Barbarians inside the gates:

[Glen Contrarian]

I imagine that your dismissal of this is substantiated by some sort of citation or personal experience?

I've met a number of people who have served, and based on my interaction with them, the warrior culture is alive and well, and frankly needs to remain and be strengthened, IMHO.

I was a grunt, I interact with dozens of soldiers who are nothing more than 9-5 civilians in 'battle uniforms'... the 'warrior culture' is so much puffery in their world. Posturing while doing civilian work in settings more like corporate America than sword and shield. So few are actually combat arms these days, have any clue what it's like to be dirty, hungry, tired, achy, scared and brave.

and they don't want to get that clue... eace

For both of you, think back to American military history. After the Spanish-American War, our military deteriorated to the point where our army was like 17th largest in the world in 1914. In the mid-1930's, our army was once again relatively small, and while our Navy was in comparatively good shape, our Army and Navy aircraft (no air force at the time, remember) were fairly obsolete.

I remember that after Vietnam, our morale was so crappy, and the material condition of our armed forces had certainly gone downhill. Progressive though I certainly am, I'll always love Reagan for making us proud to be in the military once more - the difference between those who were in the military in the "bad old days" of the 1970's as compared to today...it's 180-out.

Today, while there is certainly a corporate mentality in much of the military, to some extent - and especially in the logistics sectors - that's necessary. In the Navy, ever since we transitioned away from wooden ships, it's never been a true "warrior culture", but more of an industrial culture, since we are surrounded by technology and machinery (some of it still WWII-vintage, btw) 24/7, and while those in command may direct the fire or aircraft sorties, it's the ships that are most modern and are most well-maintained by gearheads and knuckle-draggers and electronics tweakers that survive and win.

So yeah, there's a warrior mindset in the Army infantry and the Marines - and probably to a greater extent than during most of our history. But for most of our military...no. And that's the way it must be for our military to function most efficiently.

 

[eohrnberger]

I was a grunt, I interact with dozens of soldiers who are nothing more than 9-5 civilians in 'battle uniforms'... the 'warrior culture' is so much puffery in their world. Posturing while doing civilian work in settings more like corporate America than sword and shield. So few are actually combat arms these days, have any clue what it's like to be dirty, hungry, tired, achy, scared and brave.

and they don't want to get that clue... eace

Fair enough. However, I'm sure that not all in the military are cut from that cloth.

I never served, but registered for duty, but never called. I would have served if called.

The ex-military people that I have come to know have struck me as anything but civilian, in nature in directness, or in candor. Sometimes it almost seems a difficult fit back to civilian life. The decisiveness in decision making is rather refreshing from the more usual civilian vacillation before decisions.

 

[eohrnberger]

For both of you, think back to American military history. After the Spanish-American War, our military deteriorated to the point where our army was like 17th largest in the world in 1914. In the mid-1930's, our army was once again relatively small, and while our Navy was in comparatively good shape, our Army and Navy aircraft (no air force at the time, remember) were fairly obsolete.

I remember that after Vietnam, our morale was so crappy, and the material condition of our armed forces had certainly gone downhill. Progressive though I certainly am, I'll always love Reagan for making us proud to be in the military once more - the difference between those who were in the military in the "bad old days" of the 1970's as compared to today...it's 180-out.

Today, while there is certainly a corporate mentality in much of the military, to some extent - and especially in the logistics sectors - that's necessary. In the Navy, ever since we transitioned away from wooden ships, it's never been a true "warrior culture", but more of an industrial culture, since we are surrounded by technology and machinery (some of it still WWII-vintage, btw) 24/7, and while those in command may direct the fire or aircraft sorties, it's the ships that are most modern and are most well-maintained by gearheads and knuckle-draggers and electronics tweakers that survive and win.

So yeah, there's a warrior mindset in the Army infantry and the Marines - and probably to a greater extent than during most of our history. But for most of our military...no. And that's the way it must be for our military to function most efficiently.

He Glen, this certainly seems to have the ring of truth and reasonability to it. Good post, thanks.

 

[notquiteright]

For both of you, think back to American military history. After the Spanish-American War, our military deteriorated to the point where our army was like 17th largest in the world in 1914. In the mid-1930's, our army was once again relatively small, and while our Navy was in comparatively good shape, our Army and Navy aircraft (no air force at the time, remember) were fairly obsolete. I remember that after Vietnam, our morale was so crappy, and the material condition of our armed forces had certainly gone downhill. Progressive though I certainly am, I'll always love Reagan for making us proud to be in the military once more. So yeah, there's a warrior mindset in the Army infantry and the Marines - and probably to a greater extent than during most of our history. But for most of our military...no. And that's the way it must be for our military to function most efficiently.

