 |
| Lance Cpl. Julio C. Miranda Jr. rappels down a cliff during Mountain Exercise 2014 aboard Marine Corps Mountain Warfare Training Center in Bridgeport, Calif., Aug. 29, 2014. Miranda is an infantry rifleman with 3rd Platoon, Lima Company, 3rd Battalion, 1st Marine Regiment. Marines with 3rd Battalion, 1st Marine Regiment will become the 15th Marine Expeditionary Unit’s ground combat element in October. Mountain Exercise 2014 develops critical skills the battalion will need during deployment. |
Tuesday, December 30, 2014
Mountain Warfare Training Center, pic by Sgt. Emmanuel Ramos
Subscribe to:
Post Comments
(
Atom
)
Has anyone who posts here trained at the Mountain Warfare Training Center? One thing I have never understood is why the 10th Mountain Division is based at Fort Drum in New York. That area is cold and gets a lot of snow, but the elevation is less than 200 feet. I used to do a lot of backpacking and climbing in Colorado, and you cannot replicate the affects of altitude on your body by training at a place that is close to sea level. It makes no sense. Would there be room to move the 10th mountain to California?
ReplyDelete10th Mountain Division stood up at Fort Carson, Colorado.
ReplyDeleteI would like to see 4 ID and 10th Mountain swap posts, but Fort Drum isn't exactly brimming with mechanized fighting vehicle ranges.
Honestly we could shut down Fort Drum in the next round of BRAC, move 4 ID to Fort Riley and Fort Leavenworth, and move 10th Mountain to Fort Carson.
But, the Marine Corps Mountain Warfare School, aka "High Altitude Hell" is well respected, even in the Army. The USMC Mountain Sniper School was one of the resources I used in planning a sniper sustainment training program, which never got off the ground since it went above the STRAC round allocation.
haven't forgotten the discussion AM i'm still chewing on it. i totally get the 'official' definition however its a personal touchstone that i'm loathe to admit that i could be wrong on. be "professional" is something that i've preached, railed about and taken as part of my personal attitude toward work that to now consider the performance of even the simplest task as being vocational in its entirety and not being designated if well done as professional work is a shock to the system.
DeletePart of the Army Creed goes, "I am an expert, and I am a professional" even as the Army tries to expand on the definition of "professional" to include someone who has mastered the esoteric theory of warfare, politics, and all the other stuff that adds white collar trappings to what is largely the boots in the mud dirty work of the nation.
DeleteThe only thing that I can propose to assuage your conscience is that "vocation" is not a dirty word.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vocation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional
its more than that though. despite my education...despite my professional schooling (or rather vocational schooling) i have labored in a career field that led to the upper ranks of a vocation but not profession? that's a kick in the nuts. forgive me but i need to consider this a bit more.
DeleteWhen we talk about the "medical profession" we mean everyone required to make a hospital run, right? Obviously the janitors, lab technicians, and administrators are absolutely needed to make the hospital run.
ReplyDeleteObviously some of that work is "vocational" in that it is a matter of training to perform a function. Being vocational doesn't stop it from being an absolute necessity to success. Running a Gram stain is something we teach High School students to do, but we expect hospital lab technicians to have at least a 2 year vocational degree to perform their duties. Does the education requirement change it from a "vocation" to a "professional" position? I'm not sure.
When we talk about mastering our craft, the science behind applying lethal combat power, we are talking "craftsman" level tradecraft. When we talk about how to position forces so that we don't have to fight, or refocus our forces to meet national security needs, there simply is no manual for that and so the "art" portion is what we expect from our "professionals."
Don't get me wrong, we expect our senior NCOs to be fully masters of their craft and able to advise officers on the consequences of various choices and options. In that respect, we do demand "professional" theoretical and non-doctrinal thinking from our NCOs. Where is that magic transition point where your military career went from vocational to professional? I couldn't tell you. The fact that you are writing about policy, about non doctrinal consequences, about more than just firing a rifle and killing the enemy tells me that you are a professional. Whether that was expected of you at your rank level or not is irrelevant to the how the Army is using it in terms of "being more than a job."
Of course the original definition for "vocation" was "a calling." Which I think is a better description of why people continue to serve, whether or not their initial reasons for serving were purely for "a job" or not.