Any of you been to the Military
- Thread starter HENI
- Start date
Donald J Trump
Sannin of the Scrolls 📜
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2012
- Messages
- 5,982
- Reaction score
- 787
Have fun getting brainwashed and expect to be trigger happy if you are going to work in gun on gun combat.
Killing others is not the way.
Killing others is not the way.
Waindo
Kage in the Making 👑
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2014
- Messages
- 18,259
- Reaction score
- 1,095
I had an immense crash followed by 6months of coma, a day before my recruit few years back. Now they don't let me do my service even though 'I'm in fantastic shape...I'm full of titanium/steel, bone parts and plates....apparently that is getting in the way..:/
Jin Hayami
Anbu Operative 🎭
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2012
- Messages
- 2,724
- Reaction score
- 282
Alright. Active Army E5. Please listen to what the **** I'm saying.
1. Not hard.
2. Will do absolutely nothing for you. Whatever job you qualify for with the longest AIT or better yet the highest security clearance requirement. Take that one. You know how much I'm gonna make when I get out with my TS SCI? I'm looking at a GS 9 slot right now. Plus my benefits for federal service will turn over onto that.
3. You just said you don't want to join just to be a badass. Good. Infantry has a level of retard that will give you a ****ing aneurism. When I say retard. I mean just facebook US Army WTF Moments. You don't know stupid until you're getting chewed the **** out for a truck being dead lined because it needs a new part that they don't make anymore because your trucks are so god damn ancient some idiot wrote "8 Track Player coming soon" on the dashboard or been recalled the day you get back from a field exercise because the ****ing LT realizes that he dropped a sensitive item somewhere between N.C. and Georgia and be stuck there all night with everyone getting searched and combing over every inch of the company.
Ups and downs to it. Really not as hard as people make think. Really just think about it. Everyone who has ever been in the Army has done it before. Probably harder because god damn congressmen keep telling us we have to play nice with privates now and hold their hands. But if something is impossible they won't ask you to do it. Except like "Do push ups until I get tired" type of bullshit. Thick layer of bullshit exists like I said. Retardation abounds. Money ain't really that great. Good benefits and job security. Plus you meet people from all over the world. Depending on your job you get to see all kinds of different stuff. Something good for your resume. Your whole world view changes for the most part.
1. You are entirely ignorant towards everything regarding the military.
2. Killing others is the way and has been since before humans existed.
3. Killing others is not what the military is about. It's definitely a minority of individuals who have fired their weapons down range let alone taken a life.
4. You will never realize how mundane unfulfilling and wasted your life has been until you have been put through the same amount of shit that any soldier has.
5. Your kind wallow in the bliss of their own ignorance thanks to the military. So watch your ****ing mouth.
1. Not hard.
2. Will do absolutely nothing for you. Whatever job you qualify for with the longest AIT or better yet the highest security clearance requirement. Take that one. You know how much I'm gonna make when I get out with my TS SCI? I'm looking at a GS 9 slot right now. Plus my benefits for federal service will turn over onto that.
3. You just said you don't want to join just to be a badass. Good. Infantry has a level of retard that will give you a ****ing aneurism. When I say retard. I mean just facebook US Army WTF Moments. You don't know stupid until you're getting chewed the **** out for a truck being dead lined because it needs a new part that they don't make anymore because your trucks are so god damn ancient some idiot wrote "8 Track Player coming soon" on the dashboard or been recalled the day you get back from a field exercise because the ****ing LT realizes that he dropped a sensitive item somewhere between N.C. and Georgia and be stuck there all night with everyone getting searched and combing over every inch of the company.
Ups and downs to it. Really not as hard as people make think. Really just think about it. Everyone who has ever been in the Army has done it before. Probably harder because god damn congressmen keep telling us we have to play nice with privates now and hold their hands. But if something is impossible they won't ask you to do it. Except like "Do push ups until I get tired" type of bullshit. Thick layer of bullshit exists like I said. Retardation abounds. Money ain't really that great. Good benefits and job security. Plus you meet people from all over the world. Depending on your job you get to see all kinds of different stuff. Something good for your resume. Your whole world view changes for the most part.
