Got to get tougher in a hurry: David H. Hackworth says U.S. military not making the grade

Every week, fewer American flags are flying from cars and homes. And it becomes easier to rationalize Sept. 11 as a terrible tragedy that happened to the folks in some other town rather than the ongoing threat to our way of life that this century's Day of Infamy really represents.

But out there in the global trenches, the war against international terrorism grows bloodier by the day, and as a consequence, more coffins draped with American flags will be turning up at Dover Air Force Base.

The first round in Afghanistan is still far from over, and then there are rounds two through 30: the running sore in the Middle East, and Saddam's weapons of mass destruction; ex-Yugoslavia, where we have thousands of soldiers keeping that fragile peace; and dozens of other Bad Lands either on fire or waiting to ignite.

This complicated conflict won't be won by the smartness of munitions or the sagacity of diplomats, but by the grunt on the ground digging out the terrorist and either nailing him or jailing him. There's no way we'll prevail and protect Main Street USA without tough, well-trained soldiers.

Having led infantry squads, platoons, companies and battalions in combat for a bunch of years, I know that to make it on the battlefield, grunts must be granite-hard both in body and mind, have the discipline of a Spartan warrior, know the basics of the fighting trade as well as what's on their dog tags, always sleep with one eye open and be able to shoot as straight and as fast as a Delta Force sniper.

But during the first serious fight involving U.S. conventional troops in Afghanistan, our soldiers were far from up for the game. They fought well but were just not strong enough for the rugged mountains of Afghanistan.

The commander of the operation, Gen. Tommy Franks, pulled our boys out of the battle early so they could catch their breath and brought in 1,700 fighting-fit British Marines. The British media recently reported that Franks said, "The British troops may be more accomplished at some aspects of infantry warfare than their U.S. counterparts." The report added, "They know how to walk up mountains. ... They don't expect to be given a ride in a helicopter every time they want to get somewhere."

The poor physical condition of so many of our soldiers was no big surprise to me. When I eyeballed our kids going through initial training last year in a warm-and-fuzzy basic course that's been made shockingly softer than the one I took 56 years ago, I concluded from my visits and the comments of scores of Army small-unit leaders that many of these boys and girls – some of whom could barely do two push-ups when they first reported to the Army Reception Station – wouldn't make it in battle.

Last week, 50 highly motivated recent graduates of Fort Benning's basic and advanced training programs and the storied Parachute School reported to Fort Bragg to prepare for further training that would allow them to join our elite Special Forces units.

"On Monday they took the PT test," a trainer there told me, "and over half of them failed to meet the standard."

So after eight weeks of basic, five weeks of infantry advanced training and three weeks of parachute training, more than 50 percent of this group of young soldiers couldn't pass the push-ups, sit-ups and two-mile run.

"We aren't talking about some way-out SF standard, but the bare minimum required for any soldier to graduate basic training," reports another Special Forces sergeant. "If this is representative of what's happened to infantry basic training, I'm afraid to even ask what the hell is going on at the co-ed basic programs of Fort Jackson and Fort Leonard Wood."

Our generals must bite the bullet and insist that the kinder, gentler standards that have castrated the conventional Army during the past decade be rooted out. Training must be returned to the reality-based standard that used to prepare our grunts to make it through the crucible of combat – or we'll continue to fail when and where it counts.

Exceptional women will always exceed the physical results of many men. However, Armies are built with large populations. Anecdotal accounts of 90+%'ile women don't mean much. Women, on average, are much weaker than men, and are thus generally unable to haul heavy rucks long distances, unload a truck full of fresh ordinance rapidly, break track on an AFV and repair it, etc.

Thank you...I was slowly seeing this thread being turned into a bash the women thread again...I spent 10 1/2 yrs in the Army and saw many women who were/were not phsycally fit and able or not to do the job..and saw men who were/were not...Equal Standards is the key.

Agreed that equal standards are the key - just not a weakened standard changed to accomodate weaker women, in a bow to political correctness. This is what has happened, from what I can tell, and is the root of the problem Hack is railing against.

Agreed that equal standards are the key - just not a weakened standard changed to accomodate weaker women, in a bow to political correctness.

There are two sets of standards, one for men and one for women. The women get it easier on the run and push-ups, while the two are fairly close on sit-ups.

unload a truck full of fresh ordinance rapidly

I offered to help some 155mm howitzer guys once (I was bored). I could barely unload a truck full of fresh ordnance. That's HEAVY! This gives "back-breaking work" a new definition. Oh, and remind them not to fire when you're standing next to the drive wheel.

