On 28 Oct 2012, a senior reservist officer said: What is the evidence base for his assertion that 'few' TA officers regard service as a career? Where is the evidence to support the contention that most join with no intention of serving more than a year or two? Most? Really? It takes two years to commission a TA officer. Most stay for 4-7 years. What proportion of those joining as regular officers stay for that long? A third? Most? "Most cruise through their service on the basis of whether they derive satisfaction from their current employment?" Most? Really? What about all those at RD who think that being a TA officer is shit because it consists of around 12 days a year in the field versus around 60 days a year of barrack duty and admin? Are those officers cruising? Sounds to me more like the TA majors and lieutenant colonels in bone jobs with whom the maker of that statement has been associating for the last 15 years. And how many regular officers are not really interested in the Army as a long-term career when they join? Some? Most? Do their real intentions need to be weeded out of them so that the Army does not waste time and money training and educating them? The same officer went on to say: Initially the reservist will be a poor substitute for a regular? Really? The reservist officer does about 90-100 days' training to commission, which equates to about two-thirds of the time a regular officer spends at RMAS doing military training (not including drill). He is also (if you exclude OTC commissions who count as TA commissions but have no intention of, and do not, serve with the TA) older than his regular equivalent - typically 25-26 rather than 22. By the time the TA officer is deployable in role as a Tp Ldr or Pl Comd, he will have had a further 40-50 days' training (plus more than a hundred of bone unpaid admin) over two years. It is impossible to imagine a 19-year-old reservist officer leading armour in combat because it is not possible to join the TA at 15/16: it would take that long to commission and then get the necessary quals to command an armoured veh. The reality is a 24 to 26-year-old TA Lt leading soldiers in combat. Is that impossible to imagine? I dont think so, given that that I personally know of many who have done so on TELIC and HERRICK, and I assume that there are at least some TA officers with operational and/or combat experience whom I don't know. Equally, there are many regular officers who spawn from regular Sandhurst and their special-to-arms course and yet are such mincemeat that their COs keep them away from troops for a year, or two, or permanently. The authors comments are unsubstantiated, offensive and in my estimation totally incorrect. They ignore what the TA has been doing over the last 10 years; they ignore who has been joining the TA over the last 10 years and what their aspirations are, and they confuse use with capability (the idea that because someone has been doing x, that is all they can do). It seems to me that the two main challenges that the TA has in ensuring that FR2020 is implemented and achieved are: 1) The current cohort of senior majors and above in the regular army, who remember time before TELIC/HERRICK and are threatened by the implementation or a greater Reserve integration; and 2) The current batch of TA colonels and above, who are completely at odds with where their organisation is currently pitched and are insistent on toadying up to their senior regular counterparts spreading such an inaccurate picture.