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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-06-2017, 11:17 AM
 
Location: Forests of Maine
27,754 posts, read 43,604,189 times
Reputation: 14659

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cruzincat View Post
I tend to agree with you, but I just finished watching a bunch of WWII documentaries last week. One of them was about the logistics management of getting the stuff to where it needs to be when it needed to be there. One comment stood out to me, that of all the people in the military during WWII, only 1 in 6 actually served in combat situations.
That number sounds near accurate.

We have over 150 military bases all around the globe, all of those bases are manned. Supply lines are running 365 days/year to keep all of them operational. Even if we did not have any combat happening anywhere, we would still have 200,000 troops on foreign soil doing their jobs, maintaining bases our bases.

I often hear infantry using the phrase 'the tip of the spear'. If you want to think in those terms, the mass of that tip is small whereas the rest of the spear is much larger.

During the Cold War, I served on FBM subs. Maintaining missiles ready for launch. To an infantryman, they would consider submariners to support, and certainly not 'tip of the spear'. Had we launched MRVs they might consider us differently

If you want to maintain bases across the globe, and thousands of nuclear warheads ever hidden and mobile, then you need a lot of servicemembers who are not infantry.



Quote:
... I used to think that having people in the military that cannot serve in combat situations, forces those that can to be rotated into combat more often, somewhat unfairly. Now I am not so sure. I suppose that a significant number of those non-combat roles during WWII were in the Army Air Corps, much like the USAF today. Pretty, much only the pilots are considered combat, and there are a considerable number of personnel behind the scenes, making sure the pilots and aircraft can do what they are supposed to do.

Where I see a problem with the PC management style of allowing anybody to serve, is when it comes to facilities management. Whether it is heterosexual, homosexual, transgendered or whatever, in the military, facilities have long been set up to handle same sex personnel in group situations. When I was in the USAF in the 70s we could at least assume that the other guys sharing the shower with you were not getting aroused seeing you naked. We at least understood that, if they were getting excited, they had to keep that fact hidden, if they can, or they might get into trouble.

You have to remember that the "Starship Trooper" shower scene is fictional, and human nature will prohibit that from ever being considered normal, in that it is impossible to have a situation like that where no one ever feels titillation seeing someone they are attracted to, naked. Maybe over time, a person might get used to the situation. I think, in my case, at least, it might happen about the time I hit my 40s.

So, how can that situation be avoided? Private bathrooms and showers everywhere for the military? Maybe four different group shower rooms? Male, Female, M>F, F>M? That might still leave out the openly gay which means they would still need private facilities.

Back when I joined, I knew that I would be showering with other men, but I was never asked if it would be OK if any of them might prefer having sex with men. Had someone asked if I would be OK with that I would have to think a long time before signing up. Before anyone says that I am closed minded, especially the women who criticize men because they were always looked at as sex objects by men, I would ask them how they would like the "Starship Troopers" shower room to be the norm at any time in their life.

I've never been on a Coast Guard Cutter. Do they have private bathrooms for everyone? Do they have them in boot camp?
Showers on subs are smaller than a phone booth. You open the door and enter, but you have to stand in the opposite diagonal corner to allow the door to swing shut. Showers are private.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-10-2017, 11:02 PM
 
Location: Southwest
408 posts, read 336,201 times
Reputation: 294
There are those who erroneously believe there is a "right" to serve in the military.

There is no "right" to serve. Period!

The services pick and choose who are suitable for military service. Unfortunately, the PC commando's are determined
to conduct social experiments at the expense of America's security.

