Yeah, we weren’t really trying to win hearts and minds back then. If you’re talking about total war then diversity is useless, it doesn’t really hurt but it is useless.
If you are fighting a war in the middle east where your primary enemy is a bunch of zealots that go around telling everyone that America is waging war on Islam…
Well, I said Affirmative Action was harder to justify, not unjustifiable. I don’t think I would go very deep into affirmative action territory to show the world that United Colors of Bennetton
BTW, who are you and what have you done with Fotheringay-Phipps?
So you think that ISIS might see our troops coming and say, “Hey, did you see that? Seventeen percent of those guys look like Muslims. Maybe we were wrong about this after all. Dismantle the terrorist camps immediately.” ?
Yeah, really. Like, first of all, even if the ISIS members saw this, they are already killing people who look almost exactly like them as often as they can. All brown people who aren’t the right kind of muslim are apostate infidels and deserve the grave, as far as ISIS is concerned. They’ve published many videos where they show them murdering other Muslims.
What does that have to do with diversity? You’re thinking of democracy, which the military definitely isn’t (nor should it be).
Look at it this way: which is better - a military where everyone fights the same way with the same weapons and the same strategies, or one with a diverse range of armaments and skills and approaches which can be selected from according to the strategic and tactical needs? Diversity in the types of servicemen and women you have gives you more options than having a homogeneous group.
That doesn’t mean they don’t have to meet the same demanding standards, follow the same orders, work toward the same objectives and become a tight-knit unit - that’s not in dispute. But the more diverse the mix you draw from, the greater the strength of the units they become.
Not sure if you realize this, but ISIS doesn’t have a secret underground laboratory where they clone super-soldiers to join the jihad. They recruit. And a major component of their recruitment is the claim that the West has enacted a war on Muslims, and all good Muslims must sign up to resist, or they will be eradicated. It’s a lie, of course, but recent events have shown that even the good folk of the United States can be taken in by a charming liar.
Part of the military’s role in fighting ISIS is choking off their recruitment, and one way to do that is to demonstrate as clearly as possible that not only is the West not fighting a war against Muslims, the West includes Muslims.
ISIS might have a harder time recruiting. They may have a harder time getting the cooperation of the locals. They might not be the only we are fighting in the area.
If you don’t think hearts and minds are important in insurgent warfare then I don’t think we are going to agree on the nature of the problem.
But ISIS is in direct combat with other Muslims led by explicitly Muslim governments and rebel groups every day. And while it’s a secular government, predominantly Muslim Turkey is a NATO member. Is it remotely reasonable to think a diverse American army is going to turn the propaganda war?
Too true in combat, or emergency situations. But the vast majority of military service is about getting support jobs done in the most efficient manner possible. If someone knows, or comes up with, what might be a better way, good Commanders listen and weigh the options.
Insecure commanders bark orders and insist upon “How we’ve always done it.” And yes, everyone has to go along with that and follow orders. But there is a time and place.
Note how you changed “one way to do that” into “turn the propaganda war.” Since you’re asking me about an exaggerated and extreme version of my position, I feel comfortable saying it’s not remotely reasonable, and also does not change my position.
Oh for God’s sake. Ok, why is it reasonable to think diversity would have any effect at all? Any Muslims in the American army will just be more “wrong type of Muslims” that ISIS kills every day.
Maybe the idea is that, if we include women as full equals in our military, then people who don’t think women should be full equals won’t join ISIS. Similarly, ISIS thinks Jews are the enemy. Therefore if we include Jews in our military, that will help convince ISIS that Jews aren’t the enemy.
ISIS hates diversity, therefore we can choke off recruitment by becoming more diverse. Or something.
Regards,
Shodan
Oh for God’s sake indeed. You’re failing to respond to what I said, so I’m not sure what the point would be in continuing this.
I mean, I’m not against diversity. I think an army should be broadly representative of the nation it serves. But thinking having Muslims in the army lowers ISIS recruitment flies in the face of reality.
Eta: I responded quite directly to what you said, LHoD. Don’t blame me for the fact that you have no answer.
ok
Getting back to Ranger Units and the elements of success, and how to test them. . .
