Help support TMP


"Warrior vs Soldier: Top 5 Differences" Topic


9 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

Please remember that some of our members are children, and act appropriately.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Return to the Warrior vs Soldier: Top 5 Differences Poll


Areas of Interest

General

Featured Hobby News Article


Featured Link


Featured Showcase Article

Cheap Scenery: Giant Mossy Rocks

Well, they're certainly cheap...


Featured Book Review


430 hits since 27 Oct 2020
©1994-2024 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?


TMP logo

Membership

Please sign in to your membership account, or, if you are not yet a member, please sign up for your free membership account.
robert piepenbrink Supporting Member of TMP27 Oct 2020 3:58 a.m. PST

Evidently warriors don't have discipline. Every time I ever heard some GI explaining why he'd flagrantly disobeyed some order or reg, he started calling himself a "warrior."

ScottWashburn Sponsoring Member of TMP27 Oct 2020 10:22 a.m. PST

There clearly is a significant difference. The European colonial powers were so successful because they sent armies of soldiers against armies of warriors. The technological difference were actually very minor compared to that.

Personal logo ColCampbell Supporting Member of TMP27 Oct 2020 6:23 p.m. PST

#2 and #9 are very similar.

But don't forget, if soldiers are not well led, the well-led warriors can destroy them -- cf Battle Teutobergerwald in 9 AD link

Jim

Frederick Supporting Member of TMP28 Oct 2020 7:35 a.m. PST

Agreed – while some Special Forces types champion the warrior ethos, well led soldiers beat well led warriors hands down

dapeters28 Oct 2020 9:05 a.m. PST

I think this is one of the major mistakes of understanding the European Middlea ages, with notable exception, The armies mostly all warriors.

David Manley28 Oct 2020 10:03 a.m. PST

Other – present day "warriors" use the term (or others apply it) to imply a superiority over common "soldiers" that doesn't actually exist (like "aviator" over "pilot")

dapeters29 Oct 2020 9:02 a.m. PST

I think in the modern moment, particularly thanks to marketers, we like the term "Warrior" because it suggested an individual, "soldier" in connotation is not nearly as sexy. Would you rather be described as a dishwashing Warrior or soldier?

Personal logo Parzival Supporting Member of TMP29 Oct 2020 1:47 p.m. PST

Pffft to all the choices.

A warrior is a person who has fought in a war.
A soldier is a person who is trained to perform various roles in an army, whether in war or peace.

Thus, some soldiers are warriors, and some warriors are soldiers, but the terms are neither exclusionary nor in conflict with each other.

The English language really isn't that complicated.

COL Scott ret01 Nov 2020 9:24 p.m. PST

From the US Army Soldiers Creed:

I am an American Soldier.

I am a warrior and a member of a team.

I serve the people of the United States, and live the Army Values.

I will always place the mission first.

I will never accept defeat.

I will never quit.

I will never leave a fallen comrade.

I am disciplined, physically and mentally tough, trained and proficient in my warrior tasks and drills.

I always maintain my arms, my equipment and myself.

I am an expert and I am a professional.

I stand ready to deploy, engage, and destroy, the enemies of the United States of America in close combat.

I am a guardian of freedom and the American way of life.

I am an American Soldier


In other words you can be both, perhaps Soldiers are the job, and many of those have a warrior mindset.

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.