year.

2)  All the Officers were Reg Force Phase qualified and almost all the NCO's had multiple tours/reg force experience.


----------



## Brad Sallows (18 Jan 2005)

>Are you suggesting that had the battle occured 6 weeks into the deployment that the troops would have performed poorly?

I certainly suggest they might have performed differently.  You and I can disagree that 5 months of time in theatre might have made a difference and that they had nothing more to learn about their jobs or about each other after they got off the plane.


----------



## the 48th regulator (18 Jan 2005)

In other words you are saying that;



> I certainly suggest they might have performed differently



in that _they _is referring to all the fellas on the ground, right?

'Cause trust me, until the proverbial poop hits the fan no one can predicted how they will perform.  You just do your job.  I know many of us soldiers (reserve and reg)did when push came to shove.

tess


----------



## Art Johnson (19 Jan 2005)

Hey Tess right on


----------



## aesop081 (19 Jan 2005)

the 48th regulator said:
			
		

> In other words you are saying that;
> 
> in that _they _is referring to all the fellas on the ground, right?
> 
> ...



well said.........cheers


----------



## westie47 (19 Jan 2005)

As a guy who was there I can say this:

 1. We did three months of work-up
 2. There were incidents almost as soon as we got on the ground
 3. A lot of guys had tours - to Cyprus
 4. Yes the majority of leaders leaders in the rifle coys were regs, and some pretty damn good ones too, but, there were some pretty f****d up ones as well.  More than anyone would like to admit.
 5. Yes I was a reservist in B Coy
 6. And a good friend of mine who was also a reservist from my unit and was in my platoon in Croatia, was a senior NCO with 3VP in Afghanistan.  He said that tour was boring in comparison!
I don't care who you are, everyone acts differently under fire. Being a reg doesn't automatically make you a cool cucumber.
Yes I do agree that if we had to go on operations tomorrow we would be screwed, but that isn't our fault. If we had more training days and equipment we would be more prepared.

But do not underestimate us...the average reservist is higher educated, more lateral minded, and dedicated
Remember, there are some tards, but that's true for both sides of the fence.
If reservists are second class soldiers, why are there some in Wainwright teaching reg force BIQ?


----------



## aesop081 (19 Jan 2005)

westie47 said:
			
		

> As a guy who was there I can say this:
> 
> But do not underestimate us...the average reservist is higher educated, more lateral minded, and dedicated



I agree with you except for this perticular point. I am quite dedicated , well educated and quite capable of lateral thinking and so are most reg soldiers i have worked with.   I beleive now that it is you who is generalizing ! If i could only master typing !!!


----------



## westie47 (19 Jan 2005)

You're right, I am starting to generalize. I guess I thought that the whole reg/reserve thing went out in the 90's!


----------



## Highland Lad (19 Jan 2005)

Actually, I agree with Westie when he talks about level of education - to a point.

The average level of education among NCMs in the Reserves is higher... so what? The real indicator here is whether Buddy is capable of performing his/her duties as required on operations, and I have to give the edge to the regs, but only for a short time.

As has been related above, once on the ground, the lines between so-called full and part timers gets very blurry, especially when you consider that there's no such thing as a part-time CF soldier once you land in Bosnia, or Afghanistan, or wherever the next mission is. The only part-time soldiers I heard about over there where the local guys...

Professionalism (as in the ability and desire to do a good job) in the Reserves is very high, and I'll go toe-to-toe with anyone who says different - where we are lacking as an organization is in the maintenance of skills and equipment - let's face it; one garrison evening a week, two weekends a month (field or range), and a couple of weeks in the summer would not allow _anyone_ to perform at their best on zero notice.

The other issue is, of course, cohesion. If a Reserve unit were to train up for and participate in an operational mission as a body (OK - so it's a dream world, but consider the argument, at least), they would probably perform at least on par with any equivalent body of regs. It's when individuals are tossed in to a section or platoon or HQ that we have issues that happen anywhere an outsider is suddenly introduced to an already existing team. In the cbt arms especially, this kind of disruption is magnified, and in the high-stress environment that is any operational mission (esp. something like Roto 0 in Afghanistan), the slightest friction can be magnified into something beyond belief. 

Thankfully, most (unfortunately, not all) soldiers that I have worked with have possessed the common sense, maturity, and professionalism to work through the problems with little more than some good-natured ribbing.

There are and always will be differences between regs and Res... and between Joe A and Jim B (although I prefer the differences between Joe A and Jane B - but that's me   ). If you are able to work through them, then maybe you're a better person for it. If you refuse to even try then, IMHO, you're not worth my time.


----------



## GO!!! (19 Jan 2005)

Well,
     I dont really have the time to rebut all of the responses to my statements, and I sense some hostility out there. I will end my participation in this thread with these thoughts.

My statements regarding the Mo are from my experience. I stand behind them 100%.

I am not denying that there may be reservists with potential out there - only that in 6 years I have yet to see one I would want in my sect.

I'll probably be teaching in Wx this summer - if we are'nt deployed, and any reservists I train will be to a high standard.

Judging by the response in this forum, I eagerly await one of the mo's to impress me.

ex coelis


----------



## aesop081 (19 Jan 2005)

GO!!! said:
			
		

> Well,
> I dont really have the time to rebut all of the responses to my statements, and I sense some hostility out there. I will end my participation in this thread with these thoughts.
> 
> My statements regarding the Mo are from my experience. I stand behind them 100%.
> ...



Only 6 years...maybe when you get some more time in you will change your views.


----------



## dutchie (19 Jan 2005)

GO!!! said:
			
		

> Well,
> I dont really have the time to rebut all of the responses to my statements, and I sense some hostility out there. I will end my participation in this thread with these thoughts.
> 
> My statements regarding the Mo are from my experience. I stand behind them 100%.
> ...



That was a well-thought out, reasonable, and mature post. I think you're wrong about the quality of reservists, but you put forth that opnion (in this last post) in an appropriate way. I can better understand now how you came to this position if you have never had a good experience with reservists, and I hope this is cleared up soon. 

Make sure you give reservisst a fair shake, though, as you clearly have some bias against us right now.

You will undoubtedly receive little flak for that post.


----------



## Brad Sallows (19 Jan 2005)

"You:" In other words you are saying that;

"From me": I certainly suggest they might have performed differently"

"You:"in that they is referring to all the fellas on the ground, right?

No, I was writing specifically about reservists.   I didn't pull the assessment that 5 months in-theatre made a difference out of my own nether regions.   Notwithstanding the sensitivities of all concerned, it's important to be honest about readiness and what it takes to be ready, and what sort of reserve training and evaluation regimes might be indicated.

There is likely a point at which cohesion doesn't improve remarkably with increased time working together, but I hazard a guess it doesn't happen during workups or in the first few weeks after deployment, or, for that matter, commitment to a major theatre of war.


----------



## Infanteer (19 Jan 2005)

I've attached the last post so that  Mr Sallows can defend his earlier statement (prior to the devolving bunfight), if anyone wishes to respknd, use the PM or start a new thread on "cohesion".

Infanteer Out


----------

