US using Airmen as Soldiers

#1
I cam across the following story about the US redeploying airmen on the ground in Iraq and it made me wonder - should we do the same ?

http://www.startribune.com/stories/484/5662062.html

"the Pentagon has begun deploying thousands of Air Force personnel to combat zones in new jobs as interrogators, prison sentries and gunners on supply trucks"

Just think, we could use the RAFP as prison guards (dooooor ... open!" - makes a change from barriers I suppose) and get those irritating PS2 obsessed geeks that infest the int branch into an FHT and make them see some sunlight. Who on earth would you put on gun trucks though ? The RAF Regiment would get a nosebleed moving more then 200m away from the perimeter fence and I don't know that I'd trust the average techy with a GPMG.

Banter aside, is this the way forward to meet our shortfall in the infantry ?
 

Cutaway

LE
Kit Reviewer
#3
UPI's version on the same subject has an interesting turn of phrase:

UPI said:
Air Force Fills Army Holes in Iraq
October 12, 2005

WASHINGTON - The Pentagon is using U.S. Air Force personnel to fill in holes in Army positions in Iraq and Afghanistan, The Los Angeles Times reports.

Some of the positions the Air Force personnel are being diverted into drivers, interrogators, prison sentries and gunners on supply trucks.

More than 3,000 Air Force personnel are being assigned new roles
, and are being dispatched to combat zones for longer tours of duty -- as much as 12 months rather than four. Air Force officials said they expect to commit another 1,000 airmen to missions but they don't plan to make these jobs "core competencies" within the Air Force, the newspaper said.

Like Air Force personnel, several thousand sailors are performing what the service calls "non-traditional" roles to free up Army personnel in Iraq, Afghanistan, and at the military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

Recently, 500 sailors were trained by the Department of Agriculture to become customs inspectors in Iraq and Kuwait, to sift through military cargo and personal gear that troops send back to the United States.
 
#5
Cutaway said:
UPI's version on the same subject has an interesting turn of phrase:

UPI said:
Air Force Fills Army Holes in Iraq
October 12, 2005

WASHINGTON - The Pentagon is using U.S. Air Force personnel to fill in holes in Army positions in Iraq and Afghanistan, The Los Angeles Times reports.

Some of the positions the Air Force personnel are being diverted into drivers, interrogators, prison sentries and gunners on supply trucks.

More than 3,000 Air Force personnel are being assigned new roles
, and are being dispatched to combat zones for longer tours of duty -- as much as 12 months rather than four. Air Force officials said they expect to commit another 1,000 airmen to missions but they don't plan to make these jobs "core competencies" within the Air Force, the newspaper said.

Like Air Force personnel, several thousand sailors are performing what the service calls "non-traditional" roles to free up Army personnel in Iraq, Afghanistan, and at the military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

Recently, 500 sailors were trained by the Department of Agriculture to become customs inspectors in Iraq and Kuwait, to sift through military cargo and personal gear that troops send back to the United States.
'Kin brilliant, Cuts! :lol: :lol: :lol:

Article clearly written by an ex squaddie on a dare.
 

Cutaway

LE
Kit Reviewer
#6
I've been wondering about this statement: "several thousand sailors are performing what the service calls "non-traditional" roles to free up Army personnel".

What is against the traditions of the navy ?
What quality of performance can the army pers expect to receive ?

Any ideas ?
 
#7
Cutaway said:
I've been wondering about this statement: "several thousand sailors are performing what the service calls "non-traditional" roles to free up Army personnel".

What is against the traditions of the navy ?
What quality of performance can the army pers expect to receive ?

Any ideas ?
I'm not sure, but it probably involves baby oil, black pvc shorts and a Hereford moustache.

Was rather concerned about AF personnel 'filling holes' in the army. Would never happen here. Even with the Celestial Navigator allowing that type of thing these days, I couldn't ever imagine an infantryman being willing to play "mummy" to a crab duvet consultant's "daddy".
 
#8
RAF personnel have been used as convoy drivers/gunners for a while now. A friend of mine did Dogwood et al last year (I think), and he's only a stacker!
 

Goatman

ADC
Book Reviewer
#9
Cutaway said:
What is against the traditions of the navy ?
Easy - defeat . 8)

The Royal Navy has " A tradition of Victory " - which is why you aren't posting in French, in this bi-centennial year of the Battle of Trafalgar........


to The Immortal Memory....


Lee Shaver
 

Cutaway

LE
Kit Reviewer
#11
Goatman & Cdo_gunner, please stop trying to drag this thread out of the gutter !
 
#12
Quote:"and get those irritating PS2 obsessed geeks that infest the int branch into an FHT and make them see some sunlight."

It's only fair to point out that a good proportion of FHT Interpreters are in fact RAF, in fact the majority of RAF Arabic linguists who I've taught have done a stint with an FHT, along with the odd matelot thrown in. Can't argue about the PS2 bit though!
 
#13
One_of_the_strange said:
Banter aside, is this the way forward to meet our shortfall in the infantry ?
Absolutely. We could use the RAF for mine clearance and frontal attacks (with apologies to another, as yet unidentified, Arrser for poaching his idea).
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top