"Only 1% of Americans serving in military is ‘problematic’" Topic

If you think a critical response is "a fight," you're posting your cluelessness up front. You can't expect to write a long post filled with pabulum in direct and stated response to something other people have written without exposing your critical reasoning skills, written grammar, command of the facts, or basic intelligence to criticism. That's not how the world works.

Soldiers are not "unified by authority." They are answerable to it. It's a core tenet of military discipline, embodied in the UCMJ, that none of the other groups you've mentioned are subject to. And it's ridiculous and reductionistic to say "it took the Army a long time to become diverse." The Army has always been diverse; it's a reflection of the country.

The problem is not diversity per se: the problem is the policy of mandating certain thoughts and attitudes, which acquire legal form when they are pushed through the chain of command. Any other profession can tell you how to behave in the office: the military goes a lot further than that. "Diversity" has become (in essence) a political message, pushed by the bureaucracy onto the military in the hopes that the military will in time adopt the same values and attitudes as the bureaucracy and law enforcement- it will eventually be another unconstitutional arm of government relentlessly pushing the corporate views onto its members (and not incidentally, in lockstep with the uniparty in Washington)- and potentially on the rest of us. It's a harder sell (because there are no unions, and because soldiers are by nature a heck of a lot tougher than office workers or police), but they're pushing it just the same.

9LBS +2

As we see only a US military service member or those well read on this subject. Can see and understand the reality of this type of "dogma" being forced on the US Armed Forces.

I know, again, a Rifle Plt Ldr and Mech Co. Cdr. AND I'm not the only one here, as many Vets have similar experiences and knowledge, especially at the lower tactical levels. E.g. Fire Tms, Squads, Platoons, etc. That is the pointy end of the spear, where the rubber meets the road, etc. That is where wars are won.

We recently saw again this clearly demonstrated with remembering June 6, 1944, D-Day. 80 years ago …

Cluelessness? Come on, sport! Lose that whole first para and stop setting up to argue. It's not the debate team. I asked a couple of questions and this is how you respond.

Vets have plenty of knowledge. So do cops. I hope you are not suggesting it's an easy job compared to the Army. Not everybody is a hero in either capacity. But tough is not exclusive to the military.

I reprint my other response from another post.

Law enforcement a "lapdog"? There is no further discussion here. You paint with a broad brush. There is a wall of photos in DC of dead agents, line of duty. They did not die harassing right wing extremists. You disrespect them and every other one who goes out to do his job of protecting you everyday. Why? To support conspiracy agendas? You think somebody said "Let's call them civilians" in a takeover?

I have great respect for your service, am grateful. All of you. But try to remember you are not the only ones holding down the fort.

You won't need to bother with a reply except to impress others here.

Why? Are you going to say you're leaving again?

You have made it clear in previous posts that you don't care for me, and repeatedly twisted my words around, claiming to respond to arguments I never made. You treat me to some ridiculous lecture on what you think, make it clear you're talking to me, and close with a statement that you "aren't looking for a fight?" Whatever!

I can rest my case on the difference between the military and law enforcement on the things you've written here and elsewhere.

And while I'm at it, since you want to wax indignant (and wave the bloody shirt of other men's deaths while you're at it), I'll tell you why I am contemptuous of Federal law enforcement: because their negligence and incompetence nearly cost me my life, and the lives of close friends and colleagues- and did cost the lives of others I knew. 9/11 is directly traceable to the Feebs' failure to find and halt a conspiracy whose effects we feel today.

And yes, it DOES chap my fourth point of contact (and if you know where that term came from, it's only because someone told you) to hear a cop who couldn't come within a country mile of meeting the height, weight, and physical fitness standards I lived with for nine years refer to me as a "civilian."

As I said, I think it comes down to diversity, as in a military representative of all citizens and diversity as a politically motivated agenda to "obtain" votes and donations.

The first is positive and necessary. The second is a destructive force to a military.

The nation is going through one of those transitions, which occur periodically, when the political parties as they have existed for decades reach a point where their stated goals and aims align less and less perfectly with those of their voters. When that happens, a turbulent period follows, as supporters and politicians (and those portions of the less-committed public who get engaged in the process, either because they want the government to do something or to stop doing something) try to get everyone aligned around a new consensus.

This one's going to take awhile, because the positions of the two parties stagnated during the Cold War and ossified after it. But when it is done, their pools of supporters and their relative positions are going to look very different from what they were twenty years ago.

Okay, I get your explanation and agree. There are no end of snafus in the intel community, including politicians. But some things they get right. Normally this is where you say you don't care what I think.

I don't dislike you. But I live in the middle, not on the right and we don't always agree. Not personal, but you go there – you are passionate about your beliefs – but you start your replies about my defects as you see them.. I return the favor, since you start with what is wrong with me. Yea that's a fight.

If you think I am trying to subvert the right wing dominance on this board, I can tell you that i am not. I have learned just how angry you guys are. I share some of that. But not as adamantly. I was trained to look for evidence. It's not a good fit here, evidence means something different to everyone now and we are in high gear with our differences.

There are still good federal agents. There are good local cops. Plenty of good soldiers. That's only an opinion. I may try to make the point sometimes. I come and go.

I respect the hell out of anyone who has jumped out of an airplane in the line of duty.

What business do you have telling me what my opinions are? You seem to be determined to spend your time assigning people on this board political categorizations that you have devised, and then pestering them with questions that reflect not what they have said, but your own conception of who they are and what they believe.

A good example of this is your attribution to me of the view that I believe you are "trying to subvert the right wing dominance on this board." That's not something I think – that's something you think that I think. It's not even a gross oversimplification of my thought processes: it's a thought that occurred to you, by yourself, and that you then posted on this board. It is not reflective of my actual views, which I've stated repeatedly. It is your attempt to assign a political origin to my views, so they can be dismissed or responded to with partisan talking points that you've picked up from someone who actually knows how to argue- that is what I object to.

I've explained repeatedly that this is straw man argumentation, and pointed out just as often that it's fundamentally dishonest, and insulting. Yet you continue to do it.

You want to pose as a moderate, conciliatory truth-teller, but in fact what you do is try to cast yourself in one political role, and those you argue with in another. That's easier for you, but it's an insult to those of us who are interested in discussing ideas, rather than just lining up for a dreary partisan-slag over which party is right and which party is wrong. I want nothing to do with that.

Nine pound:

I said "if you think that I am trying to subvert the right wing dominance of this board"

It does not attribute any view to you, but it then implies you are part of a group with those views, and for that I sincerely apologize.

You also explain me, and how you have repeatedly told me about me. Maybe we could just stop doing this personal stuff.

I would love to be a moderate conciliatory truth teller! Not skilled enough, and the truth about things like impact of woke in the military is not readily apparent.

I think the middle, as I know it, may be the closest I come to your own post political views, although I know this about you only from your general statement. I may not make it for the next political era, but I am sure not able to identify with the current era. I would be happy for anyone to assume the truth teller role, but it seems most people right now are sure they already know it.

The last thing I am is a dreary partisan slag. This sounds far worse even than pushing strawmen or being a poser to me…I don't belong to a party because they are both wrong. And a waste of time at this point.

But the conciliatory truth teller is somewhere. Maybe in the 8th grade right now.

I respect the hell out of anyone who has jumped out of an airplane in the line of duty.

Me too !!!! 😎