1. You are entirely ignorant towards everything regarding the military.
2. Killing others is the way and has been since before humans existed.
3. Killing others is not what the military is about. It's definitely a minority of individuals who have fired their weapons down range let alone taken a life.
4. You will never realize how mundane unfulfilling and wasted your life has been until you have been put through the same amount of shit that any soldier has.
5. Your kind wallow in the bliss of their own ignorance thanks to the military. So watch your ****ing mouth.
Aim64C
Anbu Operative 🎭
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2012
- Messages
- 3,681
- Reaction score
- 608
Basically what Jin said.
Unfortunately, I would not recommend joining the military with the ambition of making it a career. It doesn't matter where you are - the poor leadership and abundance of institutionalized stupidity will drive any thinking individual into a murderous rage.
Then you get injured and put on the VA system of healthcare.
You go to the VA to die.
And that is my experience as a biomed tech with one of the better VA hospitals. I work for a company that contracts with the local VA for dialysis service - but I couldn't stand working at the VA simply because it is so depressing. Tell a nurse that someone is in their room, calling for help - and they just kind of "alright..."
If it gets to the point that my medical issue routes me to the VA, I'm seriously going to consider putting a bullet in my brain before I'm too ****ed up to know where I am.
So you have that to look forward to.
Don't get me wrong - there is a lot of good training you can receive - and a lot of good leadership that can be found amongst the people who will rarely make it past E5.
Keep in mind - the military structure we use was the model for military structure some 600 years ago when peasants were organized by knights and/or nobles into fighting groups. It's from an era where the peasants were lucky to have much work or experience beyond beating their brains out in a field or mine, somewhere. They just kind of did what they were told, for the most part.
By the time the American Revolution came around, it became clear that "irregular" groups comprised of individually competent people were highly effective against regular forces - particularly in areas where cover/concealment were abundant and where the need to hold hard battle fronts was minimal (the goal to inflict casualties and incite confusion rather than to actually prevent an army from marching past a certain point on the map). Irregular forces were becoming popular the world over, mostly in response to conflicts with natives and the growing power of the individual as part of the industrial revolution (greater availability of materials and broader sharing of trade knowledge).
Still, the structure largely existed because the enlisted man was usually not well educated and was not really all that effective in communication - therefor strategies, diplomacy, and political authority were a bit beyond the enlisted ranks.
Today, it isn't uncommon to see NCOs with a better educational and intellectual pedigree than the officers above them. They're smarter, better educated, better informed, and have better leadership qualities.
They get frustrated and go into the civilian world where they can actually develop/grow as an individual. The people who remain behind to just collect a check get promoted because someone has to fill the position.
Much of the reputation of the U.S. military comes from World War II - and rather than swell the ranks of leadership positions with junior enlisted automatically promoted, the government reached out to business owners, business managers, and executives to fill the leadership roles of the military.
That is why, when you talk to the few World War II veterans remaining and start getting into discussions of military culture, you see a different military almost entirely. There was less separation of officers and enlisted - the officers and senior enlisted were, generally, much better leaders who saw to the needs of their charge as opposed to the desires of their supervisors. There were far fewer 'yes men' - which is what you will see a lot of in the military, today.
The Obama administration officially instated that as the policy for the military when just about everyone who questioned or resisted the President was forced to retire or otherwise dispatched. In the years since then, that policy has filtered down pretty far and is visible at the E-7 and O-5 levels (which is about where it meets the creep-up corruption that I described earlier).
We're still better than most of the military forces on the planet in terms of capability - but I certainly wouldn't want to be infantry. Chances are you will end up being a hard lesson to theater command that they have incompetent chains of command that have very good knee-pads but very little else.
