Where I Stand — Mike O’Callaghan: Army is fooling itself

Friday, Nov. 3, 2000 | 10:03 a.m.

Mike O'Callaghan is the Las Vegas Sun executive editor.

Recently, when I was at the Pentagon, the uniforms with stars, bars, leafs and eagles were in Washington meeting with the Association of the United States Army, a professional support group. The biggest story coming from the gathering was made by Gen. Eric K. Shinseki. Army Chief of Staff Shinseki made note last April of the big losses of junior officers and promised to take action resulting in greater retention.

I hope his answer to this problem wasn't what he told the association about all U.S. Army units soon to wear berets. He said it "will be a symbol of unity, a symbol of Army excellence, a symbol of our values." This is like writing machine gun on a revolver and painting tank on an old 6x6 truck. No matter what you call something or how you dress it up, the quality of the person or equipment doesn't improve. The tank is still a truck and the revolver is still a gun.

A better start to improve Army morale would be to improve the training and physical demands. When you see a green beret you know that the Army Special Forces soldier is well-trained and ready to meet stiff challenges. The same can be said for the airborne soldiers wearing a maroon beret and the Army Rangers wearing a black beret. No matter what uniform these special combat units wear, their quality is recognized both in peace and war.

On the other hand, I'm willing to question the belief of some observers that the wide use of the beret will detract from the morale of the special units now allowed to use them. Polishing the leather belt and large brass buckle for my Marine Corps uniform was always something special. Going home after boot camp before leaving for overseas, that belt and buckle around my blouse were something special.

A few years later the Corps removed the belt and buckle. There was plenty of Marine grousing about taking this symbol from the "old Corps." Remember, any Marine with more than a day or two more time in service always looked askance at the boot who came later. The quality of Marine boot camp didn't deteriorate and the Corps survived the loss of the distinguishing belt and buckle. So will the Special Forces, Rangers and airborne troops survive the watering down of their dress distinction.

What should concern the Army is that putting a beret on every soldier won't make him, or in this case her, special. The only way to make him or her special is to demand tougher training and special combat skills. This isn't what the new Army recruit is receiving today, and neither is the new sailor nor airman. Recent studies prove that soldiers in 1946 were much better prepared, and more physically ready for combat, than the soldiers today. Remember, these were young men without proper diets during the Great Depression.

Lt. Gen. Bernard E. Trainor, USMC (Ret.), better known as Mick, when recalling the early days in Korea, in June told large conferences in Canada and the United States commemorating the 50th anniversary of the start of the Korean War:

"The one exception among U.S. ground forces was my own service, the Marines, who though reduced to only 74,000 men remained combat-oriented during the five years of peace following the Second World War. In the words of Clay Blair, author of 'The Forgotten War,' the majority of the Marine commanders and non-coms were combat experienced infantrymen who had fought in the Pacific War. The ranks were filled with physically tough young men who had joined the Corps to fight, not sightsee.

"The Marines performed admirably from the day they stepped ashore in the Pusan perimeter in the summer of 1950, through the Inchon landing in September of that year, through the bitter fight with the Chinese at the Chosin Reservoir in the first winter of the war and in the subsequent allied counteroffensives of 1952."

The same can be said for some special Army units that were eventually broken up and sent into regular infantry units because of their high losses in combat. Trainor, when continuing his speech, added:

"I do not make this comparison to belittle the Army, but to make a point, because by the time I arrived in Korea there was little difference between the Army and Marines. The Army had become battle-hardened (though at a frightful price in men and equipment)."

This latest move to put a beret on every soldier won't improve their quality as combat soldiers. This is just another cheap way of allowing a bunch of soldiers to pretend they are something they really aren't. Eventually, when special combat units are needed for action, these quality fighting units will find some new way to distinguish themselves from units with lesser training.