Based on the conversations here and elsewhere, The outcome is clear: the experiment(s) failed!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-12-2017, 06:13 AM
 
Location: Central Massachusetts
3,903 posts, read 3,552,920 times
Reputation: 4470
There are entire units whose job is to support the war fighter. BSB's (Brigade Support Battalions) FSC's (Forward Support Company). They provide everything the warfighter needs. Food, ammunition, transportation, maintenance, and MWR. These units go forward and are in harms way just as much as the ground pounding infantry soldier. They take as many casualties and in some cases more. Case in point the unit with the most casualties during Desert Storm was a medical unit that was hit with a scud missile.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-12-2017, 08:44 AM
 
3,166 posts, read 1,830,058 times
Reputation: 1333
The Commandant is only assuring people he is enforcing current policy. Nothing more..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-12-2017, 10:16 AM
 
Location: New Mexico U.S.A.
22,880 posts, read 34,695,070 times
Reputation: 26541
Quote:
Originally Posted by flashlight View Post
who will be the new commandant?
Admiral Paul Zukunft assumed the duties of the 25th Commandant of the U.S. Coast Guard on May 30, 2014. He is still there. Do you have anything of relevance to say?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-12-2017, 10:29 AM
 
15,057 posts, read 7,503,406 times
Reputation: 14037
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldsoldier1976 View Post
There are entire units whose job is to support the war fighter. BSB's (Brigade Support Battalions) FSC's (Forward Support Company). They provide everything the warfighter needs. Food, ammunition, transportation, maintenance, and MWR. These units go forward and are in harms way just as much as the ground pounding infantry soldier. They take as many casualties and in some cases more. Case in point the unit with the most casualties during Desert Storm was a medical unit that was hit with a scud missile.
There were some intel troops in that building as well. Some folk I knew.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-14-2017, 11:40 PM
 
190 posts, read 107,371 times
Reputation: 629
Wow... I'm glad I'm retired now and don't have to deal with this no-win situation!!

So if you can now choose to be a male or female, can somebody now choose to be fat, if they still can pass their PT test??

Fair is fair!!

But, I'm sure an overweight transsexual would never be questioned since no currently serving Active Duty Commander, in any branch, would want to touch that issue... Period, since the P/C police now have the power to wreck your career.

LBGT issues are now more important than the military being "Mission Ready" to defend this country against our enemies.

Again, wow!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-15-2017, 12:23 PM
 
4,615 posts, read 5,149,407 times
Reputation: 8251
Don't take the pretty words to heart. Services are simply waiting for guidance as to implementation and political sweet statements do for now.

We will see what we see in the end.

The thing that is a problem for me with transgenders in service is the cost of their care and treatment. For a lifetime including VA treatment to continue gender selection.

VA is struggling as it is. Cost of continued medical care takes away from others needed medical care
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-15-2017, 05:32 PM
 
Location: Upstate NY
26,195 posts, read 6,991,748 times
Reputation: 22494
Quote:
Originally Posted by Submariner View Post
I served 20 years on Active Duty, as far as I am aware the military has never been real crazy over providing elective surgeries for anyone.

If your elective surgery was going to stop you from being deployable for any period of time, that would have been a likely 'NO' to the process.

Medical procedures need to be things that will allow for continued deployments. Like if you have a condition that if left untreated would render you un-deployable. And even then, they closely reviewed how long the healing process was going to be [called 'limited-duty']. If you need a procedure and the healing process is going to be too long, they would prefer to simply kick you out and let you heal as a civilian on the VA dime.

My youngest son recently went through this process with the Army, though I have seen it many times among my co-workers. He broke his leg, but for it to heal correctly he needed a surgery and the limited-duty after that was going to be lengthy.

One time when I was an E3 during a routine check-up the corpsman offered to set me up with a corrective procedure. When I went back to my command, they did some research and found the surgery was going to be a 'training' event for the medical department, and I would have had a high risk of being disabled from the procedure. My command stepped in at that time and refused to allow the procedure.

If a deployable servicemember wanted to have an elective surgery that was going to disable him for 3 months, I can not imagine many commands that would be in favor of approving such a procedure.
^^^
This. They're not deployable.

What we have here isn't a "commander with a heart," but an example of how some would like to extend the [w]ussification of males, in general, to the military.
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

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2017, 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 - Top