Unfortunately, I would not recommend joining the military with the ambition of making it a career. It doesn't matter where you are - the poor leadership and abundance of institutionalized stupidity will drive any thinking individual into a murderous rage.
Then you get injured and put on the VA system of healthcare.
You go to the VA to die.
And that is my experience as a biomed tech with one of the better VA hospitals. I work for a company that contracts with the local VA for dialysis service - but I couldn't stand working at the VA simply because it is so depressing. Tell a nurse that someone is in their room, calling for help - and they just kind of "alright..."
If it gets to the point that my medical issue routes me to the VA, I'm seriously going to consider putting a bullet in my brain before I'm too ****ed up to know where I am.
So you have that to look forward to.
Don't get me wrong - there is a lot of good training you can receive - and a lot of good leadership that can be found amongst the people who will rarely make it past E5.
Keep in mind - the military structure we use was the model for military structure some 600 years ago when peasants were organized by knights and/or nobles into fighting groups. It's from an era where the peasants were lucky to have much work or experience beyond beating their brains out in a field or mine, somewhere. They just kind of did what they were told, for the most part.
By the time the American Revolution came around, it became clear that "irregular" groups comprised of individually competent people were highly effective against regular forces - particularly in areas where cover/concealment were abundant and where the need to hold hard battle fronts was minimal (the goal to inflict casualties and incite confusion rather than to actually prevent an army from marching past a certain point on the map). Irregular forces were becoming popular the world over, mostly in response to conflicts with natives and the growing power of the individual as part of the industrial revolution (greater availability of materials and broader sharing of trade knowledge).
Still, the structure largely existed because the enlisted man was usually not well educated and was not really all that effective in communication - therefor strategies, diplomacy, and political authority were a bit beyond the enlisted ranks.
Today, it isn't uncommon to see NCOs with a better educational and intellectual pedigree than the officers above them. They're smarter, better educated, better informed, and have better leadership qualities.
They get frustrated and go into the civilian world where they can actually develop/grow as an individual. The people who remain behind to just collect a check get promoted because someone has to fill the position.
Much of the reputation of the U.S. military comes from World War II - and rather than swell the ranks of leadership positions with junior enlisted automatically promoted, the government reached out to business owners, business managers, and executives to fill the leadership roles of the military.
That is why, when you talk to the few World War II veterans remaining and start getting into discussions of military culture, you see a different military almost entirely. There was less separation of officers and enlisted - the officers and senior enlisted were, generally, much better leaders who saw to the needs of their charge as opposed to the desires of their supervisors. There were far fewer 'yes men' - which is what you will see a lot of in the military, today.
The Obama administration officially instated that as the policy for the military when just about everyone who questioned or resisted the President was forced to retire or otherwise dispatched. In the years since then, that policy has filtered down pretty far and is visible at the E-7 and O-5 levels (which is about where it meets the creep-up corruption that I described earlier).
We're still better than most of the military forces on the planet in terms of capability - but I certainly wouldn't want to be infantry. Chances are you will end up being a hard lesson to theater command that they have incompetent chains of command that have very good knee-pads but very little else.
RasenUchihaChaos
Sannin of the Scrolls 📜
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2012
- Messages
- 9,150
- Reaction score
- 702
No and I don't want to I don't have the ego or arrogance to join and I would fail their psyche test I have a problem with people yelling at me cuz my mind goes blank I wake up and find out I beat the crap out of the aggressor
I don't plan on fighting for bs and wars I don't agree on
Or being the guy who kills civs
I don't plan on fighting for bs and wars I don't agree on
Or being the guy who kills civs
Jin Hayami
Anbu Operative 🎭
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2012
- Messages
- 2,724
- Reaction score
- 282
BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!
Oh man. I haven't laughed that hard since opening night of 22 Jump Street.
