kp2001

Thank you for putting me in the same class as Bill, I consider that quite the compliment.

kp2001

I'm going to assume this was in response to what I posted, so I will leave the rest of the post alone and respond to this. I will still stand by my assertion that being on active duty makes for more hardships than reserve duty. If you have "LOTS of DOD data" then post some links, and I'll be more than happy to respond to them. Are there "outlyers" in both categories, sure, but let's look at it on a whole.

Just one example that I was talking about today with someone: moving every 1-3 years. I'm currently active duty and in the past 2.1 years I have moved (PCS) 3 times. And not short moves either, NE to SE to NW. Now explain how a spouse is to 1)get and 2)keep a job with that schedule to add on to the fun of moving.


(I was going to avoid responding as I initially thought you were a troll, but seeing your posting history I see you're an '82 grad so figured I would instead respond. As an aside it's always nice to keep debate civil, no need to call people idiots even when you disagree with their positions)

jasperdog

KP2001 - Fair enough, wrong turn of phrase I apologize, you are definately not an idiot. That said I now understand you to be a Navy Physician so I find it hard to believe you are unaware of data and reports that say the current Ops Tempo and activation pace and duration on the Gaurd and Reserve associated with the on-going GWOT isn't putting excessive strain on our military and their families - regardless of whether they are Active Duty, apparently like yourself, or are in the national guard or reserve components. In any case the studies and reports that I've followed, read and base my opinions on are on a trail that starts with a 2003 GAO report to the Senate and House Armed Serivice committees here: http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d031004.pdf.

Following that trail will lead you to items such as a 2006 AIR COMMAND AND STAFF COLLEGE - AIR UNIVERSITY paper/theseis by an LTC that is titled "EFFECTS OF OPERATIONS TEMPO ON MOBILITY PILOT RETENTION IN THE RESERVE COMPONENTS" approved for public release and available on the www at: https://www.afresearch.org/skins/rim...rs=enginespage. Interestigly one of the statemetns in that paper whic I wholeheartedly agree with is: "Many people have traditionally thought of Guard and Reserve pilots as “weekend warriors” and that they would only be called to active duty after all other options had been exhausted. This is clearly not the case." The paper goes on to provide data to support this statement, it further chronicles and explains "While serving the Air Force, the part-timers must also factor in their family. Many issues effect families. Temporary Duty (TDY) and mobilizations result in family separations. This separation can be stressful for both the member and the spouse. Mobilizations may also affect health care benefits and monthly income." It gives details as to what that means and while active duty PCS every three years or so during their careers I would tell you in many instanes the lack of a similar support network for NG and Reservists who are activated and have their family lives impacted to a degree and frequency as the current GWOT causes, in some cases more so for certain career specialists, is something that current GAO, DOD and other studies have been completed on and are ongoing in response to Congressional Enquiries. I'd expect over the next 12 months, now that the NG is led by a 4 star general, these items will be better addressed and even more data will become available.

In response to your question " Just one example that I was talking about today with someone: moving every 1-3 years. I'm currently active duty and in the past 2.1 years I have moved (PCS) 3 times. And not short moves either, NE to SE to NW. Now explain how a spouse is to 1)get and 2)keep a job with that schedule to add on to the fun of moving. " If I make a leap here and suppose you are younger than I - say late 20's/early thirties while I'm 49 I will tell you this situation isn't unique to active duty military. I have had a 27 year Post KP career that has been pretty successful. To put that in motion I worked hard, took opportunities and moved frequently early in my career. In fact we got married in 1988 and between 1987 when we got engaiged and 1996 - nine years later - we moved 5 times. I'm not complaing, I'm just giving you the basis for my answers and letting you know you don't have to be on active duty to move around alot for your career. In fact I'll tell you over half the Kings Pointers I know move around the world more post graduation than most other folks. It's part of what makes us who we are and as successful as we are.

In our case we had some mitigating factors - 1) My wife is a nurse and finding employment in that career field isn't as hard as finding employment in many others. However like you we dealt with the stress and disatisfaction that uprooting yourselves from a job you like at a place you're happy with, and a social group (Church, etc.) you've just gotten to know and vice-versa and being "the trailing spouse" causes. 2) We tried the I'll go first and commute thing once - it didn't work well for both of us during the early stages of our marriage at all so we made a concious effort and some accomodations, she never had to work where she didn't like it wen we did these moves and if that meant tightening our belts and living on one income for a few months while she got settled that's what we did. She also picked all houses, churches and schools regardless of what advice I might get form folks I worked with. There were others but I'm sure you understand and are doing similar things. During those 9 years we sacrificed thigs so my career could move as quickly as possible though.
3)The end result is/was that in 1996 with our son entering first grade we made a concious decision to try and make our next move one of our last and to a place and position that would slow things down abit as far as relocation. That worked but again not without sacrifices. For two stints of almost two years a piece (mid 1998-mid 2000) and (early 2005 - late 2006) I traveled alot and basically lived away from our home here in VA in apartments my then employer provided me for as long as 8 weeks at a time. In one case in Turkey and another in NYC. Doing this allowed me to keep my career going without causing our family to move, don't get me wrong we talked about it but it didn't happen and at this point I'm glad - for us we made the right choices.

