Army Pissed That Soldiers Aren't Happy

[Minimalist]

What a surprise!

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/natio.../24897455/

Army morale low despite 6-year, $287M optimism program

More than half of some 770,000 soldiers are pessimistic about their future in the military and nearly as many are unhappy in their jobs, despite a six-year, $287 million campaign to make troops more optimistic and resilient, findings obtained by USA TODAY show.

Why don't you try not putting them in positions to get their balls blown off by a bunch of towel-heads who don't want our "help?"

[Nope]

Soldiers often have to do more then one tour in dangerous areas. Of course they aren't happy.

[AFTT47]

It looks like this report is indeed indicative of the U.S. Army. I must point out that reports like this can be deceptive because of the unfortunate tendency to use the word 'army' in a generic way to mean 'military'. Those of us (like me) who have served in any capacity in the U.S. military almost always respect those serving in other services despite our tendency to joke about their deficiencies (perceived or real) compared to those of our own. The Marines are most often the recipients of those jokes but the Army isn't far behind. The U.S. Navy and the U.S. Air Force  (which I served in) are part of the U.S. military but are NOT the Army. Please take note that what goes on in that particular branch of the service is not necessarily indicative of what goes on in other branches.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Incessant deployments to unpopular wars ... I could have told them this and only charged eight or ten million.

[KUSA]

If they aren't happy they:

1. Shouldn't have joined.

2. Should get out when their time obligated time is up.

It isn't a country club and wasn't meant to be.

[Anomalocaris]

It probably has a lot more to do with:

1. The U.S. used 9-11 as excuse to spent well beyond our means to beef up our military in a failed afford to use military power to lock in a geopolitical hegemonic position though installation of pliant, subservient governments across Middle East and Central Asia. It is now clear to everyone that the 2001-2012 military expansion bought absolutely nothing lasting that is good for the U.S., and the military will needs to be sharply reduced and kept at a reduced level for a long time in order to pay the bills. As a result, those who joined the military when it was bloated would have few opportunities open to them for future career advancement.
2. While the bloating US military was killing and wounding G.Is while doing no lasting good for the U.S., those patriotic volunteers who joined the military in their flush of nation pride had begun to notice American appreciation for their sacrifices consist large of speeches, flags, and parades. There was much lower than expected level of the kind of appreciation which really matters - taking care of those who were wounded and traumatized by their services.
So the upshot is US military would not offer many career advancement opportunities for career soldiers, and if you were to be wounded in service to your country, the country would not thank you in ways that would really matter.

[Thumpalumpacus]

As someone who has directly experienced the shitty service of the VA, I can say that that is what pisses me off most. We owe combat casualties the best treatment we can give.

[Jackalope]

As someone who has directly experienced the shitty service of the VA, I can say that that is what pisses me off most. We owe combat casualties the best treatment we can give.

This.

I gave up on the VA 20 years ago.

There's an old saying, attributed to Patton, I think "The time when you worry about a soldier is when he stops bitching", but I don't think it really applies here.

[Polaris]

The problem with many enlisted personnel is they work on equipment that has no equivalent in the civilian world, so all their specialized training ends up being pretty much useless once they get out of the service.

[Minimalist]

It looks like this report is indeed indicative of the U.S. Army. I must point out that reports like this can be deceptive because of the unfortunate tendency to use the word 'army' in a generic way to mean 'military'. Those of us (like me) who have served in any capacity in the U.S. military almost always respect those serving in other services despite our tendency to joke about their deficiencies (perceived or real) compared to those of our own. The Marines are most often the recipients of those jokes but the Army isn't far behind. The U.S. Navy and the U.S. Air Force  (which I served in) are part of the U.S. military but are NOT the Army. Please take note that what goes on in that particular branch of the service is not necessarily indicative of what goes on in other branches.

You're correct, which is why I specified Army as that was the branch that has the problem. 

It is also true that the Army is the branch which has borne the most shit from Bush's wars.  The burden falls disproportionately on one branch.

Then you have the civilians with their "Support Our Troops" car magnets and "Jesus Loves You" bumper stickers.  But that is about as far as the "support" goes.