Our nation has always been distrustful of a large standing army. The War of 1812 shows how poorly state militias do in combat after so much was made of a nation of citizen soldiers. Not just the period you cite has our 'warrior culture' failed to produce a viable fighting force.

Reagan built a huge army but the drug issue was and still is a HUGE problem in the military. The 1SG of HHB 75th FIRES BDE used to tell me how he had to clean that REMF unit up of it's bangers and druggies. An E-6 and his 1SG would smoke spice while pushing troops in the training cycle. Civilians may have been proud of the military but it still suffers systemic problems. It very much is a huge corporation that has adopted the slogan- 'warrior culture'.

Reagan poured money into the military- pay raises more than anything gave the army a huge moral boost. Replacing decades old equipment gave a huge moral boost. Building modern housing gave a huge moral boost- none of that fostered a 'warrior culture'. Giving out BLACK berets was supposed to foster a 'warrior culture' as that beret had belonged to the Rangers. Polishing a turd doesn't make it a trophy- so too putting a REMF under a once honored headgear doesn't make a warrior.

The Navy has blue 'camouflage' Uniforms- an attempt to foster a 'warrior culture' when the wearer is in fact a techno-wienie with few if any warrior skills. just what camouflage value does that uniform have and where on the deep blue is it required??? Same for the AF and their cammo uniforms and green boots- where to they need them??? It isn't a warrior culture- it is lipstick on a pig. it is hollow sloganering created a false narrative to feel good.

Even the Infantry has adopted a corporate mindset along with 'warrior' jingos. Gen Tommy Franks in his book refers to himself as a 'war fighter' when comparing himself to the Chiefs of Staff (they had been war fighters at the lowest levels of command, survived and now held positions higher than him) But the reality is he spent his time in air conditioned HQ vans and buildings far from any fighting- he was a war MANAGER.

Yes the warrior culture continues but for the most part it is a jingoist slogan for a bunch of civilians who are dressed up funny. I always say if there was a true warrior culture the combat arms units would be at 100% and there would be a long wait list to join them... no Sir most soldiers joined to do a job that transfers to the civilian sector and would cry a river of tears if they were slotted to the Infantry....

That ain't a warrior culture.... eace

 

[Glen Contrarian]

Our nation has always been distrustful of a large standing army. The War of 1812 shows how poorly state militias do in combat after so much was made of a nation of citizen soldiers. Not just the period you cite has our 'warrior culture' failed to produce a viable fighting force.

Um, the conversation between myself and the other two was not about state militias, but about our military as it is now, and whether it has a 'warrior culture' now. I pointed out that at the present time, there is a warrior culture within the Marine and Army infantry - but within much of the rest, not so much...and that's the way it has to be in a modern, technology-savvy and -driven military. And when it comes to "failure to produce a viable fighting force, I'm not sure what you mean unless you're referring to those state militias.

Reagan built a huge army but the drug issue was and still is a HUGE problem in the military. The 1SG of HHB 75th FIRES BDE used to tell me how he had to clean that REMF unit up of it's bangers and druggies. An E-6 and his 1SG would smoke spice while pushing troops in the training cycle. Civilians may have been proud of the military but it still suffers systemic problems. It very much is a huge corporation that has adopted the slogan- 'warrior culture'.

Having been in the Navy before, during, and long after the inception of drug test, and having been a qualified urinalysis coordinator at two different commands, I can personally assure you that you are SO full of crap on that bolded claim above. Are there units where drug use is higher than at other units? Yes, of course. Are there times where a senior guy can't keep away from the stuff? Sure. But these are nothing more than cherry-picking - it is NOTHING like before...and anyone who knew how the drug culture was in the military before drug testing became normal and knew how things changed in the fifteen years after drug testing became normal KNOWS this. That 1SG you spoke to probably hadn't served in the early 1980's and so would not know just how different - how much BETTER - it is now than before. If he has not served in both eras as I have, he almost certainly cannot have the benefit of real perspective that I do.

 

[Glen Contrarian]

Reagan poured money into the military- pay raises more than anything gave the army a huge moral boost. Replacing decades old equipment gave a huge moral boost. Building modern housing gave a huge moral boost- none of that fostered a 'warrior culture'. Giving out BLACK berets was supposed to foster a 'warrior culture' as that beret had belonged to the Rangers. Polishing a turd doesn't make it a trophy- so too putting a REMF under a once honored headgear doesn't make a warrior.

The added pay helped, yes...but that was only part of it. Why? Take a don't-give-a-crap low-morale soldier or sailor and give him more money, and what happens? He spends even more money on alcohol and whores. The morale boost from more money gives a TEMPORARY boost...but absolutely does not give a lasting boost to morale. What does give a lasting boost is enforcing professionalism and military discipline at all levels, from top to bottom (which the drug-testing was a big part of, btw); letting the enlisted know in word and deed that the nation is proud of them and has their backs; giving them missions that are both doable and worth doing. Reagan - with more than a little help from Hollywood - did all that (with a few missteps along the way e.g. Beirut).