Aim64C
Anbu Operative 🎭
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2012
- Messages
- 3,681
- Reaction score
- 608
There is no psychological evaluation outside of the stress test of bootcamp.
They try to do an evaluation of people with TS SCI clearances - but there isn't really a hard metric for 'passing' and 'failing' - and I've yet to see any evidence that the process is successful at protecting the integrity of those positions.
Generally, the people yelling at you during your training are trained in how to 'move' recruits during 'adverse training evolutions.' (New military - we can't hit people). While there was supposedly an instance where a DI screamed at a sleeping guy in a top rack, and the guy freaked out and snapped the DI's neck (the court ruling on that one was that a person is not responsible for their behavior within the first six seconds of waking up) - It can generally be assumed that you would receive a rather rude awakening as to where you stand, physically, in this world.
You don't really know what you do or don't agree on. You're just an angry individual who isn't content with anything right now.
Not that I blame you - there's a lot to be discontent about, but my guess is that you would be in a concentration camp before you could say that you agree to fighting a war. And by that time, it's relatively moot.
Not that the current wars have much to do with that analogy - just pointing out that your reasoning is all retrospective.
The reality is that there really is no such thing as a civilian.
And it is a reality we try our damnedest to ignore.
A prostitute who puts glass in her vagina and tries to seduce political or ethnic rivals is effectively a willing combatant in a war. A farmer who picks up his rifle is a combatant. A worker relaying details of your operation to militants setting up mortars is a combatant.
It is an ugly reality that the border between civilian and combatant is often determined by what one does rather than what one wears. After they are dead - there is no way to tell the difference.
The child running at you with a live grenade? All that appears on the magazine cover is a child with a bullet entry wound peppered in shrapnel. You saved your squad - but the headline will forever imply otherwise.
I am not saying all actions by soldiers are just. When you put people into those environments, to confront those realities - the moral fiber and fabric of any individual begins to degrade.
Just as you have been incited into irrational hatred by the media, so can soldiers be incited into irrational and dishonorable behavior by the environment.
True, there are some bad apples that were bad to begin with (and they make things even more confusing when you're frustrated and confounded by an enemy that fades into and out of the population) - but very few of the people are actually bad apples at heart.
Though I doubt my statements are going to do much to cause you to reconsider your view (I couldn't care less as to whether or not you decide to join).
RasenUchihaChaos
Sannin of the Scrolls 📜
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2012
- Messages
- 9,150
- Reaction score
- 702
U have you points but hey church I went to teen pastor was a soldier and said back then him and his buddies wanted the military to glass the entire country for black hawk down
FYI I listen to the media dn actual soldiers I just recently watched a soldier defend a Muslim he did not know against some white kid
Calling him a terrorist In the military there are good men bad men and men who try to be good but end up making bad choices
But that does not make them bad men
And the disagreement is true the only war I agree on for America was ww2 all others I do not soldiers died for what
U still have those in nam scarred and receive no help wand what did they fight for
12 years in the me for what Taliban still here several dead and wounded soldiers for what what did they die for that is my point
If Russia decided to invade Ukraine u got sent there what are u fighting for ?
FYI I listen to the media dn actual soldiers I just recently watched a soldier defend a Muslim he did not know against some white kid
Calling him a terrorist In the military there are good men bad men and men who try to be good but end up making bad choices
But that does not make them bad men
And the disagreement is true the only war I agree on for America was ww2 all others I do not soldiers died for what
U still have those in nam scarred and receive no help wand what did they fight for
12 years in the me for what Taliban still here several dead and wounded soldiers for what what did they die for that is my point
If Russia decided to invade Ukraine u got sent there what are u fighting for ?
