Article Archive: Current 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics
Paramilitary: Refitting The Guard
   Next Article → MYANMAR: Promises
January 16, 2010: The U.S. National Guard (NG) is the modern version of the centuries old militia forces. Long stuck with castoff weapons and equipment from the regular army, the war in Iraq has unexpectedly changed this. NG troops were heavily used in Iraq (less so in Afghanistan), and this led to vast improvements in their training, combat experience and equipment. The army bought vast quantities of new gear for everyone sent to Iraq. Not just replacements for existing stuff, but many newly designed items. The NG quickly wore out their existing, already threadbare, equipment and weapons in Iraq. At first, replacement stuff was slow to come, but a public outcry over the shortages solved the problem. The NG now has more modern, and recently manufactured, equipment than they have had in a long time. The NG is even getting the latest computerized combat simulations and UAVs. This is having some interesting impacts on what the NG does most of the time; disaster relief.

Except when "federalized" (for combat duty), the NG troops are controlled by the state governor. In that role, they are used for natural emergencies or cases of civil disorder. NG troops are now trained for counter-terrorism operations as well. Many NG troops are former active duty soldiers (usually for four years) in the army, and join the NG for the extra money, and because they are familiar and comfortable with the work. Most NG units are in suburban or rural areas, where the army pay is often higher than the local averages, and thus a good way to pick up some extra money in what is essentially a part time job. A lot of the NG volunteers for the active army were inspired by patriotism, and the fact that they would be making more than their current job.

The NG is also reducing its strength, from 362,000 to 358,000. The additional troops are no longer needed, because National Guard units are not needed as much as they were during the peak years in Iraq (2004-7). The reduction is going to be done by raising recruiting standards, and eliminating re-enlistment bonuses. Among the changes for recruiters is a reducing of the minimum age from 42 to 35 and the elimination of medical and bad conduct (criminal record) waivers. Normally, a lot of medical and criminal justice problems (an arrest record, even a minor one) would keep you from enlisting. But during 2004-7, more exemptions for these problems were granted. No more. Also, commanders have been told to grant discharges more liberally (whether the soldier wants to get out, or the commander wants to "fire" a misbehaving trooper.)

 

 

Next Article → MYANMAR: Promises
  

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
trenchsol       1/17/2010 1:13:30 AM
Far as I can understand, the article says that Army is paying NG in USA. Is that correct ? One would expect federal states to bear the cost...... Why is that so ?
 
DG

 
Quote    Reply

49erDweet       1/17/2010 7:55:55 PM

DG asked:  .".......... One would expect federal states to bear the cost...... Why is that so ?   The US is properly a "federal state" of sorts on its own, so your question makes little sense. 
 
Did you mean why don't the various states pay NG members directly?   If so, they do most of the time unless the unit has been "activated" to full time service by the Army.  Then their pay comes through normal military channels.  Otherwise, states pay the members directly but are usually reimbursed by the US to keep NG units "combat ready" [ie: effective]. That way the cost for normal training and meetings is ultimately borne by the entire country, but most taxpayers don't delve into that very far.




 
Quote    Reply

Cannoneer No. 4    Because the States lost control of their militias in 1903   1/17/2010 9:09:47 PM

Far as I can understand, the article says that Army is paying NG in USA. Is that correct ? One would expect federal states to bear the cost...... Why is that so ?
After 9 years of mobilization and activation in support of what are now termed Overseas Contingency Operations, the only real difference between Reserve units and National Guard units is the State disaster relief and riot control role. The Central Government in Washington City suffers the States of this Union to employ some elements of the Reserve Components for local emergencies.
 
 
Quote    Reply

trenchsol       1/19/2010 7:25:38 AM
Thanks for the answers, especially 49erDweet.
 
DG

 
Quote    Reply