Going after women in general is wrong though. If you want to do a certain job, pass the test, that's it. You can't be a gun bunny without serious upper arm strength (in the 90 percentile for men, too), so there should be by-occupation standards. If a woman can make the cut, go for it.

Interesting. Easter Sunday I ran into a former 101 Airborne sergeant who told me that the marked decline in the physical fitness of incoming recruits first made itself known to him in the early '90s. Ordinarily, new recruits are called "cherries" by veteran troops. But the breed of recent high school grads that began to show up en masse in boot camps was so physically inept that many were simply referred to as "stems," because cherry would have implied too much substance. Majority could neither run nor do push-ups - and these were 18 year old males who should have been in the best physical shapes of their lives. I'm 36 years old. Does anyone in my age group recall physical education courses in high school? My instructor for all four years, Mr. Austin, a Korean War combat vet, ran us a couple miles and had us do 50 push ups every day. Most of us were like wiry rocks when we grabbed our diplomas and headed for the hills of university life.

My instructor for all four years, Mr. Austin, a Korean War combat vet, ran us a couple miles and had us do 50 push ups every day.

You haven't been near a high school lately, have you? It's all teaching you how to do basic sports, showing you what the weightlifting equipment looks like. Unless you're lucky, there's not much emphasis on actually getting physically fit.

"Every week, fewer American flags are flying from cars and homes.

This is just one more sign that Americans are not taking the war seriously … but the fact that the number of military volunteers never increased – even marginally – shows that Americans NEVER took the war seriously in the first place.

Hopefully having a Commander-in-Chief who actually is fit …

Bush may be more physically fit than Clinton, but that doesn’t excuse the fact that he has retained the hard core of Clinton’s bureaucrats and administrators in his administration. I’d prefer to have a president who has a little ideological backbone, than one who can run 3 miles in 20 minutes.

I've got to agree with your assessment of high school P.E. If my son weren't in sports, he wouldn't be in any shape at all from the regular curriculum. This is in a good quality private school, but I don't think the public schools are any better. In fact, they're probably worse, because they are so much bigger, and I expect there's a much smaller percentage of the student body involved in varsity athletics. We have around 400 students grades 9-12, and six spring sports (baseball, soccer, track, lacrosse, golf, tennis, both boy's and girl's for each), so there's plenty of room, lots of encouragement to be involved. In one of those humongous public AAAAA schools with 3000-4000 students, I can't imagine that's the case, even with J.V. teams.

We should not be falling back on our National Guard and Reserves as Battle Ready Units.

It is very disturbing to realize that we cannot even piss on Afghanistan without calling up the Reserves and National Guard. I may be wrong, but I don’t recall any Reserve UNITS being called up for Vietnam – only some Reserve individuals. The American Military sure has come a long way …. (baby)!

"...many of these boys and girls – some of whom could barely do two push-ups when they first reported to the Army Reception Station – wouldn't make it in battle."

*********

Dear Col. Hackworth:

I find your assessment of the condition of the United States military somewhat extreme.

So what if Suzie and Johnny can't do more than two pushups? Isn't it enough for a Neanderthal like youself that our military is now more ethnically and sexually diverse that ever before?

I think your comments have earned you a "time out." Our girls and boys might not be the grizzled men of Iwo Jima, but their self-esteem has never been higher. Don't believe me? Well then, just ask them yourself.

Good day Mr. Hackworth, and please contain any future criticism of our military to the VFW halls.

Signed,

Col. "Biff" Fontelroy

The first thing that needs to be done (but will not be) is remove all females from anywhere near combat arms training!

Without a doubt … George Bush, Where are you?

My liberal neighbor’s liberal wife could not understand my adamant opposition to having certain Navy ships with 1/3 female crews. I had to explain that it can only result in a crew that is 1/3 female, 1/3 VERY HAPPY male, and 1/3 VERY DISGRUNTLED male. (not to mention the many ANGRY wives)! It’s certainly no way to run a Navy.

I think your comments have earned you a "time out."

Funny you say that. A new concept in basic training is a "stress card." If things are getting too tough for you, and you're getting too stressed out, just show the card and the drill sergeant has to lay off of you for a while.

Good thing to teach the young recruits: "Excuse me Mr. Taliban, this battle's getting too tough, so here's my time out card. Come back and shoot at me later."

Where's Patton when you need him to just slap someone?

#36: A stress card?????

But wont Suzie and Johnny expect similar treatment when they enter the working world?

Turn out the lights, the party is over.

I've been voting (mostly) R since 1968 and for what???????

But wont Suzie and Johnny expect similar treatment when they enter the working world?

The comedy is I was told this by NCOs who experienced a fresh-out-of-training private trying to use one on them. Apparently it wasn't a pretty aftermath.

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.