Jin Hayami
Anbu Operative 🎭
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2012
- Messages
- 2,724
- Reaction score
- 282
Uh upholding the agreement we signed to protect them from Russia when they agreed to give up their nukes. Legally we're obligated to help them. Its a little thing called integrity. Our generation doesn't seem to understand the definition of that word. Everyone wants less nukes in the world so we made a deal. Now that its our turn to uphold our end nobody wants to go. Will we go? No because America is run by short sighted politicians who are really only worried about winning the next election instead of doing whats right. Should we go? You're God damn right we should.
Aim64C
Anbu Operative 🎭
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2012
- Messages
- 3,681
- Reaction score
- 608
You have to understand that many of the areas we get sent to are shit holes where the people, by en large, have resorted to all manner of savagery and corruption to stay alive.
Of course, in many of these countries, we also create the problem by sending them food.
Most of the problems wouldn't exist if we wouldn't pay to send people food for them to fight over and breed with.
While that sounds incredibly harsh - it is a cold fact of life. We decided to eradicate Small Pox, a decision that simply migrated to people starving to death. Then we thought we would help by sending them food - and that gets confiscated by warlords who use it to maintain power and control while the people continue to breed outside of their ability to sustain through domestic production (and they could - if they were to stop stealing from each other long enough to put up a farm).
It's a frustrating issue and when you're expected to try and 'fix it' - the tempting solution is to just 'throw it all away' - since the whole region is such a mess.
And not everyone bothers to reason into the actual cause of the problem; nor were they instruments in causing the problem to begin with - but they get shouldered with the responsibility to try and fix or improve it.
You'll learn, if you pay enough attention to reality (not the media - there is no reality in any televised media), that race exists for politics.
Because you are of a "western" or "American" perspective - you see me as white.
In many parts of Europe - I'm not white. There is no such thing as white. There are such things as German, Russian, Ukrainian, Polish, Bosnian, Croatian, etc.
Most of the distinguishing factors are not even physical - they are related to religious affiliation (Catholic versus Eastern Orthodox versus Protestant) and language more so than they are physical traits.
We all look at Nazis as if they were some kind of unique extreme - but they weren't. Sarajevo - a conflict surrounding a particular city in the collapsing republic of Yugoslavia. That was an act of ethnic cleansing. I encourage you to read: Zlata's Diary; the diary of Zlata Filopovic -
You must be registered for see links
during the Sarajevo conflict.Then you turn around to look at the Bosnian conflict around the turn of the century (a few years later).
Ethnic cleansings are the norm in Europe - not the abnormal.
While there is such a thing as ethnicity - beware that there are warlords among us who will use it to turn us against each other for their own power trips.
The TV in the break room happened to be tuned to MSNBC last night. I listen to radio and follow up with sources from the internet and other such things for my news - I don't watch TV. Anything I care to watch is on the internet. I took a few minutes to watch what was on the TV... and it was like a trip into another dimension.
I was absolutely fascinated with how a TV show could say and do so much about an issue while covering literally none of the reality. Sure - there were facts here and there - but they were deliberately stripped from reality and placed within their own little void.
Then I finally understood why people slam Fox news so much. Granted - Fox news doesn't do much better. They will present more complete sets of facts, but never address the reality of situations. Such as the current IRS issue - it is not a question that the IRS director broke the law in not reporting lost e-mails or handing those e-mails over. There is no alleging. It is in black and white that the IRS is to use the 1.8B IT budget to back up its shit.
Either they turn over the e-mails from the two server backup systems used to store those e-mails (plus the archived tapes), or they go to jail for meeting the criminal statues set forth by the federal government.
It's blatant corruption. There is no democrat or republican to it - it's a violation of the law. Period. Start the trial or it's time for the people to grab their torch and pitch-forks and throw the whole corrupt works out.
But that's not what you get from the media. You don't get reality - you get drama. Fox will present what "republicans allege" and how "democrats respond" - but it doesn't actually bother with basic journalism to portray anything resembling reality.
The same with MSNBC - they present facts that appear to make their case solid - unless you actually bother to delve into the facts - then it's blatantly obvious that they are omitting anything that would be inconvenient to the message that "conservatives are just uninformed stupid people and republicans are the smart ones who just exist to piss in the cornflakes of the democrats."
