U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Military Life and Issues
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Do military members have better values and backgrounds than those that did not serve?
No, military members are nearly identical to the general population that didn't serve in the military. 43 66.15%
Yes, military members have better values, even before serving, then the general population that doesn't serve. 16 24.62%
This may have been true decades in the past but not now. 6 9.23%
Voters: 65. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-03-2015, 07:56 PM
 
1,407 posts, read 2,153,169 times
Reputation: 1428

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by TamaraSavannah View Post
Not a chance!

Where to start? Or perhaps the question is, if the military does have better values, then what should be the profile, the model of the military person with those values?

The thing is, I worked with officers who wanted things to look good for them while they were there but didn't care if it fell apart right after they signed off on it. Or perhaps those who one would seriously wonder if they bribed people to get their quals signed off. Or those that took off the wedding ring once the ship left the breakwaters. Or commanders who wouldn't write a bad fitrep on someone but rather, just pass them off to someone else.

AT BEST, you have an organization that is good for what it is meant for, fighting wars, but often one might find that your given mission is not accepted by others for their mission. A "viewpoint" I often encountered in the late Cold War in security was, "Why so serious? We have nothing here that anyone would want to steal.".

Now, on the other side of the coin, it is a bad mistake, IMHO, to expect them to be knights. Why? Because the harder you let them play, the harder they will fight.
Agreed.

Some of the most disgusting and horrible humans I have had the displeasure to know have been in the military.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-04-2015, 09:49 AM
 
Location: Greenville, SC
1,229 posts, read 2,551,725 times
Reputation: 1079
I served '94-'99 in the Marines. Met some great folks, but some of the biggest turds were career people, or what I would call "careerists", a subset of career folks.

Discipline within the ranks declined during my time in, although I'd blame some of the people who were brought in during the build-up of the Reagan years (careerist types), as much as the young people who were coming in, say, from mid-'96 to '98. We had a mix of hangers-on who didn't care about anybody but themselves, mixed in with young people who needed discipline in their own right, due to the degraded social standards of America, ca. late-80's and into the 90's.

In the middle, you have dedicated NCO's/petty officers, officers of various ranks, and a smattering of senior-enlisteds, who actually care and carry themselves to a standard. The rest get kicked out, get out after their time in (after having not learned anything of value, including how to treat others), or they slither through the ranks, hoping to get to their 20 years, or whatever.

The armed forces have been too big for decades, a smaller force would be more nimble, more moral, and less bureaucratic.

Generally, I'd trust veterans and active duty folks, however if one of them can't explain to me in plain English what, exactly, it is they do or did in the service, then they can't be trusted, and I'd question their character/morality.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-05-2015, 02:06 AM
 
Location: Texas Hill Country
8,896 posts, read 4,840,854 times
Reputation: 7693
Quote:
Originally Posted by HowardRoarke View Post
...........The armed forces have been too big for decades, a smaller force would be more nimble, more moral, and less bureaucratic.

Generally, I'd trust veterans and active duty folks, however if one of them can't explain to me in plain English what, exactly, it is they do or did in the service, then they can't be trusted, and I'd question their character/morality.
While the issue of too big is probably true, how much smaller? One of the "wonderful" things about the military is the ability to put lots of manpower on many a task when it is needed. It's like the disadvantage/advantage of the submarine and destroyer where the latter has the greater capability of putting a fresh crew on each prosecution shift but the former can lack that.

Sort of like the lines from a Buffy episode:

Angelus: If I decide to walk into Buffy's room do you even believe for a micro-second that you can stop me?
Xander: Maybe not, maybe that security guard couldn't either, or those cops or the orderlies, but I'm kind of curious to find out. You game?



One has a large group of people who are cross trained to do each others' jobs so if it came down to it, the job can be completed, if in a generalized, inexact manner.


As to the ability of someone being able to say plainly what they did in the service, maybe yes, maybe no but if no, should that be reason enough to distrust them?



I have a girlfriend who was part of a Hawk missile battery in the Army....and that's all she will say on that. Okay, having been intelligence/MP, I can understand and appreciate that, but would someone who had never been in understand? Further, we state things so people might understand but when it comes down to it, what is stated is not necessarily exactly what we were. While I did at a time have a title of "intelligence officer", most of my work in that field was in EW, a lot of reading, and MP....only the Navy doesn't have MPs but Master at Arms (and etc etc etc).



Further, it goes both ways. Once at my Navy Police station, I heard someone answer the phone and comment that the caller was looking for the "Provost Marshall" and they didn't have a clue who that was. Of course, the caller was asking for ME!.....but in the Navy, I was called something else.


Finally, there is honorable and there is honest. "Tamara, are you an honorable person?"


