|
TheWeedNumber posted:But what about JFK? I said what I said.
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2023 17:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 18:32 |
|
|
jfk was never in the military, he was a giant cyborg built by the cia. dont you remember his quote? "ich bin ein immortal"
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2023 17:23
|
|
|
Kurzon posted:I can get my own electronic copy easily enough, thanks. lol what the gently caress
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2023 17:24
|
|
|
Grip it and rip it posted:lol what the gently caress Fascism is bad. Also only the "right kind" of people should hold office.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2023 17:26
|
|
|
Kurzon posted:I can get my own electronic copy easily enough, thanks. Okay, well, that didn't go quite as planned. Anyway, here's the thing: You dropped by with a post about a book you've never read that you just copy/pasted from somewhere else. Not a great start. Then instead of participating in the conversation you started, you hosed off. When you came back, you admitted you never read the book and then tried loving off again. That ain't gonna fly. So here's what we're gonna do. I'm giving you until noon eastern time on Sunday to read the book and tell us what you learned and how what you've read jives with what the video said. Or you can take an enforced posting vacation. I told you to come back to this thread and participate. I thought you'd do things like ask questions about the book, not try to make arguments as though you know anything about a book you've never loving read.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2023 17:46
|
|
|
not everyone is a big ol nerd that has time to read a book in 6 days like you McNerdy!!!
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2023 17:56
|
|
|
in conclusion i hope you enjoyed reading this book report as much as i enjoyed writing it
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2023 18:12
|
|
|
I finally listened to the OP video. I'm not sure OP did, since the video makes points he argues against. I wasn't going to, because if OP can't read the book they want to discuss, why should I waste my time? But McNally gave them HW, so it's only fair. The video is also beyond cliff notes of the book, and is factually wrong in some places. It's a brief treatise about Heinlein, NOT Starship Troopers. It cherry picks to establish a specific viewpoint to build off of- ignoring the fact that the book never presents Military rule, that the "only the strong" attitude doesn't apply to the individual, but the society at large, that they establish the reverse Clauswitz- Politics are another form of warfare; that voting is an act of force by the individual. It seems OP stumbled across the video, then remembered a semester of PoliSci 102.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2023 18:44
|
|
|
bulletsponge13 posted:I finally listened to the OP video. I'm not sure OP did, since the video makes points he argues against. lol holy poo poo this keeps getting better and better
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2023 18:58
|
|
|
pfft I don't need to read that poo poo not like any of those mobile infantry dumbasses read it anyway 
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2023 19:07
|
|
|
McNally posted:lol holy poo poo this keeps getting better and better Maybe I'm wrong- if someone wants to correct me, but the biggest to me was that the video outright says Veterans have no inherent better attributes beyond service- something OP keeps just ignoring, instead trying to convince a thread to go Cap'n Crunch Oops! All Fascists.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2023 19:11
|
|
|
I want to dig into the no officers as politicians comment Why? I’m a smart civvy and I’ve worked with my fair share of Es and Os. Generally the Os were lazy and focused on blue sky ideas while the Es were focused on getting the task at hand done the best way they know how. For all the horrors working for a retired LtCOL in an academic setting, they did a pretty good job of keeping the grant money flowing. Kind of a doofus otherwise, but that was most of academia IME.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2023 20:03
|
|
|
Officers are typically the first to throw their underlings in a wood chipper for a slight increase in their evaluation score. Which if you think about it is a really poor trait to have in a politician.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2023 20:11
|
|
|
CainFortea posted:Officers are typically the first to throw their underlings in a wood chipper for a slight increase in their evaluation score. Which if you think about it is a really poor trait to have in a politician. It's this, a thousand times. Dont forget the emphasis on making spreadsheet blocks the right color regardless of weather the data supports it or not. Most of them are very practiced in self delusion.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2023 21:06
|
|
|
bulletsponge13 posted:I said what I said. On one hand, can’t fault a man who stands by their principles. On the other hand 
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2023 21:12
|
|
|
Nystral posted:I want to dig into the no officers as politicians comment As stated, the Officer Corps as a whole (obv some exceptions apply) tend to be self serving, and politically cutthroat in pursuit of personal gain. They tend to be poor leaders even within the institution- an incestuous little institution full of cliques and cohorts, one with customs and policies far different from civilian reality. They tend to be operating removed from reality, from a position of privilege and protection. Officers tend to have the worst traits of politicians in spades, and not enough social experience to know it's wrong. They tend to be the types who think about how great a Purple Heart will look in their jacket without contemplating the cost. I'm also a fairly bitter E who had to deal with their garbage.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2023 21:48
|
|
|
bulletsponge13 posted:As stated, the Officer Corps as a whole (obv some exceptions apply) tend to be self serving, and politically cutthroat in pursuit of personal gain. They tend to be poor leaders even within the institution- an incestuous little institution full of cliques and cohorts, one with customs and policies far different from civilian reality. They tend to be operating removed from reality, from a position of privilege and protection. Officers tend to have the worst traits of politicians in spades, and not enough social experience to know it's wrong. I’m looking forward to the amount of dick/clit I’m gonna need to suck if I get this internship at either Leavenworth or Carlisle Barracks. Cause guess what’s at both of those places? Officers and war colleges.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2023 22:19
|
|
|
My Spirit Otter posted:jfk was never in the military, he was a giant cyborg built by the cia. dont you remember his quote? "ich bin ein immortal" Talkin animals that don't make no drat sense.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2023 22:24
|
|
|
TheWeedNumber posted:I’m looking forward to the amount of dick/clit I’m gonna need to suck if I get this internship at either Leavenworth or Carlisle Barracks. Cause guess what’s at both of those places? Officers and war colleges. Other posters can temper your expectations. My experience with Nobles was fairly limited, and very tainted by both those experiences and my own attitude, which never quite jived with the Army. I'm sure that it's not as bad as I portray. Part of my attitude comes from dealing mostly pay grades I had no business being around- LTC and above.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2023 23:15
|
|
|
bulletsponge13 posted:Other posters can temper your expectations. My experience with Nobles was fairly limited, and very tainted by both those experiences and my own attitude, which never quite jived with the Army. I'm sure that it's not as bad as I portray. Part of my attitude comes from dealing mostly pay grades I had no business being around- LTC and above. I just finished reading A Bright Shining Lie and I’m now reading The Army in Vietnam. And somehow I don’t expect the “greenshirters” as the career army officers turned academics are called, to listen if officers historically don’t listen to poo poo that doesn’t match their glorious vision anyway. Even John Paul Vann falls for his own hubris at the end. Him dying in a helicopter crash was probably a better end than watching South Vietnam fall apart all around despite his efforts. And that dude wasn’t a paragon of morality neither, let’s be clear. Brave loving dude and a good soldier, good commander. Bout it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2023 23:19
|
|
|
do you guys know how many assassins it took to kill jfk?