At first - I honestly thought I was watching a bad satire of a liberal show host. "Surely... surely no one could take this seriously, right?" - But then it occurred to me... if you're a 'news' agency - and you know that you can control what people know about a situation... then it all made perfect sense and was perfectly logical.
A perfectly rational human being could be deluded into believing complete lies and fabrications. And of course, naturally, they will reject information contrary to their trusted source, especially if it is from the side that is retarded and irrational.
The phone you have. Assuming you're not an iDrone - you probably have a Samsung or LG phone, statistically speaking.
I do encourage you to try and visit Korea some time in your life. You may or may not enjoy the experience - but that is a nation made possible by the Korean war. Otherwise - they would have become like North Korea (most likely). And you want to talk about an alternate dimension - North Korea is it.
It could also be argued that we didn't need to get involved in World War II.
While Hitler did entertain delusions of "attacking" the U.S. - it simply wouldn't have been realistic, logistically. He would not have been able to maintain domestic control of the territories he conquered. Plus, his dumb ass pissed off the Russians and then proceeded to place captured Russians (who surrendered to fight against Stalin and his atrocities) in France (where they didn't give a shit).
I agree with the decision to go to war - but our involvement was not necessary or demonstrably essential to our defense.
That is a problem of our policy makers. We could have 'won' that war. The problem was that we drew it out for so long and were never allowed to pursue the enemy. By the time we left, most of South Vietnam really didn't care if they fell under communist rule. We also botched the leadership of South Vietnam by placing in power a guy who was not identifiable with the people.
The reality is that soldiers die in any conflict. What I find interesting about the response of most people is that they then blame the military as an institution. As if the military just decided it wanted to go die in some hell hole of a country for shits and giggles.
They rarely look at our policy makers and ask: "Uh... why are you sending them there? Uh... Okay - what is your plan for fixing the problem? ... Wait... do you even understand the problem to begin with?"
They may, at first, when the media is using phrases like "Democrat" and "Republican" - but once that is over with, it's the military that gets shouldered with the "why are you there?" talk. By the time the next election rolls around - everyone is arguing over where we should or shouldn't be as opposed to whether or not any kind of intelligent decision making is going to be introduced to the powers of government.
It's like herding chickens when it comes to getting people to pay attention to the issue of our foreign policy and the importance of elected seats that understand it.
They died to give Iraq an opportunity that it never had before. They died to give Iraq the opportunity to be a free nation governed by the people.
Obviosly, Iraq botched that opportunity.
I would even argue that our politicians ensured that the opportunity would ultimately yield a failure. Anyone in the military with any knowledge of Iraq and any functioning brain cells knew that Iraq was not ready to defend itself and that it would not weather the push-back from the forces we knew were skirting the geopolitical border.
But politicians thought it would be good for their polling numbers if they used us by 'bringing us home.'
They didn't care about our mission. They didn't care about our foreign image. They didn't care about any of that - all they wanted was to appease what they perceived to be the whims of the minimum information voter. So they 'brought us home' despite the warnings that it would destroy everything we had done.
Because, hey, we could always just blame Bush for getting us involved when it ultimately failed.
For Ukraine to remain an independent nation as per the desires of many among its population - because we signed a treaty recognizing the independence of that nation and the potential need for that independence to be secured with military force at some point in the future.
Should we have that treaty?
I honestly don't have an opinion either way on it. I do believe the issue with Ukraine is different from the issue with Iraq in terms of the conflict's nature; making it a far better parallel to Korea. The people there have a stronger will to be their own nation. Though keeping them from trying to cleanse the Russians might be a bit of a challenge. Like I said - ethnic cleansing is the norm in Europe, not the exception - getting them to understand that requires beating them with a shillelagh from time to time when they try that shit.