Bottom line from my perspective - we all make compromises and sacrifices to do something we want and achieve our goals. Me and my family did and it sounds like you and your family are too. I thank you for your service but I also have to believe you get a feeling of satisfaction and accomplishment out of it, like most all folks I know who pursue Active Duty Miulitary Careers do to. I don't begrudge you those feelings or think any less of your sacrifices because you get that sense of accomplishment. I also don't belittle the impacts and sacrifices on others who might be doing so as Gaurdsman or Reservists and I took exception to the way you characterized their contribution to our national defense. If you want more data or links I'll galdly send them individually but I wouldn't want to be condescending again so if you'd like to find them yourself I'd google search with keywords "DOD Data Stress On Reservists Ops Tempo" or similar.

No I''m not a troll nor do I think you are else I wouldn't have gone on this far. if you are a troll like I think the kid who started this thread is - then you got me and I hope you have a good belly laugh. Trust me when I say you don't want to google search "DOD Data Stress Reservists Suicide Rates" or "DOD Data Stress Divorce Rate" statisitcs which apparently ahppily held steady in 2007/2008 at just 3.3% per DoD (active, Guard and Reserve" -I highlight this because if it's only about data and not about people/anecdotes then you can make the case the military (all services - Active, Guard and Reserve) doesn't put stress on the family unit apparently any more than civilian life since the divorce rate doesn't seem too bad. Before you blast me - I don't believe that or share that view for a minute.

Thanks again and good luck in all you do.

kp2001

I'll have to flip through some of the links you give for the real data: believe me, I understand the op tempo of various units and subsets in the military.

As to the moving, the reason I use that is because those in the civilian sector have a choice to pursue their career by moving or can quit at anytime. Those on active duty do not have this choice (they made their bed when they signed on the dotted line.) You have to compare reservist vs active duty moves as those are the two categories we are debating here.

I would also recommend stepping back from the immediate optempo and instead look at what a 20 year career for a reservist looks like vs what a 20 year career for an active duty person looks like. They are way different and this is why I say an active duty person has more hardships than a reservist. Prior to this war starting when was the last time a Guard or Reserve unit was called up to do OCONUS work? During that time the active duty folks were still going on 6 mos deployments, still doing all the exercises away from home, still going to Kosovo/Somalia/etc. The reservists were for the most part were continuing their weekend a month/two weeks a year routine.

I don't belittle the hardships that a reservist makes, but there are added hardships for those on active duty....but anyway, welcome to the board...I look forward to many healthy debates in the future, but I think we'll find we agree more often than disagree.

Bill0510

Nor is anyone devaluing the necessity of a maritime industy, a medical industyr, or any other component of what makes this country work. Put in a popular context, we are ALL winners and important to making this country work.
I come from a law enforcment background; my family was/is in law enforcement and I worked in federal law enforcement for many years. Do law enforcement officers [in this context federal law enforcement officers] serve their country? Of course, but they are being paid to do a job.

THE SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE is that our [my] education was not paid for by the US taxpayer. MMA graduates are granted a largesse that FAR EXCEEDS that granted to graduates of the other service academies. If one compares earnings over a twenty-year career [assuming one stays in the military services] against the service provided [active versus rserve duties], there simply is no comparison. [Even if the reservists is placed in harm's way for a year or two. KP2001 is a prime example of giving up earnings capacity to "serve his country" in exchange fo rhis education.] BUT, as I mentioned before, this is the bargain currently in effect for America. GREAT! My advice to any youngster would be, if you don't ming going to sea, to take advantage of the situation if you can. There is no resentment. The opportunity is there; if you qualify TAKE IT! What a country!!!!

Yet you attempt to link USMMA grads with State Maritime Grads in teh same boat as surgeons [and, presumably, law enforcement officers, payroll disbursement officers, reservists who hand statistical analysis, naval reserve officers based in Minnesota] along with those active duty sailors, marines, and soldiers who are serving in teh front lines. THE SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE is the USMMA grads have had their educaitonal costs subsidized, almost, in their entirety. The state maritime grads, at least, paid for their educaiton along w/ the rest of us.

The MMA made a lot of sense in a WWII [and maybe even in a Korean/Vietnam] environment. It makes less such sense in today's environment. If the taxpayers are going to pay for the merchant mariner's education, then perhaps an active duty commitment [similar to that required of other service acadmies] should be required. If graduates [as was originally posted] desire some measure of respect similar to that granted to graduates of the other service acadmies [and is granted to MMA graduates who go active duty], then they should be prepared [required?] to serve the same commitment. Otherwise, MMA is just a cost-free ride on the taxpayer's back for some lucky kids.

Finally, as is typical of many on these threads, your opening salvo seeks to attack the poster, not the content of their post. [As is VERY evident in the other thread where MMA's existence is questioned. WHile I appreciate that the original poster is probably a disgruntled MMA reject, it would be interesting to read about why the MMA should even exist rather than attacks on how inconsistent/ignorant the poster is.] Are SOME reserve components heavily involved in this current war on terrorism [are we still calling it that?]? Sure. Are some MMA graduates involved w/ these units? Probably. The point is, over the long term, active duty service is more demanding compared to a reserve service of comparable length.

Just remember, we are ALL important to making this country work. [Or, at least, we all like to THINK we are important to making this country work.] The original thread asked why USMMA does not receive the same level of respect for "serving their country." I think its because they are being PAID to serve their country in a way that far exceeds what others receive to "serve their country."

But that's just us posting on a goofy college website. I don't think anything is going to change. Ce' la vie good buddy.