The Military Thread

From elsewhere: 10 weak excuses for not joining the military.

• "I almost enlisted but I heard they make you do push-ups everyday at basic."
• "I don’t think I could stand being told what to do all the time."
• "I almost joined the Marine Corps but I kind of didn’t want to die."
• "I couldn’t have the drill sergeants get in my face. If they yelled at me I’d probably punch them."
• "I didn’t want to have to cut my dreads."
• "My girlfriend freaked out and started going on about how she’d leave me because the military is basically a bunch of murderers and losers."
• "I wanted to enlist in the Marines, but my mom wouldn’t let me."
• "I almost enlisted but then the first Gulf War started; f**k that shit."
• "I talked to a recruiter once and he said I had too much potential to waste my life away in the military."
• "I went to basic but got PTSD in the first week, so I had to quit."

The only one i disagree with is the gulf war example.

I don't think there is anything wrong with someone not enlisting when they know they will be sent into something that they have a personal objection to or feel is wrong or not what they should be doing.

That's just being a responsible conscious objector.

Even Swiss SAM batteries undergo training for "enemies coming from the East"...and they're a "neutral country" for centuries.

The one about parents is theoretically sound, but understandably difficult in practice. It's not unheard of for families to go so far as to disown their child for joining the military, especially if there is a specific religious obligation enforced in the household. I met a girl who had this issue. She was raised in a non-interventionist Buddhist household. She eventually joined the Navy anyway, but her family gave her hell for it. Disobeying the people who love you and look after you is easier said than done, even if it's ultimately the right choice.

edited 24th Nov '14 8:05:04 PM by Aprilla

Quite a few of those are just a way of saying "I don't think I'm cut out for it". Objecting to having to do push-ups every day or saying you can't deal with people shouting at you is another way of saying: "I am uninterested in physical fitness and cannot cope with aggressive authority" - and people like that are probably best off at least recognizing it rather than reaching for something beyond them.

"I didn't want to die" = "I am not comfortable with the idea of risking my life" which, again.

I agree that some of them are moronic, though.

"I'd hit the Drill Sergeant if he got in my face" usually just comes off as wannabe tough guy talk.

Yeah, that particular excuse only translates as "my pride is easily wounded, and I compensate by acting like a tough guy on the Internet" to me.

It is also a sign of complete ignorance or stupidity. The guys who genuinely think that is what would happen have probably never been challenged in their life. They've probably always been the intimidating factor or have just a sheltered life that they've never been in a position to be truly respectful to authority.

One of my brother's friends said that. According to the guys who went to boot with him, he almost cried the first time a drill sergeant got in his face because his bed wasn't made right.

They're trained to break you. They will break you. It's up to you how hard that process is so you can just get it out of the way and start to learn something.

edited 25th Nov '14 6:10:28 AM by Gabrael

I must say that those are pretty much all of the main reasons to not enlist, albeit phrased in very immature and childlike manners. The author may as well write a proposition demanding the reactivation of conscription to teach the general soft and kiddy population how to grow up.

Funnily enough, a post-recruitment version of this is actually one of the big concerns that the French Foreign Legion has about its large numbers of college graduates that form its ranks, whom otherwise would make better a officer corps instead of enlisted men.

Talking about the French military, Hollande has decided to "indefinitely suspend" his country's delivery of the ''Mistral'' warships that have sparked a diplomatic crises since the start of tensions with Russia.

edited 25th Nov '14 8:18:12 AM by FluffyMcChicken

Like ol'Bobby Heinlein said: "Force civic values down a man's throat and he will vomit them out."

Those "10 reasons not to join the military" show why a draft is a bad idea. We have tons of problems with the all volunteer military as it is. Draftees bring the "conscript syndrome" of not wanting to be there in the first place.

Although I am not a pacifist, I grew up around a lot of them in the college town I'm from. I went to Catholic school and was taught by nuns. So I can understand those who abhor violence and war.

I still get mad at those who say "I don't want to waste my life in the military", ditto those who assume the military is for those who "can't make it", we're all Dumb Muscle, etc.

I've meet more Sci-Fi and anime geeks in ther service than I ever did outside. Yeah it's frustrating when some colossal screw-up somehow gets promoted. I've seen NCO's and officers who would never make it outside somehow be in charge.

And I've seen NCO's and officers who are awesome. They take care of troops and encourage people to do better. And many more GI's are taking online classes with the encouragement of the brass.

Honest question: Is it truly improper to use "soldier" to refer to any military servicemember, regardless of which service they belong to? What "proper" alternatives exist that don't consist of two words, separate or mashed together? (I really envy the French, who can just use "militaire" as a general term.)

Depends on what respective country you're talking about - U.S military servicemen tend to identify themselves with whatever branch (i.e Army = "soldiers", Marine Crops = "marines", Air Force = "airmen", Navy = "seamen") they're part of, whereas the Russians seem to simply opt for using the term "Troops" as a general-purpose phrase.

Troops is common in the US media and for government use "Servicemember" tends to be used.

"Warfighter" is for those powerpoint slides that can bore people to death.

Bullets! Bullets everywhere!

And don't forget cheezy clipart, jargon and acronyms! Can't have a powerpoint withouse those.

When your advanced training teaches you how to use Powerpoint as part of the curriculum, this is what happens

Out of my group I learned the most powerpoint because I was the only one who knew how to type....

"Troops" used to be actively discouraged internally as a way to refer to airmen. Not sure if it still is, but nobody seemed to pay it any mind.

But "airmen" by definition refers strictly to those who actually pilot aircraft - the USAF seems to be the odd one out in the world by using the term as a general moniker for Air Force personnel, most of whom are grounded.

You probably already are aware of this fact, but U.S air force personnel actually used to be labeled "troops" prior to 1947 under the old Army Air Force.

As barkey would say it has something to do with the worship of "The Zipper Suited Sun Gods".

VA promises but fails to carry out investigation into death of unborn child.

Not-so-TLDR: Tziporah Pendleton was pregnant, and a non-VA doctor noticed a potential life-threatening issue for the fetus, ordering an MRI and bladder scan. Muskogee and Tulsa (Oklahoma) VA denied the bladder scan and let the MRI request stew, during which the fetus died from blood loss.

Pendleton talks to Muskogee facility heads in the office of Senator Inhofe, at which the doctors go on video record to promise an investigation.

Pendleton was told that it was supposed to be finished Sept 26 this year, but the investigation never even got started.

Boy, are the servicemembers being looked out for by the government.

Sure are some good signs of improvement there.

Say, is it possible for a foreign company to, say, buy the blueprints to a prototype weapon from another company that failed to be accepted for production by the latter's government? For example, say that a French defense contractor offers the US-based Northrop Grumman to buy the design plans for the YF-23. Can that happen?

edited 26th Nov '14 1:54:53 AM by MarqFJA

@ Marq: Probably not for a US product^note  At least not without Pentagon/Congressional approval — the Americans are intensely protective of their military technology, even to the stage of pissing off their closest allies on several occasions.

After all, if it has technology that was (or even wasn't) used on the winning design, it might be used against them.

edited 26th Nov '14 2:28:27 AM by Greenmantle

They could, but the US government wouldn't allow it in most cases. Though the designs for night vision equipment, humvees, and various other things have ended up in Chinese hands on numerous occasions

http://www.interaksyon.com/article/99887/executive-explains-to-sc-nature-of-edca-defends-non-submission-to-senate

In the future of American-Filipino military ties, EDCA is being debated as of now on whether the American military will assist the Armed Forces of the Philippines in case of a shooting match between China and the Philippines.