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2023 23:56
|
|
|
My Spirit Otter posted:do you guys know how many assassins it took to kill jfk? 1.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2023 23:59
|
|
|
none, his head just did that. i call it the no bullet theory
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2023 00:02
|
|
|
My Spirit Otter posted:none, his head just did that. i call it the no bullet theory I love you so much right now.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2023 00:26
|
|
|
My Spirit Otter posted:none, his head just did that. i call it the no bullet theory That's mind-blowing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2023 00:32
|
|
|
bulletsponge13 posted:I love you so much right now. im just doing my best to treat this thread with the respect it deserves
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2023 00:33
|
|
|
loving galaxy brain thinking right there
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2023 01:40
|
|
|
Onassis had JFK shot so he could get with Jackie.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2023 03:43
|
|
|
Pretty much every idea Heinlein ever had was a bad idea.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2023 04:18
|
|
|
The book isn't even hard to read.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2023 04:30
|
|
|
It was originally published in serial form for what amounted to a Boy's Magazine. It's under 300 pages. It's like 4 bad bathroom trips.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2023 05:55
|
|
|
TheWeedNumber posted:But what about JFK? 
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2023 06:17
|
|
|
So I can totally get the "Officers are bad" argument. Enlisted hate their officers generally, and a bad officer in the right position can spoil the whole pot by setting the wrong example and encouraging lovely politicking and bullshit instead of doing the job right. So here's my question: What's the alternative, and what is a 'good' officer?
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2023 15:57
|
|
|
Fivemarks posted:So I can totally get the "Officers are bad" argument. Enlisted hate their officers generally, and a bad officer in the right position can spoil the whole pot by setting the wrong example and encouraging lovely politicking and bullshit instead of doing the job right. An autopen or a signature stamp.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2023 16:16
|
|
|
I served under two officers that I would call not terrible people. And they both were very good at communicating the mission to their people, and ensuring that we had the tools and material required to complete the mission to the best of our abilities. The difference between the two of them is that the great officer once he did all of that, went to his office and shut the gently caress up. The only other things he would have us do were play quake 2 capture the flag against each other as practice for our regular matches against the computer shop. The good but not great officer tended to walk around and get involved in everybody else's stuff, but he rarely changed what people were doing or anything he was more of a distraction. That's the only reason he wasn't great.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2023 16:42
|
|
|
Fivemarks posted:So I can totally get the "Officers are bad" argument. Enlisted hate their officers generally, and a bad officer in the right position can spoil the whole pot by setting the wrong example and encouraging lovely politicking and bullshit instead of doing the job right. "Good" in what way? What is "good" on a strategic level may not be "good" on a tactical level. That is before we add in human elements and concepts like "leadership". In general terms, a "good" officer is an officer that states the objectives (and any constraints) and sets their NCO corps loose to accomplish the mission while being available as an escalation point to remove blockers/provide more info/handle admin stuff/etc. Really, they are just kind of herding cats and pointing the mob in the generally correct direction. When you read the "officer bad" stories, they almost always go further than my example above. They reach into the "gears" and make adjustments (micromanage), they get a message from the "good idea fairy" and attempt to "improve" something. Almost always, it is because they are trying to improve their "rating" that is completely arbitrary and subjective. We try to quantify things like "leadership", which is totally not an abstract concept... Edit: post above me basically says the same thing, I bet you are going to get a bunch of these replies.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2023 16:45
|
|
|
Fivemarks posted:So I can totally get the "Officers are bad" argument. Enlisted hate their officers generally, and a bad officer in the right position can spoil the whole pot by setting the wrong example and encouraging lovely politicking and bullshit instead of doing the job right. Depends on the branch, rate, level etc. Generally a good officer is someone who maximizes the good qualities of those under his command while minimizing their bad qualities. How that actually plays out is incredibly diverse ( and rare)
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2023 16:59
|
|
|
JFK actually got into some poo poo though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2023 17:03
|
|
|
I'm basically getting two kinds of responses: All officers are bad and unneeded (which I know can't be the case, considering how often it is that an army without good leadership gets rolled up by a theoretically inferior force that has better leadership); and "Officers are good when they focus on the big picture and overall direction- handling the 'What' to do while leaving the 'how' to do it to others" Which fits in with the general western ideal paradigm, but what about military traditions that don't have NCO's and put less of an emphasis on individual initiative and the idea that soldiers can be trusted to poo poo without an officer micromanage it? Like the Russians, traditionally, or what I've heard of some middle eastern militaries like the Egyptians and Saudis?
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2023 17:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 18:32 |
|
|
Woah is this the first ever GIP mod challenge?
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2023 17:13
|
|