I'm honest, I believe in being fair in that I won't take an untruthful advantage against my national political opponent, I have morals such as the ends do not justify the means, but I have a problem with calling myself honorable because I think tactically. I will not necessarily fight face to face and I certainly will not fight on even odds but rather seek to maximize those of my side."


When we are talking about the military, however they were trained to fight, we should keep in mind that once they thought like that............and probably still think like that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-08-2015, 11:46 PM
 
15,030 posts, read 8,568,934 times
Reputation: 25016
Definitely people in the military are no more or no less honorable or trustworthy than regular civilians.

Just because they serve/served in uniform, that doesn't mean as a whole they are more 'honorable' in character or other values than civilians.

I'm not saying anything badly with this, just that people in the military are like people anywhere else, there's good, bad, in between, etc.

When I was in the Navy I had my checks stolen from my ship bunk and someone cashed it. Another time I was about to leave the ship and felt around for my wallet and noticed it was not there. I walked back and a sailor comes up to me with my wallet. The wallet was missing some cash I had put in it earlier, so obviously this guy's 'noble' deed was hardly honorable.

I've also had uniform items stolen right off my bunk when I was with an Army reserve unit training in the desert.

Compare that to my civilian jobs the past few decades. I could leave my wallet unlocked at my desk and no one would touch it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-10-2015, 01:51 PM
 
693 posts, read 757,053 times
Reputation: 480
I don't know the answer on that one suburban guy. Thieves come in all ranks ,sizes,colors you name it. I recall when I would sometimes go to the RandolphAFB commissary with my dad who was disabled,and even before he retired ,he'd come home and make a comment about the place was filled with army types shopping. He was airforce(1942-1975),so don't know if that was the deal, or maybe the army accepted folks whom the airforce wouldn't take or maybe it was easier to get into the army than the airforce.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-19-2015, 09:44 AM
 
18 posts, read 12,630 times
Reputation: 45
Responding to the OP:

Ha, I wish that simply being part of the military = better values. I think the tendency is to enhance whatever qualities you bring to it - if you were a ****bag prior to service you'll be an even bolder ****bag after service. If you were a good person with a good head/heart, you will take many military lessons to heart and be an even better person.

I am both proud and ashamed of veterans. Some I want to thank for their service and others I want to perform a running drop kick on...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-19-2015, 12:08 PM
 
2,058 posts, read 4,313,028 times
Reputation: 1827
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnsonkk View Post
A discussion keeps going in a regional thread on the issue of background differences between those in the military and the general population.

Is this phrase correct?

Most of the people in the military did it to get away from home, get a job and provide for their families. Generally the armed services are not made up of people born with a silver spoon in their mouths or who are going to UC Berkeley as their backup plan. As such they bring in a lot of the problems from their old lives. Soldiers are not more honest or socially aware than anyone else.

Might this have been true in the past, still is true, or is this not a correct assumption for today's military?
I believe this is 100% true. The only difference between military and civilian personnel is, the military has a military discipline and justice to keep their personnel in-check. After normal duty hours and the take the uniforms off many of these well disciplined soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines turn into confederate flag waving cowboy boot wearing racists, new-nazis, gang-bangers, druggies and everything else.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-19-2015, 12:13 PM
 
436 posts, read 455,147 times
Reputation: 197
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnsonkk View Post
As such they bring in a lot of the problems from their old lives. Soldiers are not more honest or socially aware than anyone else.
True. That's why we have military prisons and the UCMJ.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-19-2015, 10:32 PM
 
17,950 posts, read 9,863,505 times
Reputation: 17441
Quote:
Originally Posted by dorado0359 View Post
I believe this is 100% true. The only difference between military and civilian personnel is, the military has a military discipline and justice to keep their personnel in-check. After normal duty hours and the take the uniforms off many of these well disciplined soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines turn into confederate flag waving cowboy boot wearing racists, new-nazis, gang-bangers, druggies and everything else.
Away from the flagpole.

Around the flagpole, the rules don't change.

As I said before, people come into the military as they are in civilian life. However, I would argue that the ideals of military culture are superior to the mores of the civilian world. That is because the ideals of the military culture are deliberately designed to create social cohesion while the mores of the civilian world "jest growed."

Marine Corps Values: Honor, Courage, Commitment
Air Force Values: Integrity, Service, Excellence
US Army Corps Values: Loyalty, Duty, Respect, Service before Self, Honor, Integrity, Courage

Some people in the military actually buy into those things. I did.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-19-2015, 10:51 PM
 
Location: Middle America
35,821 posts, read 39,409,007 times
Reputation: 48621
If you only believe in them/uphold them part of the time, within a certain role, then they aren't values. They're simply required guidelines for conduct.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Military Life and Issues
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top