There's a story that comes down from Sun Tzu. When he was applying to be the emperor's general, the emperor said that if Sun Tzu could get the emperor's concubines to act as a proper military unit, he'd get the job. Sun Tzu took the challenge, lined up the concubines and told them to stand straight and then do (their version of) left face. The girls giggled and basically ignored him. Sun Tzu gave them a warning and repeated the order, and again they just giggled and half-assed tried to comply. Sun Tzu then said, "If the commander's troops do not follow his orders, then it is the commander's fault for not enforcing proper discipline", whereupon he ordered that a specific one of the concubines - the most influential one, apparently - be beheaded for refusal to follow orders. The emperor was shocked and told Sun Tzu that he could not allow this to happen (it was his favorite concubine)...and Sun Tzu replied, "The emperor wants his general to win victories, but will not allow his general to maintain the discipline that is necessary to achieve those victories." The emperor very reluctantly allowed Sun Tzu to proceed with the beheading. The next time the concubines were ordered to perform facing movements in formation, they obeyed without question.

THAT, sir, is not just part of maintaining discipline, but also of maintaining morale. The military's zero-tolerance towards drug use is not perfect and has resulted in many sad stories of ruined careers and subsequent hardship with the affected families...but it did wonders towards improving the professionalism, discipline, and morale. Whether you believe it or not simply doesn't matter, because I lived it and watched it from almost every side of the story.

The Navy has blue 'camouflage' Uniforms- an attempt to foster a 'warrior culture' when the wearer is in fact a techno-wienie with few if any warrior skills. just what camouflage value does that uniform have and where on the deep blue is it required??? Same for the AF and their cammo uniforms and green boots- where to they need them??? It isn't a warrior culture- it is lipstick on a pig. it is hollow sloganering created a false narrative to feel good.

I can't say much concerning the black berets, but about those Navy blue camo uniforms...I'm glad that MY Navy has them. Why? When I first came in, we wore polyester blend utilities that would melt in fire (which really is a big f***ing deal on board ship)...and were doggone hard to keep ironed and looking good. Then we switched to dungarees that were more comfortable and safer in case of fire...but were even harder to keep clean and pressed and looking good...especially when 200-man berthings with one iron and one ironing board is normal. Why is all that a big deal? Because ensuring the crew's uniform appearance is proper really does make a difference in the morale. If the crew looks like crap, they will give less of a damn in making sure their work is done right the first time...but ensuring that they keep a proper military appearance - as much of a pain in the ass as it certainly is - is a big part of maintaining a professional attitude among the command as a whole.

That, sir, is from a career's worth of experience, of seeing the issue from every side.

 

[Glen Contrarian]

Even the Infantry has adopted a corporate mindset along with 'warrior' jingos. Gen Tommy Franks in his book refers to himself as a 'war fighter' when comparing himself to the Chiefs of Staff (they had been war fighters at the lowest levels of command, survived and now held positions higher than him) But the reality is he spent his time in air conditioned HQ vans and buildings far from any fighting- he was a war MANAGER.

From the Wiki page: "Franks enlisted in the United States Army in 1965 and attended Basic Training at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri and received his Advanced Individual Training as a cryptologic analyst at Fort Devens, Massachusetts. Standing out among his peers in outstanding marksmanship and leadership qualities, PFC Franks was selected to attend the Artillery and Missile Officer Candidate School, Fort Sill, Oklahoma and was commissioned a second lieutenant in 1967. After an initial tour as a battery Assistant Executive Officer at Fort Sill, he was assigned to the US 9th Infantry Division, Republic of Vietnam, where he served as Forward observer, Aerial observer, and Assistant S-3 with 2nd Battalion, 4th Field Artillery. He also served as Fire Direction Officer and Fire Support Officer with 5th Battalion (mechanized), 60th Infantry during this tour.

So he enlisted as a grunt, and then went to OCS because he was a hot runner, and then served in Vietnam as a forward observer and aerial observer. Who the hell are you to say that he hasn't seen the elephant?

Y'know, I have no idea if or how long you served, but if you served a full career as I have, then you KNOW that at any rank above the lowest levels, they multi-task the hell out of you. You wind up having one, sometimes two primary duties, but having five collateral duties on the side is freaking normal...and the kinds of duties you have changes not just with every new duty station, but usually several times at every duty station along the way. What happens? By the time your career is over, if you haven't done it, chances are you've done something pretty doggone similar to it.

Yes the warrior culture continues but for the most part it is a jingoist slogan for a bunch of civilians who are dressed up funny. I always say if there was a true warrior culture the combat arms units would be at 100% and there would be a long wait list to join them... no Sir most soldiers joined to do a job that transfers to the civilian sector and would cry a river of tears if they were slotted to the Infantry....

