I'd like to add to my previous comment. I have nothing but the highest respect for those particular soldiers and the Rangers.

I do have a problem with a chain of command that would send them anywhere in Afghanistan without the proper equipment. In this case, holsters and ammunition. The chain of command is who failed. These Rangers still have to eat, and they can't get into the DFAC without a weapon.

I'm a former Marine officer and would never have allowed my Marines to go anywhere like this. Actually my NCOs would have taken care of it long before I saw it.

The Rangers were embarassed, and totally professional in their explanation. And as a resident of BAF (POG), I felt terrible confronting these brave men. However, I did want to address the problem of unsecured weapons and flagging people. And the Afghan DFAC employee continued to stand over us the whole time. They did make me feel better about the situation when they said that their inserted magazine was empty (although it's ridiculous to carry empty magazines in weapons).

When you can't accomplish the important, the petty becomes important.

I was in South-Central Iraq in 2008, on a multinational FOB which had been getting rocketed fairly regularly. A conventional brigade showed up; they were living in tents due to lack of CHU space, and highly vulnerable to IDF. They did not go out on a single raid that I know of to get the guys who were lighting the FOB up (fortunately, others did.) The only times those guys went outside the wire, it was to ferry their senior leadership across the province for unproductive key leader engagements (they killed an Iraqi police guy with an MRAP while going through a checkpoint on one of those field trips.) You know what their senior leadership's priorities were? Doing away with takeout trays at the DFAC (since, according to the brigade's CSM, the local nationals working on base were sneaking food out to feed to the insurgents) and enforcing ludicrous uniform standards (all brigade personnel had to wear gloves outside-in August-to avoid sunburning their hands, and noncompliance meant an Article 15.) I had to pry their CSM off one of my junior guys at breakfast one morning-we'd just come back in the wire after being out all night, and he didn't like my dude's uniform.

The main issue is this-a LOT of the senior leadership is lost in the sauce, has no idea what's going on or how to accomplish anything concrete. So, they attempt to make themselves feel like they're in control of the situation via a) imposing ludicrous chickenshit on those below them, and b) spending most of their time liaising with other senior Americans, doing coordination meetings, briefings, etc., etc., etc. That way, they feel like they are in control of their environment, and never have to encounter anything which would suggest differently. All this is done at the expense of their subordinates and of the war in general, but that's ok.

When an Arab guerrilla smashed his truck loaded with explosives into the Marine barracks in Beirut 28 years ago, setting off a blast that lifted the multistorey building right off its foundations and killing more than 200 Americans, it was because he could drive his vehicle right past the armed Marine guard in the building forecourt; and as ordered, the guard's firearm was unloaded.

This and the parking sign article are a complete failure of senior NCO leadership. I have been a POG, a grunt, a NCO and an officer. The majority of officers and junior NCO's could give to #$%^'s less about PT belts, parking signs, etc etc etc. and the ones that do are idiots. Commanding officers sign off on these policies at the suggestion of their CSM's and if the officer comes up with it and the CSM doesn't step in then shame on him. Do you really think that Petraues during his morning update brief was concerned with the number of PT belt tickets the night before or the number of soldiers that were killed. There are way to many senior NCO's in POG units in charge of these bases and this is a clear indication of having nothing to do but trying to feel self important. I'm willing to place money that the majority of these guys have never had to actually go outside of the wire on any type of regular basis. Most of the senior enlisted were E-7 and E-8 at the onset our current conflict. I guarantee that if they had to walk a mile in the shoes of these rangers, 11b's or any one else that goes outside the wire on a normal basis they would dump these idiotic rules. It is easy to see how there is a distinct line between the POG's and the combat arms guys. I have not deployed since becoming an officer but I have heard horror stories of guys still on the flight line post flighting their aircraft and being yelled at by the CSM to blouse their boots. On a recent training mission myself and a couple of other pilots were berated by our CSM for not having a PT belt on like he did. The sun hadn't even set yet. The problem is that we have been told our whole career that CSM's are gods. They are not and for every good one there are at least three that shouldn't have been given stripes in the first place. I wish i could tell you a solution to the problem but it start somewhere when a E-7 stops leading soldiers directly. If you think i'm crazy take a look around and see where these dumb rules are coming from. The biggest problem with these CSM is that everyone else is running around trying to get #$%^ done, and these CSM's want to have a job too. I have a suggestion for every CSM. Go out to the ARV or the Pakistani border and wear your PT belt for a couple of days and see how long you make it!

since rangers travel to and from theater with their weapons. At least when I rode out with them.

