Yes, yes he does need a cite for the above. Especially Item #3. I want hard data, not anecdotes, or I call BS.
Greeting a new poster with this is at best impolite:
You don’t have to believe an individual’s sole experience as being the general rule for all, it’s a data point coming from an individual. But if they do provide a cite then that adds another possible data point.
When I served (1980-1993) I met several people whose choices given by a judge were to either go to jail or join the Marines. So Hercules Engineer can cite me, because it does happen. And I can cite them.
If you want to look up the data, to see how large is a “large percentage”, you are welcome to do your own research. And if you find data counter to what was claimed, then you can post that as a counter example. It is not BS until you have proved the counter example.
Which you haven’t.
So then you’re calling him a liar? My friend’s father went to Korea and saw a lot of
action when given that offer by a judge. It happened.
I’ll cite hajario’s father too.
silenius, you can claim BS but until you provide data that’s all it is — a claim. Just like Hercules Engineer’s #3 was a claim. Just like mine is. You don’t have to believe us, but don’t claim BS until you have data to support your claim. If you served and never heard of any such thing, you can share that.
Let’s build a community that fights ignorance together. We’re human and we all make mistakes, and if that happens we should point that out. I’ve learned a lot here and am grateful to those who have helped me.
Just to be clear, it was my friend’s father. We know that this doesn’t happen anymore and hasn’t for some time. It definitely happened in the past when recruiting standards were much lower. I have no idea how common it was.
I think it is “large percentage” that is in question.
Exactly.
“Large percentage” is subjective. I would think that #3 is probably the least provocative thing Hercules Engineer says above. A lot of men joined the service this way, including a young Jimi Hendrix (who was later drummed out after being, as one superior put it, “the worst soldier I have ever known.”)
What I find more troubling is that anyone’s first post in a forum is something as incendiary as asserting that most fraggings were done by black soldiers upset with white superiors - in the context of reviving an eight-year-old thread, no less. Forgive me if I am just a bit disingenuous, but this strikes me as race-baiting, especially with no sources to support it.
BTW, I never once saw drugs, not even grass, in my 11 months-1 week tour. Surprising? But I wasn’t in a rear area, and have always respected my body and mind too much to screw with drugs. Especially in Vietnam,
where the last thing I would have wanted was to be incapacitated. Druggies were then and are now, losers.
My belief is that men who actually see combat are less likely to assault their officers. Enlisted men know that their lives depend on good officers in battle. However, only about three in ten men in any squad ever fired their weapons. A huge percentage of men never saw combat at all, even from a distance. I think this took away the sense of imminent peril that makes men loyal to each other and to their officers, while leaving them plenty of nothing to do but abuse drugs and alcohol and otherwise get into trouble.
Just revistiting some stuff about English author Evelyn Waugh (Evelyn Waugh - Wikipedia), and remembered that the assertions were made that during WWII, (1) a guard was placed on him to protect him from his men, and (2) that he wasn’t taken into combat for fear that his men would shoot him.
Actually, it’s likely that both assertions were false, and that his bad relationships were with the officers making the assertions, not anybody else. Interesting point though that post WWII, the idea that an unpopular WWII officer would be killed by his men wasn’t so outlandish that anybody rejected it as a concept.