Here are five people I have known:
A. Knows how to jump out of a plane successfully. Can lift 200 lbs comfortably,and carry it a long way. Is not good at the really long marches and views marathoners with awe. Requires a much higher food ration than any of the others. Strong knowledge of plant life in combat area. Can find food on the go but also create poisons if needed. Excellent terrain navigator. Better at spraying bullets than riflery.
B. Top of the line sniper. Not a mile-shot sniper, nor carries the equipment for it, but at 1,000 yards can take the eyeballs out of a rattlesnake while planning within an inch where its body will land. Can move with unimaginable stealth, and an absolute artist with camouflage. Requires the least rations of anyone in the group and can remain rational and productive without sleep twice as long as anyone else.
C. Runs marathons for fun, ultra-marathons for a bit more challenge. Climbs cliffs that elite climbers think are impossible. Has combat experience but in a completely different geographical zone and climate. Above average shooting ability with light-to-mid weapons. Knows the local terrain and has in-depth knowledge of where friendly units/resources can be found. Excellent mechanic for an exceedingly large variety of vehicles.
D. Good with explosives and carries elements of same. Average with a gun. Also communications trained and keeps radio equipment. Has the most command experience in the group. In-depth knowledge of various types of structures, how to build them, and how to bring them down. Photographic memory. Comes from an extremely cold area and can stay rational and productive in sub-zero temps better than anyone else in the group.
E. Can do the most push-ups and sit-ups in the group. Can do a long march without complaint. Proven record with challenging terrain navigation and small-unit leadership. Needs second-highest rations in the group. Knows the infantry manual backwards and forwards. Comes in the top three on an obstacle course every time, and once set a record on one in training. Is one of three West-point Grads on this list, and one of two Ranger School grads. Strongest need for encouragement in the group.
All are proven tough, intelligent, and in top physical fitness. You don’t know exactly what you’ll be getting into,but you know approximately where. Pick three for your mission.
Need to know the actor playing each one. I’ll give it a go with some suggestions:
#1 Vin Diesel
#2 Michelle Rodriguez
#3 Adrien Brody
#4 Joseph Gordon-Levitt
#5 Dwayne “the Rock” Johnson
The problem, TruCelt, is that the Ranger School isn’t just for people who are going to be in a Ranger unit. 3/5 of this thread, many of my posts included, obscure or ignore this. Having passed the course is a big bonus when it comes to promotion time especially for infantry personnel. So some of the same arguments may apply, eg do you need to be super tough physically to be an effective small unit combat leader, but “will they be a good Ranger?” isn’t a proper question.
That’s kind of like how we still have to perform algebraic manipulation by hand to pass junior high, high school, and college math courses. Yet in the real world, Mathematica can do any manipulation you can think of, and it won’t make mistakes at anything like the rate you do, and it’s instant. Sure, if your power fails you won’t be using it, but any task where you need an equation, you probably have power. If it’s after a hurricane and you’re fighting off looters, you probably don’t need to solve some linear algebra just then.
So essentially to be an engineer or programmer or anything else, you need to show you have some talent on a task that you will never use unless you just don’t know how to use a tool to do it. Unfair, and it’s quite possible that some racial and gender groups have an easier time doing symbolic math than others. (coughasianscough)
This is the same thing. And if you think about it, showing you have what it takes to be even a 3rd string Commando is a way to really show you got big brass ones. Literally - testicles appear to be basically required. And that’s worth a lot of points for promotion.
These are not Hollywood characters. One is my Dad, one is my cousin, one is me at age 22. The other two were my Dad’s Army buddies. E was on the news a lot during Desert Storm. He was a fair leader and administrator, but NOBODY wants him along on a mission. And if all that is true, then maybe the Ranger program could do with a tweak here and there, with thought given to what is needed on today’s missions, with today’s soldiers, including the females.
My point is that how many push-ups they can do is not part of the decision making process. And if one can’t carry as much, the same might be true of a male who had other forms of expertise.
P.S. All you twerps who never even heard of a menstrual cup, or any of several birth control methods which stop the menses altogether, are obviously unqualified to comment. So quit.