Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Grip it and rip it
Apr 28, 2020
What you aren't considering is that if only veterans were granted the franchise, then politically active individuals would be drawn to military service. They may subsequently be killed in whatever military engagements take place. This process of elimination would undoubtedly have a net positive effect on society. Thank you

bulletsponge13 posted:

Veteran =/= Military in Starship Troopers- something you are conveniently leaving out.

Also applying the numbers of our system to a hypothetical system is uh, apples to oranges at best.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Grip it and rip it
Apr 28, 2020

Kurzon posted:

I can get my own electronic copy easily enough, thanks.

I think Heinlein's idea that service makes you wiser somehow would be better if applied to leaders, not voters. Selectorate theory tells me that it is bad to disenfranchise people for any reason, whether it be lack of military service or poor education. Leaders are another matter. I in fact think people should be barred from running in elections if they lack education or have a criminal history. If only veterans can serve as leaders, that's OK because as long as they must depend on a broad support base to stay in office, they are incentivized to deliver good public policy.

lol what the gently caress

Grip it and rip it
Apr 28, 2020

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.

So here's my question: What's the alternative, and what is a 'good' officer?

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)

Grip it and rip it
Apr 28, 2020

Fivemarks posted:

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?

Loyalty to the regime is all that matters

Grip it and rip it
Apr 28, 2020

CMD598 posted:

I don't like assuming we're "just better" because I feel like we're kinda just like rich assholes that can throw money around and pretend our success isn't dependent on a bunch of disgruntled junior enlisted not lighting it on fire at any given moment for some reason...probably healthcare.

Like our infantry's probably on point but will undoubtedly fare far worse when SN Timmy fucks up some maintenance that leaves the four decade old floating airstrip that's got the nearest supporting air assets dead in the water or worse because he's been awake for 3 days.

Our maintenance and logistics programs are adhered to (relatively) and SN timmy isnt the bottom line that maintenance is taking place. That kind of QA costs a lot of money but makes sure our ships dont look like the zhukov or whatever that Russian smokestack on the water is called.

Collectively its money, continuous training (and warfare), and selecting competent military leadership(relatively) who are loyal to the state and largely apolitical (again relatively) that guides much of our success

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply