Posted on 05/16/2005 8:45:17 PM PDT by mike6181
ROA Says BRAC Recommendation Raises Serious Concerns on Reserve Component, National Security
posted 5/13/2005
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
Washington (May 13, 2005)—Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld’s announcement this morning on Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) raises serious concerns on its impact on the Reserve Component in the U.S. Armed Forces.
While the announcement shows 33 major bases recommended for closure and 29 others for realignment, it does not provide details on more than 400 National Guard and Reserve installations and facilities included on the list. For example, the information that DoD provided gave no indication on the number of Guardsmen and Reservists that the recommendations would affect if they are approved by the president and Congress later this year. The number of installations and facilities affected, however, indicates thousands of Guardsmen and Reservists will be displaced.
The Reserve Officers Association supports efficiencies and savings that Congress envisioned when the first BRAC legislation was passed for the 1988 commission. However, the association has serious concerns about the nation maintaining the appropriate number of Reserve Forces that are trained and ready to defend the nation in time of war.
One of the most serious concerns is the impact on retention and future recruiting. By closing so many facilities, Reservists and Guardsmen may be required to travel hundreds of miles to drill every month. Many of these servicemen and women will not be able to afford the additional time and travel expense incurred and may choose to leave the military. The result could be a loss of skills and experience the military desperately needs.
Another concern is that the BRAC recommendations would lead to a severe impact on Reserve Forces if input from the recently formed Commission on the National Guard and Reserve is not considered. ROA strongly urges that input from this commission be reviewed before making far ranging decisions, especially when thousands of Guardsmen and reservists, local economies, and national defense are affected.
ROA will continue to monitor the BRAC recommendations and acquire more details, especially in how they affect the Reserve Component.
The Army Reserves and the Abrams Doctrine: Unfulfilled Promise, Uncertain Future by James Jay Carafano, Ph.D.
April 18, 2005 (Heritage Lecture #869)
Junking the policies justified by the Total Force Concept and the Abrams Doctrine may be a prerequisite for rethinking how the Reserves are organized, employed, ...
Looks like Rummy is hell bent on changing the force structure to expeditionary in a dramatic way. I hope he fully understands the recruiting/retention consequences of pulling the infrastructure plug on the RC, especially now.
From what I've read so far, the Pentagon has put a lot of thought into this round of the BRAC process -- maybe because they know they might not get another one in a long time. I don't think the Reserve Office Association has made a good argument that this round is unduly hostile to the reserves.
Actually, I think the MSM does a whole lot more than the Pentagon to mock and de-value reserve service. I can think of dozens of ways the Pentagon could improve reserve readiness at no cost (or at a cost savings to them). But if there's a problem with reserve recruiting and retention, let's not blame the Pentagon for something that's really caused by a sickness in our media.
Well, they didn't mobilize and deploy by themselves. That process begins at DoD and works downstream. My point is that Rumsfeld may be taking the right tack in transforming the force but he also has to consider the near and mid term consquences of depleting a large share of the force via lack of recruitment/retention from the RC. Most of that phenomenon can be attributed to repeating, lengthy deployments but closing facilities has an even bigger impact with RC units when they are back at home station reconstituting.
It's hard to convince RC soldiers to stay in if they now have to travel further to drill and may have to spend their own money for lodging due to lack of billets (some already do anyway). Combine these challenges with everything else that impacts on RC soldiers and we'll see recruiting/retention of RC units plummet even further (Maybe that's what Rumsfeld wants?).
Close too many active bases and we are going to have real problems. Nobody is going to want to drive eight hours one way each month to stay in the Reserves.
Trying to lease space at local airports is not an option in many cases. So the ground crews, flight crews and the pilots will retire when their contract is up.
Then what are we left with to defend America? Right now we have military forces in 135 countries. What would happen if these folks were all brought back home? Just where would we base them? The local hotels?
I worked with Reserve and Guard members on the AWACS and JSTARS planes. They worked as hard or harder than us regulars. In fact in AWACS they were often deployed right along side of us. If there is any "cr@pping" on them I do not think it comes from the commanders I was under.
Our current military bases and locations are seriously bloated and need trimming. Badly. Then the facilities we do have can recieve the TLC some desperately need.
Maybe in your case, but ask the average Reservist how they or thier families are treated at AD hospitals, for example. The USAF does a pretty good good job of taking care of these folks, the record for the Army is less than 'swell'
Most USAF bases now have a clinic, no hospital. We use Tri and get Care like everyone else.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.