2 ms·
I'll disagree that it's hard to get people "capable of adapting." And I also resent the implications. The Service however is increasingly ossified. It increasi
by halJordan 3y ago
I'll disagree that it's hard to get people "capable of adapting." And I also resent the implications.
The Service however is increasingly ossified. It increasingly wants to ossify. And Cyber is of course the perfect example.
The Navy was charged with building something like ten Cyber Mission Teams and instead of doing that they just battle-rostered the key individuals to whatever team was being externally inspected. For years; and Navy leadership is totally unrepentant.
The Army? Not much different. The Army cannot keep talent in the ranks. So Congress mandates incentive pay for key workroles. If enlistedmen demand their Congressionally mandated pay the 22-year veterans get pissed off at the 'mercenary' young people who don't adapt to the all-consuming Mission.
Despite the fact that the DoD Civilians earn twice as much for the Exact Same Role.
- CobaltFire 3y agoI thought I was fairly open that I don’t necessarily consider the failure of many of our recruits to adapt to be their problem; the military isn’t a very good way to live. Specifically, I was very nearly a fatal failure to adapt (suicidal attempt), and am speaking from that perspective. There is much they could do to address this from the services side. The Army tried to recruit me to the cyber warfare side towards the end of my career, and after taking one look I ran. I wanted nothing to do with that structure.