The compilation of rear-echelon silliness in this and the companion threads is both funny and discouraging. But wouldn't the REMF types be ruling the roost no matter what war we're talking about, whether it's WW2, Korea, Vietnam, or the Gulf? It seems like human nature. Maybe some of the Vietnam vets on the blog can elaborate, but Danang was our biggest base during the Vietnam War, and there are many stories about the culture clash between the line troops and the comfortable rear echelon culture at Danang. I think the big question is not why CSM's and REMF types behave so predictably....rather, it's why we build such big (and even bigger) bases. Granted, we have big logistical tail to support, but has the Army culture gone "over the top" with these bases? The next time we do this, are we going to have a Walmart on one of these bases?

This has a simple, obvious solution. You lie and say you're on suicide watch. Worked for me when I got stuck on KAF after turning in my weapon to go on R&R. Though only one person ever challenged me on not having a weapon.

By the way, our brigade's policy was even more idiotic - we convoyed or took helicopters, but more often convoyed, from our FOB to KAF without weapons when going on R&R, since the brigade wanted to keep the weapons with the unit at the outlying FOB.

Ideally the Rangers would be within the post policies. Sometimes you miss the forest for the trees though.

Now as for carrying weapons on a FOB(I am talking about the mega FOBs; BAF, KAF, etc) and into the chow, my personal view is that it's completely stupid. Besides the transient war fighters stopping on their way through, most of the people on the FOBs are staff/support/contractors. Most of these people probably haven't zerored within the last month(which caused the zero to be lost has by dropping the weapon, it being kicked while on the floor at the chowhall, optic loosening, etc), haven't done any marksmanship training continously before or during deployment, haven't lubricated their weapons recently, haven't cleaned their magazines & pmcs'd the magazine they carry around. For those FOBBITs(esp staff, esp staff officers) carrying pistols, the situation is even worse. In addition to all those reasons listed above, they have probably had little if any pistol training, have no muscle memory on clearing malfunctions, sweeping the safety, drawing the M9 from their holster, and are guarented to miss the 1st shot by 4-5 ft with the M9's double action.

If there is an active of shooter in the chowhall, I do not want 99.9% of the people in the chowhall taking any shots. If the base is attacked, again I don't want 99.9% of the people running around inside the base shooting. If the outside of the base is attacked, I am assuming risk that the towers and guards will be able to kill or delay the attackers long enough for the QRF or for additional war fighters in their unit areas to arrive.

The other pillar to my argument is for every shot fired in anger(against the enemy and not the clearing barrel, fellow service member, etc) by the POG with his/her weapon on a FOB, there are thousands of weapons lost/left/misplaced at the chow hall, MWR, buses, etc, resulting in thousands of lost man hours searching and counseling those who lost their weapons and degrading mission readiness.

Therefore, mandated weapons carrying on mega FOBs is more dangerous and a drain on man power than not carrying weapons.

And for those who would state that POGs need to be reminded that they are still in a combat zone, I say have them wear their body armor around. I saw the Air Force cdr on Kirkuk Air Field mandate all AF packs wear their armor one day a week(I forget the specified day) to remind them that they were still in a war zone. The 2nd and 3rd order effects of this policy were that the AF pax skipped meals on that day(so as not to have to walk with their armor) which caused them to be less fat and I always scheduled my refit days to coincide so we didn't have to wait in line at the chowhalls.

Merry Christmas ,Christmas top gift
==== http://www.fashion-long-4biz.com ====

In some units, soldiers with mental issues get to keep their Rifle- to get into the chow hall and to maintain the their personnal bearing in front of other soldiers. Their bolt just gets taken from them....

It's been over forty years since I was on active duty. My daughter, son in law and now grandson are however still active. I enjoy reading The Best Defense. I'm sure many other do too. It helps keep me somewhat up to date on goings on. Much better than main stream media.

What I find troubling is the extensive use of acronyms in comments, and even many articles and blogs.

Perhaps there might be more traffic and or participation if there were a roadmap to the meaning of all the acronyms. Some terms might be easliy interpretated but often times it's like reading an incomplete post. Perhaps someone might present a code. Years ago there was something similar. It was the Charlie Echo Code, (no relation).

836