Transactional vs. Transformational Recruits

[rangerrebew]

Fri, 02/24/2023 - 7:30pm
Transactional vs. Transformational Recruits
By Brandon Sanders
 

“Why do the support MOSs tend to have the most issues?” my battalion commander asked me. It took me a second to formulate an answer from the years of work as a chaplain, advanced education, and untold study hours concerning the human condition and military life.
“I have no idea.”

My analysis warranted a shoulder shrug from him, but my lack of understanding of something so basic nearly drove me insane. Why do our cooks, fuelers, mechanics, and other non-combat arms Soldiers tend to contribute an untold amount of workload to the Soldier support structure of the Army?

Trying to understand why the Soldiers sitting on my couch were much more likely to work in supply and not the infantry became an obsession for me. They weren’t recruited differently. The combat support and service support jobs were generally easier for the same pay. As a national guard battalion, they even came from the same communities.

https://smallwarsjournal.com/jrnl/art/transactional-vs-transformational-recruits

[catfish1957]

This was a pretty fascinating read, but I have my own theories on why our miltary grunts have more aspirations towards  support roles, versys  carrying a gun and bayonet.

If you think about it, we haven't been in a war that has truly directly threatened our boundries of a nation since 1945.  From wikpedia, since World War 2, there have been 17 finite countable conflicts of varying levels that we have been involved in .  Some were pretty inert, but some like Korea, Vietnam, and WOT  came at great loss of life.

So after almost 80 years, you got to believe that these ranks are getting pretty jaded in their thinking of their disdain for  bold politicans in the comfort of their DC seats are viewing the value of their lives, and may seem like pawns  in a continous loop of proxy wars. 

In the aftermath of 9-11, I was as "rah rah" as they came in thinking what level of military intevention was needed to save the American Way.   I have changed a lot in 20 years, and am coming to the understanding that these endless proxy wars knows no party affiliation, and that more sinister elements were in play.   And most had minimal impact security of this country, considering the scale we invoked warfare. 

So, when giving thought to the support and sabre rattling that I see now with Ukraine?  I am reminded to the true fact that this is a regional conflict. So,  I say let the region fight it, and not risk a single U.S. life, or risk the probablity of inflicting World War 3.  Why isn't the likes of UK, Germany, and France responding so vigoursly? 

Zellinskyyyy and his grift is not worth one single American Serviceman's life the chaplain in this article describes.

[rangerrebew]

Plus, being in a nice war is a time proven political strategy for stimulating the economy by replacing  weapons, shells, missiles, etc. expended or lost