That ain't a warrior culture.... eace

And you understand precisely d*** about what it takes to run a modern military. Sure, what you describe might have been great for, say, Sparta...but in a modern military where technology is absolutely crucial, your "true warrior culture" observation is a sick joke. As I pointed out to the others, much of the military - and especially the all-important logistics support units - do and MUST have a "corporate mindset"...or do you not remember the old maxim that "amateurs talk firepower, professionals talk logistics"? That, and - again, as I pointed out to the others - quite a bit of the military - and especially the Navy - has an "industrial mindset"...and this is out of absolute necessity, because without the gearheads and knuckle-draggers and zoomie-tweakers to make the ships and aircraft work, how the heck are the real warriors - the infantry - going to get to where they need to go, much less be reliably resupplied and supported once they are there?

So what are you going to do - tell the majority of the military who have corporate or industrial mindsets, "You aren't real warriors - you're just civilians who'd cry a river of tears if you were sent to the infantry and actually had to go fight"? Seeing as how the infantry canNOT do what they need to do without those oh-so-wimpy-in-your-eyes fake warriors, exactly how are THEY any less important than those in the infantry? Here's a clue: Every single one of those "fake warriors" can be ordered to take the field as an infantryman, because as crappy and quick-to-die as they would be, they can still fire a rifle...BUT those "real warriors" canNOT be ordered to go maintain and fly that cargo plane, much less get that ship underway and sail it into harm's way.

I do hope that you've gotten a clue that you ticked off the wrong guy, who just happened to be willing to spend the better part of an hour striving to unf**k your brain, since you simply do not realize just how ignorant you really are about deeper military issues such as "drug-testing" and "morale" and "warrior culture".

 

[notquiteright]

Um, the conversation between myself and the other two was not about state militias, but about our military as it is now, and whether it has a 'warrior culture' now. I pointed out that at the present time, there is a warrior culture within the Marine and Army infantry - but within much of the rest, not so much...and that's the way it has to be in a modern, technology-savvy and -driven military. And when it comes to "failure to produce a viable fighting force, I'm not sure what you mean unless you're referring to those state militias. Having been in the Navy before, during, and long after the inception of drug test, and having been a qualified urinalysis coordinator at two different commands, I can personally assure you that you are SO full of crap on that bolded claim above. Are there units where drug use is higher than at other units? Yes, of course. Are there times where a senior guy can't keep away from the stuff? Sure. But these are nothing more than cherry-picking - it is NOTHING like before...and anyone who knew how the drug culture was in the military before drug testing became normal and knew how things changed in the fifteen years after drug testing became normal KNOWS this. That 1SG you spoke to probably hadn't served in the early 1980's and so would not know just how different - how much BETTER - it is now than before. If he has not served in both eras as I have, he almost certainly cannot have the benefit of real perspective that I do.

I have to laugh at your cherry picking as well... The 'warrior culture' in the COMBAT ARMS of the Marines and Army Infantry is but a TINY fraction of the military. Attempts to sloganize the rest is the absurdity guys like you wish to continue. The navy and air force even less so. So few today have a warrior mindset.

I served in the early 80's (in the 70's as well) Top and I compared notes and sad to say many new soldiers are pissing hot and getting a ticket out. That dozens of guys are not shooting heroin isn't the issue- they are doing drugs. I see that all the time, plenty of low skilled labor in Lawton OK thanks to booted soldiers.

I see this damn near everyday, you're 'experience' is in one branch at one time... eace

 

[Glen Contrarian]

I have to laugh at your cherry picking as well... The 'warrior culture' in the COMBAT ARMS of the Marines and Army Infantry is but a TINY fraction of the military. Attempts to sloganize the rest is the absurdity guys like you wish to continue. The navy and air force even less so. So few today have a warrior mindset.

I served in the early 80's (in the 70's as well) Top and I compared notes and sad to say many new soldiers are pissing hot and getting a ticket out. That dozens of guys are not shooting heroin isn't the issue- they are doing drugs. I see that all the time, plenty of low skilled labor in Lawton OK thanks to booted soldiers.

I see this damn near everyday, you're 'experience' is in one branch at one time... eace

And if you'll check, that's pretty much what I said...and I continued on saying WHY it must be that way, WHY it's good and right that the "warrior mindset" you so treasure is not found in much of the rest of the military. I guess you didn't read that far. And if you served in the 70's and early 80's, that implies that you did not serve a full career.

As far as drug use goes, apparently either those who are getting kicked out for drugs just happen to be clustering around where you personally can see them, or you're allowing your personal assumptions to cloud your judgement, since the positive urinalysis rate (as of 2013) is about .93 percent...yes, less than one percent.

In other words, yes, those of you who think you know what you're talking about truly annoy those of us who do know what we're talking about.