Marine Corps Community, discussions, blogs, photos & video - Marine Corps Times

Letters

WHAT’S IN A NAME?

Your Sept. 14 editorial “UAVs aren’t ‘unmanned,’” describing Air Force Gen. William Fraser’s proposal to change the name of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles to Remotely Piloted Vehicles, misses a significant point: the term RPV is not new. It is the original name used by many in the military to describe UAVs.

In 1984, the Marine Corps operated RPV units, and referred to the aircraft as RPVs until at least 1993, when the term UAV came into vogue. More recently, the term UAV was replaced in some circles — particularly within the [Washington, D.C.] beltway — by the term Unmanned Aerial Systems.

It matters little to me or many other Marines what we call the aircraft, machines most journalists simply call “drones.” But painting Fraser’s recent initiative to rename UAVs as RPVs as new or innovative is misleading. If Fraser’s proposal gains ground, we’re simply coming full circle with the terminology. And if we wait a few more years, someone else will think of another catchy name and acronym for these aircraft. You can count on it.

Lt. Col. Glen Butler

Marine Corps Base Hawaii

Rethink retention efforts

The Marine Corps does a fabulous job with recruiting. Time and again, while the other services struggle to meet their quotas, we have seen the Corps routinely meet or exceed them.

Despite its success recruiting Marines, the Corps has had a more difficult time retaining experienced Marines. While the Corps has tried to fix the retention problem by throwing money at it, the incentive of bonuses has proven ineffective at best. We continue to lose eight-to-15-year veterans at a rapid rate.

Although I and many Marines enjoy having $60,000 in our pockets after re-enlistment, a full bank account dwindles after time. Bitterness fills the void as Marines realize that money can’t buy you happiness and $60,000 doesn’t last for four years.

There is no blanket solution that can be universally applied to all Marines. Career planners, commanding officers, sergeants major, monitors and occupational field sponsors need to sit down with each Marine and ask what they want out of their career. It will take some time and effort to meet with all Marines approaching their end of active service and determine why they are getting out. It will take even more time and effort to fulfill their career aspirations, but it is the best way to retain experienced Marines. They need to know that what they do matters and that there is something more than a 50 percent pension and worn-down knees waiting for them at the finish line.

Gunnery Sgt. Paul Carey

Al Asad, Iraq

Learn to take a joke

Are the armed services really getting that sensitive?

Army Gen. David Petraeus [who recently told a joke at the Marine Corps Association Foundation’s annual dinner at the expense of the Air Force], only did what we all do [“Petraeus apologizes for AF joke,” Frontlines, Sept. 14].

Services do that to one another. In fact, since he was in Marine Corps territory, his joke was giving Marines a pat on the back. Toughen up. Because that’s what we do — rib each other. And when the time comes, like during the ongoing conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, we protect each other.

Army Chief Warrant Officer 4 L.D. Mitchell (ret.)

Lawton, Okla.

Flawed policy for fallen

The passing of a loved one is tragic indeed. But more tragic is how Lance Cpl. Roger Hager [“Fallen troop’s survivors protest Pentagon’s personal effects policy,” Sept. 14] deployed without having drawn up a will or naming a primary next of kin. His command should have made him take care of these things before deploying. When I deployed to Iraq, having a will drawn up, power of attorney assigned, and primary next of kin identified was part of predeployment training.

All things aside, his mother should have received his belongings. His father was not listed on his birth certificate, and he never married Hager’s mother. His mother had sole custody. So what entitles him to anything? According to Pentagon policy, his age. This makes no sense.

Why not simply default to the primary beneficiary of the life insurance policy or, at the very least, the parent or legal guardian who last had custody when the Marine reached the age of consent? Either of these options would have made a world of difference to his mother and prevented her struggle to have her son’s personal effects returned to where they belong.

Sgt. Dale E. VanHouten Jr.

Swansboro, N.C.