Project 2025

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(06-19-2024, 02:16 PM)Dill Wrote: I can agree with that. Though I don't agree that all military advancement must be directly related to "warfighting prowess". 

Some other comments in this section of project are odd, like the claim O6-O9 who have "actual battlefield experience" is at 
an all time low. Seems they could only get that in a war, which we supposedly don't want and don't have at the moment.

Also in Afghanistan, so far as I know, they only let company grade officers lead combat missions.  Colonels only left base
for big meetings with local head men or in Bagram or Kabul. I don't know if they count command of a FOB in a war zone 
to be actual battlefield experience.

Commanding troops in combat counts as combat experience.  Once you get to O6 and above you're not going to be directly involved in combat unless something has gone very wrong.

Quote:I do have a concern that legitimate trimming might be cover for re-shaping the military according to right wing or even
Christian Nationalist ideology. The Project makes of point using their more direct control of the DOD school system to
select what is "appropriate" for the curriculum. 

Does you concern extend to a similar thing happening as we speak?

https://www.defenseone.com/policy/2021/06/hundreds-troops-complain-about-woke-racism-extremism-training-cotton-claims/174672/

I realize the issues in the article are not directly substantiated, but I can say from personal experience with guys in the service, or have recently left (lots of my colleagues are/were reservists) that this is a common complaint.  That training on actual military matters is taking a backseat to these types of courses.  Wonder why recruitment levels are so low?  Because no one signs up to join the military to be hammered over the head with this type of crap.

I already know your counter will be this is all anecdotal, which is fair.  But it's also ignoring a very real problem.