Spartan, I recognize (and respect) that distinction, and I know I'm really just a guest here, but here's a bit of my perspective on the subject of Ranger-qualified leaders in a non-Ranger unit.Spartan wrote:That's probably a phenomenon of most board members having served in the Regiment, as compared to those who's claim to being a Ranger is that they are graduates of Ranger School.
In the end, I think there is far more life-long pride displayed among individuals who experienced several years of service in a Ranger Bn or the Regiment, than among those who are graduates of Ranger School.
I'm about a week (+/-) away from my ten year anniversary of graduating Ranger School. In those ten years I've served in three different divisions as well as spending some substantial time training and leading IOBC lieutenants (part of my "no assigned weapon" time). In all of those jobs I've tried to live up to the Ranger Creed.
When I, as a Ranger-qualified guy, look across my formation, the guys that I know I can count on right off the bat are the ones wearing a tab over their shoulder sleeve insignia. If I go to another unit's AO, I'm more likely to talk to the Ranger in the group first. I'm saying that at first glance; of course, the longer you spend in a unit, the more you know about who you can really rely on and who you can't. My experience has been that a guy having the tab counts for a lot.
Just like anywhere, I suppose, there are those who went to Ranger school a long, long time ago (or maybe only just a year ago) for the wrong reasons and don't internalize the Ranger Creed. To me, they're just "wearing the tab." Maybe they've forgotten something along the way; maybe they never learned it.
"I accept the fact that as a Ranger, my country expects me to move further, faster, and fight harder than any other soldier." When "any other soldier" applies to most of the soldiers you're leading, you have to recognize your solemn obligation to be the best soldier in your squad, platoon, company. How do you do that? Well, if you've forgotten all else, you go back to the Ranger Creed. It's a six step reminder of what you're supposed to be.
You, of course, know all of this--not trying to preach to the choir. You've had the good fortune of serving in a unit where they don't let you forget it. I have not. No excuses for that, it's just not the path I took. Making an honest effort to live up to the Creed for the last decade is my claim to being a Ranger. Relative to that, the school was easy!
You're absolutely right. I constantly have had Soldiers tell me, "I really want to go to Ranger School." Apparently most of them have had different reactions from others before me. I'll offer to sign them up on the spot---the tune changes quickly. "...but I can't swim," or "...but I need to do [BNCOC, re-enlist, get some college credit, whatever] first." To me, that means they don't really want it.Silverback wrote:I don't think this will have too much effect, jesus we can't even get all the Infantry guys to go. What makes anyone think that all of a sudden Ranger school is going to flood with turds?
So if you get some stud 96B (Intel Analyst) in a mech unit who wants to give it a shot, great. As long as the standards of the school don't change, then you've got a better trained leader when the TOC gets hit. But I agree with what I think I'm hearing here about the concern that these "other" MOSs show up unprepared and waste a slot that could have gone to some team leader in the 101st who got bumped because their unit doesn't get the same allocation as they used to.
For what it's worth.
BB
